Logical Positivism and Empiricism
Recommend on Google+
In the 1920’s and 1930’s much discussion was dedicated to the criteria of meaning. Philosophers were trying to develop rules for meaningful discourse, considering truth and meaning as different concepts.
One group of philosophers that regularly met in Vienna became known as the Vienna circle, and took a univocal approach to language. Logical Positivists formulated the Verification Principle; only assertions that are verifiable by observation or experience are useful. Other assertions are either analytic or meaningless utterances.
The key members were: A.J. Ayer, Moritz Schlick, and Rudolph
According to the verification principle, meaningful assertions fall into three categories:
Analytic: Statements that are true by definition contain their truth within the premise and are necessarily true. They are logical propositions. ‘A bachelor is an unmarried man’
Mathematical: 2+2=4
Synthetic: Statements that are verifiable through empirical examination can be tested and are contingently true/false. They are empirical propositions. ‘Elephants are pink.’
“The meaning of the presupposition is the method of verification… we know the meaning of the statement if we know the conditions under which the statement is true or false.” – Moritz Schlick
Implications of the Verification Principle for Religious Language
Statements about God are not mathematical or analytical logical propositions. Neither are they verifiable, and since religious experiences are subjective and not universal, they do not form the basis for empirical propositions. Therefore, according to the Verification Principle, religious language is rendered meaningless.
Limitations of the Verification Principle
Prior to the Second World War it became apparent that the Verification Principle was fatally flawed:
• It is not consistent with modern science as it was first intended to be. Many scientific statements are not verifiable, such as ‘atoms exist’ or ‘forces exist.’ Science is also theory based, and uses models and analogies to describe concepts not visible to the human eye (non-cognitive/anti-realist language).
• Historical statements such as “the Battle of Hastings took place in 1066” cannot be empirically verified, and are therefore rendered meaningless.
• The Verification Principle fails its own rigid test – no observations can be made to falsify it
A.J. AYER’S WEAK VERIFICATION PRINCIPLE
Ayer tried to avoid some of these problems by proposing a weak form of the Verification Principle. He supposed that if it is possible to know what would, in principle, verify a statement, then it is meaningful. However, Ayer later conceded that using his weak form of the Verification Principle anything could be verified ‘in principle.’
Does the Verification Principle actually render religious statements meaningless?
• Keith Ward reasoned that God’s existence can, in principle, be verified, since God himself can verify his own existence.
John Hick argued that eschatological verification would verify beliefs in the afterlife
• Many religious claims are founded on historical events. If historical statements are useful, then so is the statement ‘Jesus Christ rose from the dead.’
blog comments powered by Disqus
RELIGIOUS STUDIES TEACHER RESOURCE NEWSLETTER
Sign up for tutor2u's free Religious Studies Teacher Resource Newsletter
