Religious language as a blik- Hare

• hare thought that religious language was non-cognitive
• his 'parable of the lunatic' illustrates his claim that all beliefs, religious and otherwise, are bliks
• parable of the lunatic

  lunatic is convinced that all dons (Oxford lecturers) want to murder him. his friends introduce him to all the mildest and kindest oxford dons who are very nice to him but the lunatic is still convinced that the dons were just plotting against him and being cunning. however many kind dons are products, the reaction is still the same.
• bliks are interpretations of the world that are not falsifiable. nevertheless, they are deeply held, life-changing and therefore crucial.
• strengths:

  • it explains why there are different 'factual' claims in the different religions: they are in fact bliks, not cognitive statements. this also explains why people are not convinced by evidence that seems to challenge their views
  • it supports the view that religion gives a view that is used to interpret the whole of life in a range of distinctive ways.
• weakness

  • it makes religion very subjective as it all depends on how you see something. as flew pointed out, most theists regard their faith statements as cognitive. if there are no factual truths, then Christianity's significance is simply what psychological and sociological benefits it might have.