Ayer: Implications, Part b

Quick Part B: Overall Themes

Ayer

Implications on Religion

• Religious language isn’t meaningless, as the majority of the world still has more religious worshippers than those who are atheists. 
• Religion and belief in God, therefore does have meaning, Durkheim and his atheistic background does not distract from his acknowledgement that religion plays a function in society 
• Similarly, to suggest that all religion is meaningless, wipes out a large chunk of human history as religion has been a key aspect of our past. 
• The decalogue would be meaningless and this cannot be the case, as our justice system is also founded upon the original commandments
• but still according to the verification principle, we cannot prove God through empiricism and therefore it still fails
• Dawkins supports Ayer as science itself is able to provide enough evidence to back up its points whilst religion cannot prove a God. ‘a virus’ or meme that has simply been passed on
• Flew talks about the fact that we cannot look past our individual beliefs and therefore this is one explanation 

Implications for Human Experience

• moments where we feel something would be disregarded, such as emotional interpretations of art and/or areas of study such as history, art, cookery, (we cannot validate tastes)
• Bertrand Russell and talk about the idea of love (soap dramas)
• accepting Ayer’s stance brings a major constriction on the enjoyment of human existence 
• NDE’s and various testimonies would be meaningless -> contradict with Swinburne who used the cumulative argument
• major key figures such as the mystics (St Theresa of Avila) had a R.Exp and was able to do good,
• focus on major advancements instead of focusing our attentions on religions

Implications for Morality

• morality itself cannot be verified, therefore extreme view: antinomianism, complete anarchy 
• use the Hurrah/Boo theory, you were wrong to eat the last cookie =  you ate the last cookie, boo!
• however, this means anything is technically allowed as there are no common grounds on what is allowed and what is not. 
• nothing more than Freudian wish for a loving father figure, human concept.