Posted: Dec 30, 2011 8:23 pm
I.C.37 wrote:I'll just plug this here, seems relevant. It's from Wikipedia.Wikipedia wrote:Theological noncognitivism is the argument that religious language, and specifically words like "god", are not cognitively meaningful.Wikipedia wrote:Theological noncognitivism can be argued in different ways, depending on one's theory of meaning. Michael Martin, writing from a verificationist perspective, concludes that religious language is meaningless because it is not verifiable.[1][2]
George H. Smith uses an attribute-based approach in an attempt to prove that there is no concept for the term "God": he argues that there are no meaningful attributes, only negatively defined or relational attributes, making the term meaningless.Wikipedia wrote:Some theological noncognitivists assert that to be a strong atheist is to give credence to the concept of God because it assumes that there actually is something understandable to not believe in. This can be confusing because of the widespread belief in God and the common use of the series of letters G-o-d as if it is already understood that it has some cognitively understandable meaning. From this view strong atheists have made the mistaken assumption that the concept of God actually contains an expressible or thinkable proposition.
Fun stuff.
I@m with Wittgenstien on this...
- "What we cannot speak about we must pass over in silence."
