A) Religious language as non-cognitive and symbolic
- Created by: Gradebaker
- Created on: 07-05-19 19:27
Fullscreen
Functions of symbols (John Randall)
- For Randall, religious symbols were non-cognitive
- They were socially necessary, but not 'true' in the sense that religious people might assume
- Do not 'point' to any transcendent reality, such as God
- Religion is not essentially knowledge at all (aims and functions are not to furnish people with truth)
- Religion expresses whatever people have felt deeply (non-cognitive)
- A symbol is in no sense representative- instead it provokes a characteristic response in people
- 4 functions of symbols:-
- 1. Motivating- by firing up emotions/inspiring people to act
- 2. Socially binding- people with the same understanding of a symbol
- 3. Communicating- things that are non literal
- 4. Disclosing- revealing hidden depths about spiritual matters
- 'Religious beliefs, though far indeed from being 'meaningless', do not possess what is ordinarily meant by cognitive value'
God as that which concerns us ultimately (Paul Tillich)
- In 'Theory of Symbols' , Tillich makes a distinction between signs/ symbols- uses traffic lights as illustrative example
- 1. Signs do not participate in the reality of that to which they point
- 2. Symbols do participate in the reality of that to which they point
- 3. Symbols open up levels of reality otherwise closed
- 4. Symbols…
Comments
No comments have yet been made