Ramsey approached a number of philosophical problems concerning twentieth century theology. One of the significant topics concerned "God-talk" or the soundness of theological language. Much of this had been prompted by the philosophical writings of
Ludwig Wittgenstein and also by philosophers such as
Alfred Ayer who were involved in the mid-twentieth century movement known as
Logical Positivism. The implications of Ayer's argument in
Language, Truth and Logic (1936) were that religious or theological language was deemed to be analytically unscientific. Religious statements were considered to be technically meaningless as it was argued that claims such as "God exists" were observationally unverifiable. Ramsey was concerned in his writings to argue that traditional theological language was empirically meaningful. He was equipped to make this argument because his thinking closely paralleled that of Wittgenstein.
Theology grounded in mystery For Ramsey, theological language is grounded in "permanent mystery". He distinguishes this "permanent mystery" from the kind of mystery that can solved by facts and information. Permanent mystery cannot be eradicated. It is not "mystery" used as "a synonym for ignorance". In his emphasis on mystery, Ramsey drew on Ludwig Wittgenstein. For example, Ramsey distinguished between the "thatness" and the "whatness" of an event. This distinction parallels Wittgenstein's proposition, "not
how the world is, is the mystical [mystery], but
that it is". The mystery of
what happens can be solved by sufficient information, but, for Ramsey, the mystery
that its happens is permanent. Given his position that theology is grounded in permanent mystery, Ramsey holds that language about God (theo-logy) should never be viewed as "a super-science" that explains phenomena. Rather than treating language about God as explanatory, Ramsey characterizes talk about God (theology) as "an attempt to be articulate about the divine mystery".
Two languages In his
Religious Language, Ramsey differentiates two kinds of language. He denotes one kind variously as "observational language", "ordinary language", "straightforward language", or "straightforward public language". To simplify, this first kind of language can be called "ordinary language". Ramsey calls the other kind of language "religious language", the language of theology. He cautions that religious language will be "logically odd" because "God" is "a word
outside ordinary language". Thus, even though religious language is "grammatically simple", its "logical structure" is neither plain nor straightforward. The challenge for religious language, in Ramsey's estimation, is how to make "ordinary language" into a "suitable currency" for the "religious language" of theology without its being misread as straightforward language. Ramsey tried to prevent misreading "religious language" as "ordinary language" by pointing up the logically odd "qualifiers" to the ordinary language of "disclosure models" (aka "analogue models") by which religious language speaks of God. One of Ramsey's examples is the disclosure model "First Cause". When "God" is predicated by active verbs, if the language were "ordinary language", the word "God" would refer to a causal agent. But, for Ramsey, the disclosure model "First Cause" does not mean that God is a causal agent. Rather, if one traces the empirical
whatness of a "causal chain", the permanent mystery
that such causation exists might dawn on a person, or in an image Ramsey used, "the penny drops". Disclosure models are grounded on the empirical
what, in this example, causation. This is the "empirical fit" Ramsey emphasised. At the same time, disclosure models "point to mystery", in this example, the mystery
that causation exists. Thus, for Ramsey the religious language of theology names the permanent mystery "God" and by a disclosure model speaks of God as "First Cause". The qualifiers "First" and the capitalizations signify religious language. Ramsey's understanding of theological language has been applied to the biblical story of
Hannah in
1 Samuel 1:2-5, 19. The disclosure situation was that "Hannah had no children" because of unstated empirical causes, but the permanent mystery
that the causes happened was named "the Lord" and was modelled with an "empirical fit" as having "closed Hannah’s womb". When Hannah became pregnant, the mystery
that it happened was again named "the Lord". This time the Lord was modelled with an "empirical fit" as having "remembered Hannah" (I Samuel 1:19) to fit the new disclosure situation. Ramsey reconciled such conflicting disclosure models by tracing them back to the
what of the disclosure situations.
Grounded in personal experience Ramsey's arguments were developed on a model of religious language grounded in personal experience and personal disclosure. As humans communicate with each other personal disclosure occurs. Ramsey used this point to argue that humans come to encounter God also by way of personal disclosure, thus offering an argument from analogy. Ramsey's theological work thus re-emphasized the traditional theological view that all religious language is analogical, and the religious words that humans create are always involving the language of analogy. He was particularly effective in communicating with experts from a wide range of disciplines, inspiring them to work together on the problems raised for theology and ethics by developments in science, technology and medicine. As a result of his experience he became convinced that a permanent centre was needed for enquiry into these
interdisciplinary areas, and it was in response to this that the Ian Ramsey Centre for the study of religious beliefs in relation to the sciences and medicine was set up in 1985 in the
University of Oxford. Bishop Ian Ramsey Primary School in
Consett,
County Durham, Ian Ramsey Church of England Academy in
Fairfield,
Stockton-on-Tees and
Bishop Ramsey Church of England Secondary School in
Ruislip in the
London Borough of Hillingdon are also named after him. ==Styles and titles==