God In Language:Empirical Reference And Affection-endowed Meaning

This dissertation is an attempt to provide a tentative study on the problem of religious language in the history of contemporary western philosophy of Christianity. Religious language refers to statements or claims made about God or gods, so our study will focus on the meaning of God, which is one of hard-cores in the history of western thought. In dealing with the language of God, I shall endeavor to reveal the existential concern in God in human life. This is especially true under the circumstances of western Christianity, where God plays a critical role in human existence, and without Him, people would be unable to satisfy their feelings of ultimate dependence and their lives would become meaningless. In this consideration, my study will focus on the languages of God in various influential thinkers' works. I will employ the method of existential analysis. This method sees that there are two ways of defining God, that is, empirical reference and affection-endowed meaning.The thesis will trace the relevant texts of religious language, which engage in clarifying the meanings of God in the context of western Christianity. These texts are involved some influential philosophers in history, such as David Hume, Kant and Hegel, Schleiermacher, Kierkegaard, Wittgenstein and Plantinga, whose treatments of the issue in question have formed indeed a quite consistent tradition. This consistent tradition has been developed on the foundation of two basic principles, namely, empirical reference and affection-endowed meaning. The distinction between the two principles is characterized by their different starting points for human existence, and the different starting points will lead to different understandings on the concept of God for philosophers and thinkers;Those who speak of God by way of "empirical reference" will fall into the dilemma of "nothing refers to God", in which situation God is imprisoned in the frame of human reason and experience; comparatively, those who speak of God by way of affection-endowed meaning think that speaking of God should start from human affection or feelings, for the proposition of God should be understood as the expressions of human affection or feelings. Thus, by way of affection-endowed meaning can God remain his perfect nature and attributes by breaking through the shackle of human language and reason. In discussing about the philosophers' understandings of God, we employ the method of existential analysis to demonstrate their existential concerns in their language of God, which indeed divulges the relations between their lives and the language of God. I shall explore the references and meanings of God derived from their existential concerns.Thus, we divide the whole dissertation into five chapters:In Chapter One, we will begin with the concept of God, which is a question about human existence in the history of western thought. In the conflicting and shock between Hebrew and Greek civilizations, God had overcome Greek philosophy successfully, for the grace of God(the truth itself) brought forth vitality and hope for the ancient Greek philosophers who sought the truth by human effort, which way turned out to fall into dilemma. From then on, God had become a core concept in the history of western philosophy. Since God is a problem about human existence, the best way to speak of Him is surely the method of existential analysis. So in Section2of the chapter, we will introduce the three principles of existential analysis, namely, existence is reality, affection-endowed meaning and starting point for human existence. In particular, we deal with two meanings of existential analysis, that is empirical reference and affection-endowed meaning. The key distinction between empirical reference and affection-endowed meaning is that they have different starting points to speak of God: one starts from human experience, and God is given meaning based on human experience; one starts from human affection and God is what the expression of human affection refers to.Chapter Two is the beginning of the body part of whole dissertation. The problem of religious language in contemporary philosophy can be traced back to David Hume, so we will begin our investigation from Hume. Hume said we should speak of God based on our experience, for experience is the solid foundation for our knowledge of religions. But, according to the principles "like effects is arise from like causes" and " Anthropomorphism", we can't speak of God by analogy. During the course of demonstration, Hume realized the importance of human affections, and he thought religious beliefs originate from human passions. Since "reason is the slave of the passions ", speaking of God should also be based on human passions. Hence, in the thought of David Hume, affection-endowed meaning has already drawn our attention at its early stage. But it is Hume's thought on empiricism that influenced Kant.Following Hume's thought, Kant's "Copernican Revolution" had inverted the relation between the subject and the object, asserting that the object should conform to the subject rather than that the subject conform to the object. The purpose for Kant's revolution is to set limits to human reason, that is, human reason can only function on the objects in the field of human experience, but it can't reach the religious objects beyond human reason, so human reason should leave space for human religious faith. Thus, after Kant,"empirical reference" has overwhelmed in the realm of human experience. Kant's conception of "God" is the God "within the limit of pure reason" and is still confined by human reason. Then Hegel had developed a system of the Truth and push God of rationalism onto its peak. He tried to unify the substance and the subject by the slogan "substance is subject", based on which he built up his system of Truth. On the peak of his building of the theory is his "Absolute Spirit", which is the synonymous with his notion of God. But Hegel's system of Truth had suffered great criticism, for it neglected human existence, which did not need any system of Truth.In Chapter Three, we will deal with three thinkers, who advocated and upheld affection-endowed meaning:Schleiermacher, Otto, and Kierkegaard. Schleiermacher, in the climatic period of Kant's Rationalism, holds an opposite idea that the nature of religion is intuition and feelings, which is the core of emotionism. So the starting point to talk about religion should be human emotions and feelings, and God just means the feelings of "absolute dependence" in the deep of human heart. As a matter of fact, Schleiermacher tended to return the knowledge of religion to real human existence. Following the example of Schleiermacher, Otto developed further the affection-endowed meaning. He said God is the Holy One, which is the expression of our creature-feeling, so we can't speak of God by the rational way, but by non-rational way, that is, by human feelings. So the concept of God gains its meaning in our creature-feelings in our inner heart.Kierkegaard objected to Hegel's claim that he had devised a system of truth that could explain the whole reality. Kierkegaard thought that it is totally wrong for us to set up our religious beliefs on the foundations of objective proofs or rationalism. Starting from real Christian existence, he proposed that the concept of God should gain its meaning by our subjective passion, for passion is the highest point in the subjectivity and inwardness of a single individual and also the starting point for us to speak of God. There are three choices in the existence of a Christian:aesthetic, ethical and religious. All these three choices are "paradoxes" in human existence, especially in religious choice. But paradox is the passion of thought, so we need to grasp the paradox. This is particularly true in religious B, that is, in Christianity, and Kierkegaard called it "the absolute paradox". How can we understand the absolute paradox? Kierkegaard said we should start from our passion in our subjectivity. To sum up, affection-endowed meaning had got its climax after Schleiermacher, Otto, and Kierkegaard.Chapter Four has emphasized the impact of linguistic turn on the meanings of religious language in twenty-century. We choose two representatives:one is A.J.Ayer, a leading figure of Logic Positivism; another one is Wittgenstein, the typical representative of Analytic Philosophy. Ayer held the view that only empirical reference is the only lawful and reasonable way of meaning-giving, for it agrees with "the principle of verification". But he always emphasized that religious language has no "literal significance", for it can't meet the verification or examination of fact. But he should give an explanation why there are still so many religious language used in our daily life. And his explanation actually returns to our existence, that is, religious language has the emotive meaning, so we should conduct an emotive analysis on them. Ayer's idea was further developed by Wittgenstein. Wittgenstein's view on religious language can be divided into early and latter stages, in accordance with his two stages of philosophical views. In the early stage of his thought, Wittgenstein held the view that "whereof we can speak, we should speak clearly; whereof we cannot speak, thereof one must be silent." By saying this, he devoted himself to the logic structure between the world and language, which is Logical Picture Theory. According to this theory, language is the picture of the world, but religious language belongs to "the mystical", so what we can do is "to remain silent". But in his latter stage, Wittgenstein proposed a totally different idea. He thought the meaning of language is given in its use, that is, meaning is in use, so language is just like games. This is what is so-called "language-game". According to this theory, religious language is a "life form" in real religious life and expresses the feelings and emotions of the speakers. So religious language should be understood as the expressions of the feelings or emotions. The change of Wittgenstein's views, that is, from Logical Picture Theory to Language Game, is due to the fact that his starting points to speak of religious language have changed:in the early stage, his starting point is the logical structure of language, but in his later stage, his starting point is the real human existence, that is, the real religious life. Thus, the change is the key to understand his views on religious language, and also shows that affection-endowed meaning should replace empirical reference in understanding the language. In Chapter Five, we will narrow down our study to a special kind of affection---faith (beliefs), which is critically emphasized in Christian beliefs. We will emphasize Alvin Plantinga's Warranted Christian beliefs, in which book he said that Christian beliefs needs no proofs, but our "belief", for Christian belief is the basic belief for our existence. We don't need any argument or proofs to demonstrate God's existence, but to believe, that is enough. The emotional function of faith (or belief)is so strong that it can offer great meanings to things. As a result, under the influence of this affection, our understanding can be refreshed, and our judgment be given up, and our existence become a paradox. A simple and brief argument should be the following:if we have faith in God's grace, we are recipients, that is to say, our understandings are in the position of reception and expansion when encountering God's grace. Whatever God gives us, we regard it as God's grace in our beliefs, thus, we surrender our judgment to God, that is, God takes over our judgment. So when facing God, we live in a state of "absolute belief without any judgment", this is our paradoxical existence. By this way, the meaning of God is given in our strong faith. As long as the strong faith, for the believers, does exist, God is the holy actual reality.The Conclusion part will summarize the whole dissertation, with the special emphasis on several conditions for affection-endowed meanings;and how can affections give meanings? That is, how can we offer meanings to the object and what is their relationship between empirical reference and affection-endowed meanings? This part also concludes the distinction between empirical reference and affection-endowed meaning:by empirical reference, God is imprisoned in the frame of human language and reason; however, by affection-endowed meaning, God can remain His perfect nature and attributes. But their relatioships is that affection-endowed meaning can not be separated from empirical reference, and empirical reference can deepen the affection. For after all, both experience and affection are our existence.