Theology and falsification
Theology and falsification
复制标题
神学与证伪
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
1973
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
J. C. Thomas
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
J. C. Thomas
证伪原则被用来质疑宗教声明的意义，理由是如果它们是有意义的，那么它们必须排除某些可能的事态，因此是可证伪的。许多当代基督教教义学试图回答这一挑战，坚持认为宗教声明与事实主张没有逻辑关系，因此这种神学主张的意义与这些主张被证伪的可能性无关。尽管这种对证伪挑战的回避是试图坚持上帝是超越的，但它在一定程度上是合理的。因为，如果关于上帝的陈述可以简化，而不丧失关于世界的陈述的意义，那么“上帝”这个词就等同于一些自然事件，上帝在任何意义上都不能超越世界。但是，从宗教索赔，这是最近的基督教教义学的事实索赔完全分离，可以保持只有在使宗教信仰完全心灵依赖的代价。然而，任何宗教，声称上帝已经揭示了自己在一个特定的时间，在一个特定的地方，不能避免作出索赔指的是上帝，这是逻辑上相关的陈述事实，这是特别真实的基督教，如果它认真声称是一个历史的宗教。因为宣称耶稣为世人的罪死在十字架上，就意味着耶稣死在十字架上。因此，如果耶稣死在十字架上这一历史事实不是真的，那么他为世人的罪死在十字架上在逻辑上也不可能是真的。
The falsification principle has been used to challenge the meaning of religious statements on the ground that if they are meaningful then they must exclude some possible state of affairs, and therefore be falsifiable. Much contemporary Christian dogmatics has attempted to answer this challenge by insisting that religious statements have no logical relations with factual claims and thus the meaning of such theological claims have no connection with the possibility of these claims being falsified. Insofar as this side-stepping of the falsification challenge is an attempt to insist that God is transcendent, it is in part justified. For if statements about God could be reduced, without loss of meaning to statements about the world, then the word “God" would be identical with some series of natural events, and God could not in any sense transcend the world. But the complete detachment of factual claims from religious claims, which is made by much recent christocentric dogmatics, can be maintained only at the price of making religious belief totally mind dependent. Any religion however, that claims that God has revealed himself at a particular time, in a particular place, cannot avoid making claims referring to God which are logically related to statements of fact this is particularly true of Christianity if it seriously claims to be a historical religion. For to claim that Jesus died on the cross for the sins of the world entails the statement that Jesus died on a cross. Thus, if it is not true as a matter of historical fact that Jesus died on the cross, it logically cannot be true that he died on the cross for the sins of the world.