Some Attempted Conclusions
Sentences of the form I have been considering cannot be regarded as either (a) expressing pictures or (b) being pictures or (c) presenting pictures which play a certain role in the life of the believer, and that attempts to develop a ‘picture’ theory of such sentences, in addition to being based initially on false assumptions present in certain cited writings of the later Wittgenstein, are either internally inconsistent, lacking in decision procedure and open to crucial objections from the standpoint of traditional belief (in the case of Professor Phillip’s account) or are open to the charge of introducing a vacuous notion of ‘logical connection’ on the basis of an unintelligible use of the notion of ‘entailment’ and to a charge of incompleteness (in the case of Dr Hudson’s account); and
that such sentences cannot, without, at the very least, disastrous consequences, be regarded as remarks of ‘grammar’ in Wittgenstein’s sense.
KeywordsSingle Status Logical Status Abstract Term Christian Belief Present Essay
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Notes and References
- Dr Kenny, ‘God and Necessity’, Williams and Montefiore (eds.), British Analytical Philosophy (Routledge & Kegan Paul, London, 1966) pp. 131–51; cf. especially pp. 147–8.Google Scholar