Vem vill dö för en metafor? : En undersökning av religiöst språkbruk från ett feministiskt perspektiv

Sammanfattning: The purpose of this essay is to examine how God-talk can be used to say something reality depicting and potentially true, and at the same time contribute to a feminist aim where women and men are equally qualified in their talk about God. A pure shift from male to female metaphors and properties applied to God is rejected. Religious language that is used from a radical semantic realistic or radical semantic anti-realistic point of view is also rejected since those positions are not in line with the feminist aims. Metaphors are of value when examining how to speak about God. It is examined if, and in that case how, metaphors can express truths and say something reality depicting. It is argued that a theory of metaphors based on semantic modest anti-realism contributes with something more distinct than a theory of metaphors based on realism does. This distinction highlights the different uses in language between an analogical way and a modest anti-realistic use of metaphors. The three classical “ways” in religious language – univocal, analogical, and equivocal language – are possible to use from a feminist perspective of religious language. It is argued, however, that religious language that is supposed to be in line both with a feminist agenda and be able to contribute to our understanding of God, ourselves, and express truths must be based on a semantic modest realism or semantic modest anti-realism. Analogical language is the one and only religious “way” that is compatible with both semantic modest realism and semantic modest anti-realism. For that reason, it is argued, the analogical language has an advantage over univocal and equivocal language. Finally, four criteria are set up that a good feministic metaphor must achieve, and some remarks about the research of feminism and religious language still to examine is made.