Introduction to Religious Language
Religious statements are not straightforward assertions, they gave unusual features so raise
questions about meaning and meaningfulness.
Some of these issues include: falsifiability, expressions of attitudes, verifiability and whether
they are just descriptions of the world.
Cognitivism and Non-Cognitivism
Attitudes towards these statements can be separated into two different categories: cognitivism
and non-cognitivism.
Cognitivism: statements are meaningful as they are expressions of our beliefs about the world
(they are propositional, something we already know). Expressions of beliefs about the world
can be true/false. They have truth value so are therefore truth apt.
Non-cognitivism: meaningful as they express some other type of mental state (non-cognitive)
i.e emotions, commands, values, attitudes, bliks. Expressions of mental states are not making
claims about the world (not true or false).
The formal arguments can be found here:
Cognitivism- cognitivist believers would say arguments about God’s existence are
meaningful.
P1: Sentences are meaningful if they are statements (expressions of belief about the world)
P2: Expressions of belief about the world are true/false (can be verified/falsified)
P3: ‘God exists’ is the claim that there is a God that exists independently in the world, and
reasons can be given to support this claim
C. Therefore God exists is a meaningful statement
Criticism: Ayer and other atheists would argue that arguments about God’s existence and
attributes are meaningless because ‘God exists’ cannot be verified, nor falsified (as Flew
emphasises) so this statement makes no genuine claim at all about the world.
Non-cognitivism- believers would argue that discussions about God’s existence and
attributes are meaningful on very different grounds.
P1: Sentences are meaningful if they are expressions of a mental state, ie attitude, emotion,
value, way of seeing
P2: Expressions of these non-cognitive mental states are neither true nor false (neither
verifiable nor falsifiable)
P3: ‘God exists’ or ‘God is supremely good’ are not claims about the world (not
verifiable/falsifiable) not an expression of non-cognitive mental states (i.e a fundamental
attitude, the way in which we see the world)
C. Therefore ‘God exists’ and ‘God is supremely good’ are meaningful
Religious statements are not straightforward assertions, they gave unusual features so raise
questions about meaning and meaningfulness.
Some of these issues include: falsifiability, expressions of attitudes, verifiability and whether
they are just descriptions of the world.
Cognitivism and Non-Cognitivism
Attitudes towards these statements can be separated into two different categories: cognitivism
and non-cognitivism.
Cognitivism: statements are meaningful as they are expressions of our beliefs about the world
(they are propositional, something we already know). Expressions of beliefs about the world
can be true/false. They have truth value so are therefore truth apt.
Non-cognitivism: meaningful as they express some other type of mental state (non-cognitive)
i.e emotions, commands, values, attitudes, bliks. Expressions of mental states are not making
claims about the world (not true or false).
The formal arguments can be found here:
Cognitivism- cognitivist believers would say arguments about God’s existence are
meaningful.
P1: Sentences are meaningful if they are statements (expressions of belief about the world)
P2: Expressions of belief about the world are true/false (can be verified/falsified)
P3: ‘God exists’ is the claim that there is a God that exists independently in the world, and
reasons can be given to support this claim
C. Therefore God exists is a meaningful statement
Criticism: Ayer and other atheists would argue that arguments about God’s existence and
attributes are meaningless because ‘God exists’ cannot be verified, nor falsified (as Flew
emphasises) so this statement makes no genuine claim at all about the world.
Non-cognitivism- believers would argue that discussions about God’s existence and
attributes are meaningful on very different grounds.
P1: Sentences are meaningful if they are expressions of a mental state, ie attitude, emotion,
value, way of seeing
P2: Expressions of these non-cognitive mental states are neither true nor false (neither
verifiable nor falsifiable)
P3: ‘God exists’ or ‘God is supremely good’ are not claims about the world (not
verifiable/falsifiable) not an expression of non-cognitive mental states (i.e a fundamental
attitude, the way in which we see the world)
C. Therefore ‘God exists’ and ‘God is supremely good’ are meaningful
