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

Religious responses to the verification principle have been largely unsuccessful. Evaluate this claim.

Extracts from this document...


'Religious responses to the verification principle have been largely unsuccessful.' Evaluate this claim. (20 marks) The Verification Principle claims that it is meaningless to talk about God and ethics etc, as these cannot be verified using empirical evidence or scientific experiments. There have however been many responses to this theory, for example the falsification principle. This is a theory developed by Anthony Flew who says that for a statement to have meaning it must be able to be proven false. So that not religious meaning. This theory is similar to the verification principle but just to prove something wrong instead, however it's a stronger argument, as it does not go beyond our understanding of God and religion. ...read more.


In addition, Moses Maimonides said that positive statement such as 'God is powerful enough to lift a rock', limits God because we are comparing Him to a human and assuming we know what He can do. This is a cogent argument because we cannot understand properly a God we have never seen before, we can only imagine our own personal God and when we die we will then be enlightened with the real God, if there is one at all. However, St Thomas Aquinas rejected the Via Negativa as he believed that there are positive things to say about God. He argued that the only we way we can legitimately speak about God is using analogy. ...read more.


However, some symbols change over time for example, the Hindu symbol of peace was adapted by Adolf Hitler to produce the infamous Swastika that reminds people of sadness and death. So it raises the question whether symbols are reliable or not to show meaning. To conclude, I think there are a few reasonable responses to the verification principle such as the falsification principle, as this does not limit God to our understanding but we can still talk about Him. Also the doctrine of analogy is a strong theory as we can compare one thing to another thing we are familiar with without properly describing the unfamiliar thing and this makes it easier for us to understand. However, symbols can often be misinterpreted and lead to confusion, as they don't say enough about God and religion for people to fully understand. ...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. The verification principle offers no real challenge to religious belief. Discuss

    He would argue that the verification offers a large challenge to religious belief. Ayer suggested a procedure for deciding whether a statement is verifiable. Ayer called the statement being tested a 'putative proposition'. Ayer distinguished 'practical verifiability' from 'verifiability in principle'.

  2. Comment on the claim religious language can never be meaningful Answer this question with ...

    Richard Swinburne developed another criticism aimed at the theory, he says that there are certain things which we can never verify but they can still be meaningful, his example is the story of the toys in the toy cupboard coming to life when we go to sleep, we can never verify this claim.

  1. 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".

  2. falsification principle

    This is because beliefs are so strong and will never change and nothing that is so unchangeable can be meaningful so statements of about religious beliefs are meaningless The falsification principle would at this point therefore seem to make a significant challenge to religious belief.

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