Ineffability and Religion

Moore, A. W.

doi:10.1111/1468-0378.00181

Cited by 11 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…36 Even apart from explicitly Wittgensteinian sympathies or antipathies, some philosophers hold that religious views of life may be attempts to express "ineffable truths", something that cannot be put to words (cf. Moore 2003). Perhaps this is also what (some) religious naturalists are claiming?…”

Section: Problems In Pragmatic Religious Naturalismmentioning

confidence: 86%

A pragmatic critique of three kinds of religious naturalism

Pihlström¹

2005

Method Theory Study Religion

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper takes a critical look at a number of recent attempts to reconcile religious and scientifi c ways of thinking. Three basic programs of what I call "religious naturalism" are discussed: (1) attempts to synthesize science and religion by defending a combination of (Christian) theism and naturalism by means of the concept of emergence; (2) "demythologized" interpretations of religious statements, allegedly rendering them compatible with science (for example, in John Dewey's pragmatic naturalism or in the religious naturalism inherited from the Chicago School of liberal theology); and (3) a form of naturalism analogous to Arthur Fine's "natural ontological attitude" (NOA), debated in the philosophy of science over the past two decades. I suggest that (1) amounts to a nonreductively naturalist metaphysics, whereas (2) is a nonmetaphysical and (3) a postmetaphysical program in the philosophy of religion. It is argued, among other things, that while the concept of emergence has become increasingly relevant in the philosophy of mind and science, its place in the philosophy of religion remains obscure. Similarly, nonmetaphysical discussions of religious experiences or "the religious" à la Dewey and his followers are difficult to combine with genuinely religious views. Further, it is hard to see how postmetaphysical naturalism (NOA) could be part of a philosophically responsible program at all, because of its diffi culties in accounting for the normativity of ontological commitments. It is proposed that, instead of elaborating on these pseudo-solutions, the problem of the relation between science and religion should be subordinated to a pragmatist re-evaluation.

show abstract

Section: Problems In Pragmatic Religious Naturalismmentioning

confidence: 86%

A pragmatic critique of three kinds of religious naturalism

Pihlström¹

2005

Method Theory Study Religion

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…1 When it comes to ineffable religious understanding, the traditional approach appears to contradict itself. It is difficult to see how it can respond to the objection of inconsistency and, more precisely, of self-stultification: it does look like an attempt to do the impossible, that is, to put into words something which cannot be said, but only shown or indicated (Moore 2003;Derrida 1992;Marion 1999).…”

Section: The Objection From Inconsistencymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…As I point out below, the issue of ineffability constitutes a major challenge for traditional, dominant approaches to religious knowledge. There is, however, in recent literature a growing interest in the issue of ineffability (Moore 2003;Marion 1999;Jonas 2016;Derrida 1992Derrida , 1995Derrida , 2001; Bennett-Hunter 2014; Anderson 2012Anderson , 2002Alston 1956).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Religious Knowledge, Ineffability and Gender

Baiasu

2018

Religions

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The issue of ineffability constitutes a significant challenge in the philosophy of religion. In this paper, I first argue that it is difficult to see how the traditional approach, which I call 'the metaphysical approach', can address this challenge. I consider then a post-metaphysical approach inspired by Wittgenstein which does look more promising in dealing with the ineffable. Finally, I argue that there are, however, new challenges that have to be taken into account; in particular, I focus here on the problem raised by contemporary feminist philosophers of the gendering of religious knowledge.

show abstract

“…Kukla, for example, advances an argument for ineffable facts ‘from mysticism’, i.e., from the view that some human beings have ineffable knowledge about, or experiences of, some religious state(s) of affairs, perhaps involving God. A. W. Moore has provided a bolster for such arguments in the form of his sophisticated recent defence of the idea of ineffable knowledge and the religious register in which such knowledge is linguistically expressible (‘Ineffability and Religion’ passim). Arguments from mysticism of this kind can be seen as reactions to the supposedly insoluble problem of self‐stultification.…”

Section: An Impasse On Divine Ineffability? Two Obstaclesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Divine Ineffability

Bennett-Hunter

2015

Philosophy Compass

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Though largely neglected by philosophers, the concept of ineffability is integral to the Christian mystical tradition, and has been part of almost every philosophical discussion of religious experience since the early twentieth century. After a brief introduction, this article surveys the most important discussions of divine ineffability, observing that the literature presents two mutually reinforcing obstacles to a coherent account of the concept, creating the impression that philosophical ref lection on the subject had reached an impasse. The article goes on to survey some more recent work, which draws on the conceptual resources of existential phenomenology, pragmatism, and the later Wittgenstein. It shows that this work has made possible a new philosophical account of divine ineffability that surmounts the obstacles, overcomes the impasse and makes divine ineffability, once again, a live option in philosophy of religion. The article concludes with some brief remarks on how this alternative approach ref lects recent trends in the discipline as a whole and has the potential to make a valuable contribution to live research questions in epistemology of religion.

show abstract

Ineffability and Religion

Cited by 11 publications

References 5 publications

A pragmatic critique of three kinds of religious naturalism

A pragmatic critique of three kinds of religious naturalism

Religious Knowledge, Ineffability and Gender

Divine Ineffability

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About