首页> 外文学位 >The 'one true God' in history and society: A meta-hermeneutical critique of Rodney Stark's sociology of monotheism.
【24h】

The 'one true God' in history and society: A meta-hermeneutical critique of Rodney Stark's sociology of monotheism.

机译:历史和社会中的“独一真神”:对罗德尼·史塔克一神论社会学的元诠释学批判。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

In The Heretical Imperative (1979), Peter Berger posited two types of religiosity: (1) Jerusalem, where the divine is experienced outside of (and separate from) the self and cosmos; and (2) Benares, where the divine is experienced within, or identical with, the self. In The Other Side of God (1981), he added a third type: (3) Mythological Matrix, where the divine is experienced as identical with, or manifesting through, cosmic phenomena. This study traces and compares similar typological schemes in the works of Robert Bellah, Eric Voegelin, Gerhard von Rad, Mircea Eliade, Ninian Smart, Joseph Campbell, Carl Jung, Friedrich Heiler, Rudolf Otto, Nathan Soderblom, and Max Weber. Insights drawn from their works are brought together in a critically revised version of the typology where the types are renamed simply as A, B, and C, respectively. It is suggested that underlying Berger's typology of religion are two contrasting epistemologies, labeled here as type A and type B/C, each with its corresponding cognitive and interpretive styles. A tendency to emphasize and reify key distinctions and boundaries is associated with type A epistemology, whereas the opposite tendency of disregarding or dissolving them is associated with type B/C. This perspective is then used to critically examine sociologist Rodney Stark's work on the nature and socio-historical consequences of monotheism. After a critical assessment of the Rational Choice Theory of Religion, it is argued that Stark's picture of religion in general and of monotheism in particular is based upon accentuation of key dichotomies. This indicates Stark's reliance on type A epistemology which is responsible for a hermeneutical asymmetry or lopsidedness in his approach, leading to an unjustified privileging of type A religiosity in his reading of monotheism. It is suggested that the methodological problems in Stark's work are partly related to his ideological commitment to the Weberian version of Western exceptionalism, as well as his desire to legitimize powerful Western institutions on the basis of Christian beliefs.
机译:彼得·伯杰(Peter Berger)在《异教的命令》(The Heretical Imperative,1979)中提出了两种宗教信仰:(1)耶路撒冷,神圣经历于自我和宇宙之外(并与之分离); (2)贝纳雷斯(Benares),神在自身内或与自我相同。在《上帝的另一面》(1981)中,他添加了第三种类型:(3)神话矩阵,其中的神圣经历与宇宙现象相同或通过宇宙现象显现。这项研究追踪并比较了罗伯特·贝拉(Robert Bellah),埃里克·沃格林(Eric Voegelin),格哈德·冯·拉德(Gerhard von Rad),Mircea Eliade,Ninian Smart,约瑟夫·坎贝尔,卡尔·荣格,弗里德里希·海勒,鲁道夫·奥托,内森·索德布鲁姆和麦克斯·韦伯的著作中的相似类型学方案。从他们的作品中得出的见解汇集在类型学的严格修订版本中,其中类型分别简单地重命名为A,B和C。建议伯杰的宗教类型学是两种相反的认识论,在这里被标记为A型和B / C型,每种都有其相应的认知和解释方式。强调和统一关键区别和界限的趋势与A型认识论有关,而忽视或消除它们的相反趋势与B / C型有关。这种观点随后被用来批判性地研究社会学家罗德尼·斯塔克关于一神论的性质和社会历史后果的著作。在对宗教的理性选择理论进行了批判性评估之后,有人认为斯塔克对宗教的总体看法,特别是对一神教的看法,是基于对关键二分法的强调。这表明史塔克对A型认识论的依赖导致了他的方法的诠释学上的不对称或偏斜,从而导致在他对一神论的阅读中不合理地剥夺了A型宗教性。有人建议,斯塔克作品中的方法论问题部分与他对韦伯式的西方例外主义的意识形态承诺,以及他希望根据基督教信仰使强大的西方制度合法化有关。

著录项

  • 作者

    Afzaal, Ahmed.;

  • 作者单位

    Drew University.;

  • 授予单位 Drew University.;
  • 学科 Religion History of.;Sociology Theory and Methods.
  • 学位 Ph.D.
  • 年度 2006
  • 页码 332 p.
  • 总页数 332
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类
  • 关键词

  • 入库时间 2022-08-17 11:40:44

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号