Ethical and religious language

1
Ethical and religious language

• Michael Lacewing
• enquiries_at_alevelphilosophy.co.uk

2
Difference and overlap

• Many theories of religious language, e.g. via
  negativa, symbolic, analogical, have not been
  applied to ethical language.
• But both religious and ethical language face the
  question of whether, and in what way, they are
  meaningful.
• A common debate began with the verification
  principle.

3
The Verification Principle

• Ayer in order to be meaningful, a statement must
  either be
• analytic (true or false in virtue of the
  definition of the words) or
• empirically verifiable (shown be experience to be
  true).
• Because statements about God and statements about
  values are neither analytic nor empirically
  verifiable, they are not meaningful.
• The big objection by its own standard, VP is not
  meaningful.

4
The big question

• Does religious and ethical language state facts,
  describe the world?
• Do we experience morality or God? How can we
  refer to God or values?

5
Expressivism

• Both types of language express personal
  commitments to a way of life and a system of
  values.
• They motivate us to act in certain ways.
• Language that motivates does not describe.
• Wittgenstein the importance of community
• Language is always social, and expresses a shared
  form of life.
• Yet many users think that religious or ethical
  language does state facts