Assess whether ‘God exists’ is a testable hypothesis Essay

Ultimately, perfections being domiciliate non be classified as a test able-bodied assumption. A hypothesis is a proposal, which can be tested and wherefore either fixed or spurned. theologys non-physical body politic makes this virtually undoable, as we ar unable to use our senses to confirm his presence or absence. Anthony Flew and Ludwig Wittgensteins theories exit a considerable amount of certify, which fires that in that location can non possibly be a unearthly hypothesis. Good introduction.Firstly, Anthony Flews parable of the gardener is highly vital in the gather up to produce that divinity fudges population is non a testable hypothesis. The scenario includes two explorers, who make out a valetly made clearing, but evidence suggests that it occurred naturally. Both explorers have tell a touch off learns, ane favours natural causes and the other favours world intervention. Subsequently, no evidence of the gardener is present, withal is invisible. Flews use up hinges on falsification,and if a ghostlike study can non be falsified it is basically empty, as the considerant hasnt allowed themselves to be turn out wrong. The hypothesis of perfections reality is relatively similar to this case, as divinity is transcendent and beyond our experiences, which by Flews logic makes the phantasmal hypothesis nonsensical, as it is not testable. Good.William Paleys watchmaker proportion is instrumental in the argument for the claim that beau ideals cosmea is a testable hypothesis. Paleys analogy consists of a watch, which possesses parts, which at long last fulfils a part. Paleys bold claims are plausible, as he likens the watch to the universe. Evidently, a watchs sole purpose is to tell the time. hence, there must be a watchmaker. This links together with the human analogy, which implies that human beings must have a creator, who is in this case divinity.Essentially, Paleys view is that receivable to the building c omplexity and grade of the universe, it is a affectment that a supremely able being must exist. That being is supposedly God. Critics would say that this is far from the truth, and that we have not by trial and error witnessed the presence of God and it is refuge to presume that we allow for never be able. Therefore, we can assume that Gods man cannot be likened to that of a watch, because the act upon of making a watch is a testable hypothesis, whether the creation of the world is not and never will be. Good use of the analogy.Flew argues that phantasmal believers hold onto Gods cosmos regardless of any evidence brought before to suggest otherwise. Subsequently, Flews proposal is that the spectral hypothesis must be jilted, due to the unfalsifiable reputation and the undying support by spectral believers, who are unable to allow their religious smells to be deemed meaningless. However, Flews admission is not widely accepted, and Basil Mitchell is one of many, who e xpressed their criticisms. Mitchell disagrees with Flews view that religious views are unfalsifiable. Mitchell suggests that when religious believers encounter pain such as evil, they are circumscribe to question their assent, which makes it falsifiable. How plausible is this claim?Also, legion(predicate) believers do lose their faith, indeed, Flew is misguided in his attempt to show that believers see their righteousness through rose tinted glasses.So,while Mitchell may not be claiming that God is indeed a religious hypothesis, he still possesses the belief that religious belief can be falsified via trials of faith. Good.In addition, the bank check principle is a good deal employ to support both the claim that God exists and that God does not exist. tin hick acknowledged that the religious proposals cannot be falsified, however can be affirm therefore making the hypothesis testable.Ultimately,John agrestic s suggestion is that in the afterlife, religious statements ca n be verified, and can prove whether Gods existence is a religious hypothesis. Hick proposes that, an observation is trump out assessed, if it can be verified, with the removal of sharp-witted doubt.Hick accepts that religious propositions cannot be falsified, because if God doesnt exist, when we die we will be un able to confirm or disclaim this. Hick uses the parable of the Celestial metropolis to illustrate this. It includes two men, who are travelling to the selfsame(prenominal) destination, yet have contrastive expectations of what they will find. This parable hints towards Eschato pellucid impediment, which relates to Hicks argument that many claims are reliant on the presence of the afterlife.Nevertheless, critics suggest that we will never be able to truly verify our experiences. This essentially applies to the existence of God and heaven if God is a figure beyond our thoughts, it is voteless to ideate how we will be able to bring up that we are experiencing God and heaven, rather than further a illusion.Moreover, Logical Positivists possess the belief that all knowledge is derived from our senses. Therefore, if knowledge is not empirically improvered, it is pregnant. Gods asseverate characteristics hint toward him being non-physical, making it impossible to empirically witness his existence. This led to logical positivists claim, that Gods existence is not testable and the claim is meaningless, as it is empirically not verifiable and cannot be tested.Equally, the flaws within the verification argument are highlightinged regularly. History and cognition exploit the weaknesses for all to see. An example from science is the existence of atoms, which cannot be verified, but closely certainly exists.Therefore,this example highlights the out-dated nature of the verification principle, as issues are much complex than the verification principles allow. Also, the example of Julius Caesar is one which resembles that of God. There are no longer witnesses for the existence of the roman leader and documentary evidence is limited. This leads you to believe that, if Caesars existence cannot be verified but still be true, then maybe the same can be said for the existence of God. plastered analysis.Furthermore, Ludwig Wittgenstein, who was one of the most decorated philosophers of his generation, rejected the curtain raising of a religious hypothesis, basing it on the fact that the meaning of delivery hinge on the context that they are used in, and whether we are a part of the limited group. Wittgenstein claims that there cannot be a religious hypothesis, because the context will vary depending on whether its religion or science. Wittgenstein rejected the single theory of meaning, and all words can be used in a variety of context. Wittgensteins claim is that all statements are meaningful as long as they are dumb by other linguistic communication users. Regarding religious statements, we must be a part of the game and share the beliefs in order to understand the religious statements.Therefore, religious statements cannot be a hypothesis as they are too subjective ,unlike, scientific claims. This accounts for wherefore Atheists do not possess the same faith and beliefs, because they do not ascertain language in the same focal point as the religious believers, when it comes to the existence of God. However, Wittgensteins theory is far from flawless, and this is evident. A meaningful statement no longer has to be connected to the real world, as it is associated with a language game, which renders the truth of it to be irrelevant. For example, a group of priests could talk meaningfully well-nigh non-existent objects, and this wouldnt affect the meaningfulness of the language game. This sparks anti-realism, which is destructive ,as to an extent religious claims often involve claims about what exists in reality. The religious language game is applicable to society, and not such members of the religious language game.In addition, Evidentialism is a theory, that suggests it is irrational to believe in something without enough reason. Faith allows someone to simply state their belief, without explanation or defence. Kierkegaards infamous quote, when I pray, I hear silence, therefore God exists Kierkegaard suggests that faith can pull up stakes solace in a meaningless world. The supposed silence that Kierkegaard hears would indicate to an atheistic that God didnt exist. But, for Kierkegaard, faith is more important than reason, and belief in God is required, which makes is Gods existence a religious hypothesis a meaningless discussion. How plausible is this claim?Despite this, faith is not without its faults. Believers often require a purpose in life, which hey pull ahead from a supernatural being.Ultimately,our faith in God may well angry walk from our own insecurities and the desire to feel that there is an afterlife waiting for us if we raise by Gods rules.To conclude, ultim ately, the existence of Gods is not and will never be a testable hypothesis, for an crop of reasons. The main issues arise from the fact that God can not be empirically proven, due to his non-physical state, making it far from testable, which makes it hard to provide support for the case of it being a hypothesis. The case brought forward by Anthony Flew and Ludwig Wittgenstein is compelling to say the least, as they highlight several issues, which back up claims that Gods existence is not a testable hypothesis.The inability to falsify religious claims essentially makes them meaningless, as there is no possibility of the clamant being proved wrong, therefore since Gods presence cannot be empirically know, we cannot test his existence. Wittgenstein highlights the subjective nature of nature, which prevents you defining a term, and he claims that hypothesis are scientists rather than believers. Therefore, we cannot label the Gods existence as a hypothesis, as were unable to gain acces s to it empirically or otherwise. meaningful conclusion.