首页> 外文学位 >Religious Experience at the Limits of Language: Levinas, Marion, and Caputo From a Post-Phenomenological Perspective.
【24h】

Religious Experience at the Limits of Language: Levinas, Marion, and Caputo From a Post-Phenomenological Perspective.

机译:语言后的宗教经验:现象现象学视角下的列维纳斯,马里恩和卡普托。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

In my dissertation, I explore the thinking of Emmanuel Levinas, Jean-Luc Marion, and John D. Caputo, three late twentieth-century philosophers who consider the manner in which human desire for the divine is experienced within consciousness. I endeavor to provide a balanced reading of their views and then explore the question of whether phenomenology, rigorously applied, can provide a means for properly understanding religious experience. These three philosophers were influenced by the views of Nietzsche, Husserl, Heidegger, and Derrida, and accordingly, my dissertation considers the manner in which those views are understood and then followed or rejected by Levinas, Marion, and Caputo. In my view, contemporary philosophy of religion struggles to find its voice, often facing criticism for its theological tenor and hyperbolic language. I attempt to offer a reasoned analysis of the way in which philosophy, properly considered, can view language-formation (the creation of meaning within consciousness) as an essential component of religious experience. In my analysis of the writings of Levinas, I explore how he finds in language the means to articulate an experience of the divine that begins outside of Being in "saying" and culminates within Being in the "said." I then delve into the philosophical basis for his break with Heidegger and his expanded reading of Husserl and consider the possibility that he failed to fully justify his arguments through phenomenology. Next I consider Marion's attempts to provide convincing arguments for an expansion of phenomenology to include all phenomena "given" to consciousness, a project grounded in his readings---or possibly his misreadings---of Husserl and Heidegger. I will evaluate Marion's argument that phenomenology may properly recognize the possibility of revelation from a divine source that resembles the God of Western religion. Marion contends that such phenomena are incomprehensible and, paradoxically, impossible; I explore the way in which this contention supports an expansion of phenomenology to consider the experience of meaning-creation that occurs when phenomena are manifested to consciousness in the manner claimed by Marion. I then consider the contributions of Caputo to this debate and his premise that experience of God occurs (if at all) through a deconstructionist undertaking; in particular, I explore the way in which his "radical" hermeneutics supplements the philosophical contributions of Levinas and Marion. Each of these three philosophers offers contemporary philosophy a different means for describing the possibility of religious experience; however, all of them conclude that human consciousness experiences God---or the idea of God---as largely incomprehensible. My dissertation asks whether phenomenology could potentially embrace impossibility as so depicted. Similarly, it considers whether a fundamental unanswered question regarding a phenomenological understanding of religious experience is this: how can truth and meaning be found in divine manifestations that defy language and are claimed to be beyond human comprehension?
机译:在我的论文中,我探讨了20世纪晚期的三位哲学家伊曼纽尔·列维纳斯(Emmanuel Levinas),让·卢克·马里昂(Jean-Luc Marion)和约翰·卡普托(John D. Caputo)的思想,他们考虑了人类对神的渴望在意识中的经历方式。我努力平衡地理解他们的观点,然后探讨严格应用的现象学是否可以提供一种适当理解宗教经验的手段的问题。这三个哲学家都受到了尼采,胡塞尔,海德格尔和德里达的观点的影响,因此,我的论文考虑了列维纳斯,马里恩和卡普托对这些观点的理解,接受和拒绝的方式。在我看来,当代宗教哲学努力寻找自己的声音,常常因其神学上的高音和双曲线语言而遭到批评。我试图对经过适当考虑的哲学如何将语言形成(意识中的意义创造)视为宗教经验的重要组成部分进行理性分析。在我对列维纳斯著作的分析中,我探索了他如何在语言中找到表达神圣经历的手段,这种经历始于“说”中的存在之外,并最终体现于“所说”中的存在中。然后,我研究了他与海德格尔的决裂以及他对胡塞尔的扩展阅读的哲学基础,并考虑了他未能通过现象学充分证明自己的论点的可能性。接下来,我考虑马里昂(Marion)试图为现象学的扩展提供令人信服的论点,以将所有“赋予”意识的现象都包括进去,这是基于他对胡塞尔(Husserl)和海德格尔(Heidegger)的读本(或可能是他的误读)的一个项目。我将评估马里昂(Marion)的论点,即现象学可以适当地认识到来自类似于西方宗教之神的神圣来源启示的可能性。马里昂认为,这种现象是难以理解的,而且矛盾的是,是不可能的。我探索了这种争论支持现象学扩展的方式,以考虑当现象以马里昂(Marion)所主张的方式表现为意识时发生的意义创造体验。然后,我考虑卡普托对这场辩论的贡献,以及他的前提,即上帝的经验是通过解构主义事业发生的(如果有的话)。特别是,我探索了他的“激进”诠释学对列维纳斯和马里恩的哲学贡献的补充方式。这三位哲学家都为当代哲学提供了不同的方式来描述宗教经历的可能性。然而,他们所有人都得出结论,人类的意识在很大程度上无法理解地经历了上帝(或上帝的观念)。我的论文问的是,现象学是否有可能像这样描述不可能。同样,它考虑有关宗教经验的现象学理解的根本未解决的问题是否是这样的:如何在反抗语言并声称超出人类理解能力的神圣表现形式中找到真理和意义?

著录项

  • 作者

    Swart, William E.;

  • 作者单位

    The University of Texas at Dallas.;

  • 授予单位 The University of Texas at Dallas.;
  • 学科 Philosophy.;Religion.;Philosophy of Religion.
  • 学位 Ph.D.
  • 年度 2017
  • 页码 226 p.
  • 总页数 226
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类 康复医学;
  • 关键词

  • 入库时间 2022-08-17 11:38:49
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