• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

The verification principle offers no real challenge to religious belief. Discuss

Extracts from this document...


'The verification principle offers no real challenge to religious belief.' Discuss I would like to start this essay by explaining the background to Verification Principle. Verification is a philosophical movement which claims that language is only meaningful if it can be verified by a sense- observation or it is a tautology. The verification movement was influenced by science, which emphasized the importance of confirming any statement by observation eg through experiment. Moritz, Schlick and other supporters of the verification pointed out that the meaningfulness of statements is shown by the method by which you verify the statement. If you cannot demonstrate with sense-observations how a statement is true, then the statement is factually meaningless. Personally, I agree with the verification principle in some aspects, for example things can be verified by using sense observations and that its challenges the religious belief of God. There are also some stronger and weaker challenges which I will explain later on. Verificationists argue that any statement that cannot be proved true or false is meaningless. Language that talks about God is meaningless for a verificationist as there is no way to demonstrate the truth or falsity of God. However one problem with early verificationism's strict scientific approach is that it would mean that many statements people make are meaningless, even when most people think they make perfect sense. ...read more.


Swinburne refers to debates about the end of the world, the devil or Poseidon However if Ayer is correct, religious statements are nonsense if they are referring to God defined in a traditional sense as infinite, impersonal and transcendent because statements about God do not tell people anything about the world that is verifiable Ayer also rejected any argument from religious experience. He accepted that people might claim to have experiences of God, but he argues that a person, such as Paul who claim they have seen God is recounting a set of experiences raised interesting psychological questions, but because religious experiences are not verifiable Ayer rejected them as meaningful statements. However it is possible for something to be meaningful but unverifiable. It is quite possible for a statement to be meaningful without being verifiable. Swinburne gives the example of toys in a cupboard. The toys only come out at night when no one observes them. The situation is meaningful even though it is fictitious and unverifiable. Schrodinger suggested that you can imagine a cat in a box with a radioactive particle that would kill the cat. Is the cat dead or alive- you cannot know. If you open the box to find out, you may trigger the release of the radioactive particle, thus killing the cat. ...read more.


Anthony Flew's example of the explorer in the garden was inspired by a similar story by John Wisdom. However Wisdom uses his story to make a different point to Flew. Wisdom's story about a garden suggested that 2 people were looking at an overgrown garden. One of the observers how uncared it is, but there are signs of order like flowers and suggests a gardener. However no test can show whether there was a gardener. It suggests that religious language makes statements that are reasonable. Just as they cannot verify whether a gardener has been at work, the existence or nature of God might be beyond our normal methods of verification. Therefore the nature of God is a matter that is outside the scope of traditional methods of scientific enquiry. In conclusion the principles of verification and falsification both present strong challenges to religious belief. However, they are not the only ways in which to assess religious language, and for many believers the language they use to talk about God is symbolic, mythological or just different from other language. Therefore, believers might claim that the principles of falsification and verification are not relevant challenges to religious language as the nature of religious language is different from that supposed in the verification and falsification debates. ?? ?? ?? ?? ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our AS and A Level Philosophy section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related AS and A Level Philosophy essays

  1. Religious language is meaningless, Discuss

    Therefore the statements are meaningful as we know how to falsify them. Basil Mitchell wanted to show how religious statements are meaningful even if they are not straight forward to verify or falsify.

  2. The verification principle does not provide any real challenges to religious people when talking ...

    While on the other hand, the weak verification principle holds that a proposition is weakly verifiably "if it's possible for experience to render it probable or some possible sense experience would be relevant to determining whether it was true or false".

  1. In what ways may suffering create philosophical problems for religious believers? Outline two solutions ...

    set on edge.` But every one shall die for his own sin; each man who eats sour grapes, his teeth shall be set on edge." Jeremiah 31: 29-30 According to Augustine, when God made the world it was perfect. Augustine assumes that the world was created in 6 days, as it is stated in Genesis.

  2. Religious language is meaningless. Discuss.

    Therefore this supports the statement. An criticism of this is that 'The parable of the gardener' is used to claim that a religious believer doesn't let any evidence count against their beliefs. However, within this parable empirical measures have been used in order to seek the gardener whereas religious believer would argue that God is found through faith.

  1. "Religious Language is meaningless." Discuss.

    To him, even when they were nice to him, he believed that they were being devious and hypocritical." This shows the unshakeable nature that religious believers hold. A "Blick" is meaningful even if it cannot be falsified. It affects a person's attitudes or emotions.

  2. Compare and contrast arguments for and against belief in life after death.

    non-physical object how can it cause anything to happen in the purely materialist realm of the world. Arguments have been put forward to counter this - some philosophers for example have highlighted parts of the brain by which they believe the mind connects to the physical realm.

  1. Examine the contributions that two of the following may make to a study of ...

    Although these attacks are irrelevant as if it is conceded that religious statements are myths, this is because we don't expect myths to be factually scientific. Criticisms of myths contributing to religious language is that a fundamental ability difficultly of interpreting religious stories as myths as it undermines their status as true accounts of events.

  2. Philosophers have proved conclusively that religious language is meaningful. Discuss

    applied to a second thing because the one causes the other, e.g. we may speak of someone having a ?sickly? look because his or her appearance is the result of a sickness. Aquinas saw human wisdom as a reflection of God?s wisdom.

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work