Category: Anthology – Implications

Anthology

Posted on

Questions on the Ayer passage – use the text to answer

What is Ayer’s central assertion?

That any assertions or claims about a god’s existence or non existence or nature are meaningless.

 

Who does Ayer suggest now admit that no god’s existence can be demonstratively proved?

Philosphers.

 

Ayer suggests a theist’s position is an untenable as the position held by what two other groups?

Atheists and agnostics.

 

What is a deity?

A god of any sort.

 

Who or what is Jehovah?

The name for the Judaeo-christian God. Comes from Hebrew letters JHWH no vowels – variously called Jahweh, Yahweh or Jehovah.

 

What is an animistic religion?

One which asserts that the spirit of divinity inhabits all things. The doctrine that all natural objects and the universe itself have souls; “animism is common among primitive peoples” Animism (from Latin anima (soul, life) is a philosophical, religious or spiritual idea that souls or spirits exist not only in humans and animals but also in plants, rocks, natural phenomena such as thunder, geographic features such as mountains or rivers…

 

What is the assertion ‘Jehovah is angry’ equivalent to?

It is thundering.

 

What kinds of religions have supplanted those who associate gods with natural phenomena?’

‘Sophisticated’

 

Theists claim that god is not an object of reason but of what?

Faith.

 

How does the mystic get his knowledge of the truth?

From intuition.

 

What does Ayer say that damns the mystics’ beliefs ….that it says more about….

‘the state of mind…’

 

To assert the existence of yellow object expresses what?

A genuine synthetic propostion.

Posted on

Does Ayer think this?

  1. That the existence of a god of any non-animistic religion is even probable?
  2. That a religious man is merely asserting that his assertion ‘god exists’ entails no more than that certain phenomena occur in certain sequences?
  3. That the term god is a metaphysical term?
  4. That the assertion God exists cannot be true or false?
  5. That the assertion ‘there is no god’ is nonsensical?
  6. That the question whether a ‘transcendent god exists is a genuine question’?
  7. That either of the assertions in 5 and 6 express propositions at all?
  8. That assertions such as ‘Jahweh is angry’ may be allowed to be significant?
  9. That the notion of a person whose essential attributes are non-empirical is an intelligible notion?
  10. The mere existence of a noun ‘god’ is enough to foster the illusion that there is a real being corresponding to it?
  11. That the noun ‘God’ is a genuine name.
  12. That there can be any transcendent truths about religion?
  13. That God is an object of faith not reason?
  14. That it is impossible for a sentence to be both significant and about God?
  15. That a state of mystical intuition is not a genuine cognitive state?
  16. That it is logically possible for men to be acquainted with God?
  17. That there is no reason why one should be prepared to believe a man when he says he is seeing a yellow patch and refuse to believe him when he says that he is seeing God?
  18. That an act of intuition can reveal a truth about any matter of fact?
  19. That any philosopher who states that he simply knows any moral or religious truth is merely providing material for the psychoanalyst?
  20. That religious experiences are interesting from any point of view?