A dual-process approach to faith, doubt, and diakrisis

P. Butakov
{"title":"A dual-process approach to faith, doubt, and diakrisis","authors":"P. Butakov","doi":"10.25205/1995-4328-2023-17-2-1084-1097","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"It is often claimed that there are passages in the New Testament where the word διακρίνω, contrary to its regular meaning (to discern, separate), has a special \"NT meaning\" of hesitation and doubt. Those passages describe diakrisis as the opposite of faith. I offer an argument against the \"NT meaning\" of diakrisis, which is based on the dual-process theory from cognitive psychology. First, I distinguish the two types of faith in the New Testament—an involuntary Type 1 and a voluntary Type 2. I also suggest that all cases of propositional or quantitative faith belong to Type 2. I argue that in those passages where diakrisis opposes faith, the faith is propositional and quantitative, therefore it is of Type 2. Then I argue that in those passages faith and diakrisis belong to the same Type, i.e. Type 2. Since doubt is an involuntary Type 1 process, and diakrisis is a voluntary Type 2 process, diakrisis should not be translated as \"doubt,\" and the claim of the special \"NT meaning\" of διακρίνω is incorrect.","PeriodicalId":228501,"journal":{"name":"ΣΧΟΛΗ. Ancient Philosophy and the Classical Tradition","volume":"17 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ΣΧΟΛΗ. Ancient Philosophy and the Classical Tradition","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.25205/1995-4328-2023-17-2-1084-1097","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

It is often claimed that there are passages in the New Testament where the word διακρίνω, contrary to its regular meaning (to discern, separate), has a special "NT meaning" of hesitation and doubt. Those passages describe diakrisis as the opposite of faith. I offer an argument against the "NT meaning" of diakrisis, which is based on the dual-process theory from cognitive psychology. First, I distinguish the two types of faith in the New Testament—an involuntary Type 1 and a voluntary Type 2. I also suggest that all cases of propositional or quantitative faith belong to Type 2. I argue that in those passages where diakrisis opposes faith, the faith is propositional and quantitative, therefore it is of Type 2. Then I argue that in those passages faith and diakrisis belong to the same Type, i.e. Type 2. Since doubt is an involuntary Type 1 process, and diakrisis is a voluntary Type 2 process, diakrisis should not be translated as "doubt," and the claim of the special "NT meaning" of διακρίνω is incorrect.
对信仰、怀疑和危机的双重处理方法
人们经常声称,在新约中有一些段落中,διακ νω这个词与其常规意义(辨别,分离)相反,具有犹豫和怀疑的特殊“NT意义”。这些段落将灾难描述为信仰的对立面。笔者从认知心理学的双重过程理论出发,对诊断危机的“NT意义”进行了反驳。首先,我区分了新约中的两种信仰类型——非自愿的第一类和自愿的第二类。我还认为,所有的命题信仰或数量信仰都属于类型2。我认为,在那些diakrisis反对信仰的段落中,信仰是命题性和定量的,因此它是类型2。然后我认为,在这些段落中,信仰和diakrisis属于同一类型,即类型2。由于怀疑是一种非自愿的第一类过程,而诊断危机是一种自愿的第二类过程,诊断危机不应该被翻译为“怀疑”,διακρ末路ω的特殊“NT含义”的主张是不正确的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信