Philotheos 19 (2):227-259 (2019)

Authors
Abbas Ahsan
University of Birmingham (PhD)
Abstract
The laws of logic and two of the broader theories of truth are fundamental components that are responsible for espousing an ontology and meaningfulness in matters of analytic philosophy. In this respect they have persisted as conventional attitudes or modes of thought which most, if not all, of analytic philosophy uses to philosophize. However, despite the conceptual productivity of these components they are unable to account for matters that are beyond them. These matters would include certain theological beliefs, for instance, that transcend the purview of analytic ontology and the meaningfulness it ensues. Any attempt in making rational sense of such beliefs that are insusceptible to these methodological components would conventionally prohibit (restrict) us from rationally believing in them. This is because we would be unable to make sense of such beliefs with the aid of these methodological components. As a result of this, religious beliefs of this particular nature would be deemed irrational. I shall demonstrate this point by applying both of these components to an absolutely ineffable God of Islam. This would entail, attempting to make sense of an absolutely ineffable God of Islam in virtue of the laws of logic and two broad categories of truth theories, namely, substantive and insubstantive theories. I hope to establish that applying both of these methodological components in attempting to make sense of an absolutely ineffable God of Islam would not be conceptually viable. It would result in a contradictory notion which I shall allude to as the paradox of ineffability.
Keywords Analytic Philosophy  Ontology  Logic  Substantive  Insubstantive  Truth  Islam  God  Ineffability  Paradox
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.5840/philotheos201919213
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 70,079
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

Naming and Necessity.S. Kripke - 1972 - Tijdschrift Voor Filosofie 45 (4):665-666.
A Realist Conception of Truth.William P. Alston - 2018 - Cornell University Press.
Truth as One and Many.Michael P. Lynch - 2009 - Clarendon Press.
Doubt Truth to Be a Liar.Graham Priest - 2005 - Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
The Problems of Philosophy.Bertrand Russell - 1912 - Mind 21 (84):556-564.

View all 48 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Analytic Theology and its Method.Abbas Ahsan - 2020 - Philotheos 20 (2):173-211.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

The Paradox of Ineffability.Gäb Sebastian - 2017 - International Journal of Philosophy and Theology 78 (3):1-12.
Quine’s Ontology and the Islamic Tradition.Abbas Ahsan - 2019 - American Journal of Islamic Social Sciences 2 (36):20-63.
Music, Nature and Ineffability.David Cooper - 2016 - Philosophia 44 (4):1257-1266.
Schleiermacher on Language, Religious Feeling, and the Ineffable.Eric Sean Nelson - 2004 - Epoché: A Journal for the History of Philosophy 8 (2):297-312.
Current Issues of Religious Studies in Ukraine.Anatolii M. Kolodnyi - 2004 - Ukrainian Religious Studies 29:4-10.
If Meaningfulness is Not Always Fulfilling, Why Then Does It Matter?Nicole Note - 2014 - Meta: Research in Hermeneutics, Phenomenology, and Practical Philosophy 6 (2):484-505.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2020-05-16

Total views
30 ( #380,960 of 2,506,036 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
3 ( #209,628 of 2,506,036 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes