Cognitive/non-cognitive debate

• philosophers, theist and atheist, take different views on whether religious language should be viewed cognitively or non-cognitively.
• cognitive language is language that conveys factual information: most of its statements are synthetic, e.g. the Eiffel Tower is in Paris.
• the validity of non-cognitive language is not dependent on whether it can be shown to be empirically true. this type of language includes statements of emotion, morality, insight.
• cognitive language

  conveys factual information and is open to examination. mostly synthetic in nature.
• non-cognitive language

  language of which it is inappropriate to ask whether or not it is factual. such language may make moral claims or it may convey emotions, give commands, etc.
• concluding the cognitive/non-cognitive debate

  • most religious believers regard their faith statements as cognitive and open to investigation
  • at the same time, the non-cognitive approaches of hare, Wittgenstein and others reflect the differences in interpretation by religious believers of their beliefs
  • perhaps these approaches are not mutually exclusive: the central faith claims may be viewed as cognitive and the interpretations/developments of them as non-cognitive.