Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Liberalism versus PostliberalismThe Great Divide in Twentieth-Century Theology$
Users without a subscription are not able to see the full content.

John Allan Knight

Print publication date: 2012

Print ISBN-13: 9780199969388

Published to Oxford Scholarship Online: January 2013

DOI: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199969388.001.0001

Show Summary Details
Page of

PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2020. All Rights Reserved. An individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of a monograph in OSO for personal use. date: 24 February 2020

The Liberal Response

The Liberal Response

Chapter:
(p.53) Chapter threeThe Liberal Response
Source:
Liberalism versus Postliberalism
Author(s):

John Allan Knight

Publisher:
Oxford University Press
DOI:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199969388.003.0004

This chapter describes liberal responses to the falsification challenge, which tended to be a version of one of two sorts. For noncognitivists, religious or theological utterances were never straightforward assertions, but are to be understood symbolically, or as expressions of an intention to follow a certain way of life, or as expressions of an internalized spiritual principle. Cognitive responses, on the other hand, argued that some religious or theological utterances are indeed straightforward assertions. Some argued that theological assertions could in principle be falsified, but in fact have not been (at least not all of them). Others argued that such assertions are meaningful because some things count as evidence against them, despite their invulnerability to conclusive empirical falsification. Yet both sorts of responses agreed with Flew that if religious or theological language is to be meaningful, it must meet the descriptivist requirements described in chapter one. This chapter considers the noncognitive response of R.M. Hare and the cognitive responses of Basil Mitchell, I.M. Crombie and Schubert M. Ogden. Though different from each other, liberal responses all assumed a descriptivist view of religious and theological language.

Keywords:   Crombie, I.M, descriptivism, Hare, R.M, liberal theology, meaning, Mitchell, Basil, Ogden, Schubert, reference, religious language, theology and falsification

Oxford Scholarship Online requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books within the service. Public users can however freely search the site and view the abstracts and keywords for each book and chapter.

Please, subscribe or login to access full text content.

If you think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.

To troubleshoot, please check our FAQs , and if you can't find the answer there, please contact us .