Abstract

The so-called "problem of religious language" is a philosophical problem generated by some of the doctrines of classical theism. For example, if one conceives of God as infinite, then it would seem that words used to describe finite creatures might not adequately describe him. The ambiguity in meaning with respect to the divine names is the "problem of religious language" or the "problem of naming God." ;There are three possible solutions to the problem of naming God: the equivocal approach, the analogical approach, and the univocal approach. The equivocal view argues that words used with respect to God have a different meaning than the same words used with respect to creatures. After outlining Maimonides' view of equivocity, I argue that his approach limits speech about God to divine actions and negations. Given the richness of the monotheistic traditions and their assumption that truths about God can be communicated about God beyond the divine actions, this position seems unlikely. ;The univocal view argues that words used with respect to God are used in the same sense as when they are applied to creatures. After outlining William Alston's view of univocity, I argue that Alston's approach is to be rejected because it cannot accommodate the differences between God and human beings with respect to perfection. Alston's commitment to the functional interpretation of mental concepts permits him to predicate terms of God and of human beings that he alleges to be "partially univocal." I argue that on the basis of functionalism, only complete univocity could exist between God and human beings and that Alston, himself, rejects complete univocity between God and human beings on the basis of divine perfection. ;The analogical view argues that words used with respect to God signify the same thing as words used with respect to creatures, but in a different mode. I argue that the analogical approach of Thomas Aquinas provides the best means of naming God within the context of classical theism and that it does not fall prey to those problems faced by the equivocal and the univocal views