Talking of intangibles…

Section 113 is talking of supposed intangibles and invincibles…

“Edmond; tell me, what makes talking about God harder than talking about everyday things?” They’d been watching a video and practising a communication exercise. Vernon had his fingers crossed.

The problem with God-talk was knowing, really knowing, when one had actually talked about GOD.

The problem with God-talk was knowing, really knowing, when one had actually talked about GOD.

“It’s more difficult because God’s watching?”

“That’s a start” Vernon sighed, longing for the hills of Thailand. “How’d you know he’s watching?”

“Erm.” Edmond stalled as always and Flo stepped in. “It’s more difficult because there’s no proof he’s watching. He’s an entanglement.”

Vernon smiled, “You mean an intangible. Okay, if God’s invisible and hard to agree on, how can we say meaningful things about him? Why is this a different challenge to saying things about historical events, things like ‘Napoleon ate mutton pie and chips just before his final defeat at Waterloo’? Lilly?”

“Did he Sir?” Flo asked interested as always in food.

“I don’t know I wasn’t there…” Lilly said, and brusque though this sounded, Vernon was sure there was more to come. “If I was there I might verify it by asking him, consulting witnesses… or even killing him and doing an autopsy.” Lilly wanted to be a vet Vernon knew, God help us is she becomes a medic he thought.

“Good, good. Well done, so the key is Verification. A claim is meaningful if it can be verified… or what?”

Lilly’s face was as blank as the cheque of an indifferent benefactor. “Ugh?”

Vernon re-trod the path for her. “A claim, religious or not is meaningful if it can be verified empirically, or shown in principle how it can be verified. The Logical positivists regarded truth as something determined by a thing’s relationship with the world. Speech is pointing to things in that world and meaningful speech is verified by demonstrating the existence of the things you are pointing at.”

Napoleon... where is he now?

Napoleon… where is he now?

“So what about Napoleon, assuming we can’t disembowel him for the sake of a demonstration” asked Edmond, stifling a yawn probably resulting from night-time capers. “How would you verify in principle whether he ate mutton pie and chips?”

“Well it’s unlikely he ate chips as we do because that would be an anachronism but in principle, if we could go back in time, and if we could meet him, and if we could believe him, the claim is therefore verified in principle.”

Having found an expression to wear on her face, Lilly re-entered the debate. She wore an expression of disbelief. “That’s a whole lot of, what’d you call it, ‘special pleading’. If we could get to God’s dimension, and if we could see him, or her, and if we could understand God-speak, the claim that he exists is also verified in principle. Logical Positivists are naff.”

“Were naff Lilly; nevertheless you’re right.” 

As soon as the sixth formers filed out for their trek across the park to the dinner hall Vernon’s anxiety about Jean Luc and Émile resurfaced.

Check out the story so far on The Novel page


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s