The Falsification Challenge: A Comment
In the last section of his article Professor Kellenberger says that Professor Flew misunderstands the nature of religious utterances. These are affirmations of belief or trust, whereas Flew treats them as if they were hypotheses. If God loves us' is held by someone as an hypothesis then it wou...
| Published in: | Religious studies |
|---|---|
| Main Author: | |
| Format: | Electronic Article |
| Language: | English |
| Check availability: | HBZ Gateway |
| Journals Online & Print: | Drawer...
|
| Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
| Published: |
Cambridge Univ. Press
[1969]
|
| In: |
Religious studies
Year: 1969, Volume: 5, Issue: 1, Pages: 81-84 |
| Online Access: |
Volltext (Verlag) Volltext (doi) |
| Summary: | In the last section of his article Professor Kellenberger says that Professor Flew misunderstands the nature of religious utterances. These are affirmations of belief or trust, whereas Flew treats them as if they were hypotheses. If God loves us' is held by someone as an hypothesis then it would be proper to ask what justifies him in holding it, and, equally, what would have to happen for him to feel that he could no longer justifiably hold it. But if God loves us' is said by someone as an affirmation of trust such questions seem out of place. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 1469-901X |
| Reference: | Kritik von "The Falsification Challenge (1969)"
Kritik von "The Falsification Response (1969)" Kritik in "More on the Falsification Challenge (1969)" |
| Contains: | Enthalten in: Religious studies
|
| Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.1017/S003441250000398X |