The Liberal Response

John Allan Knight

in Liberalism versus Postliberalism

Published in print December 2012 | ISBN: 9780199969388
Published online January 2013 | e-ISBN: 9780199301546 | DOI:

Series: American Academy of Religion Series

The Liberal Response

Show Summary Details


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

Chapter.  12398 words. 

Subjects: Religious Studies

Full text: subscription required

How to subscribe Recommend to my Librarian

Buy this work at Oxford University Press »

Users without a subscription are not able to see the full content. Please, subscribe or login to access all content.