Origen of Alexandria: The Bible and Philosophical Rationality, or: Problems of Traditional Dualisms

C. Markschies
{"title":"Origen of Alexandria: The Bible and Philosophical Rationality, or: Problems of Traditional Dualisms","authors":"C. Markschies","doi":"10.1515/9783110446395-006","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The thesis to be presented in this paper is relatively simple: I wish to demonstrate that a central element of rationalization, and not only in Antiquity, lies in resolving dualisms, or more precisely, dual models of reality. If we subscribe to Carl Friedrich Gethmann’s process-oriented definition of “rationality” as “developing processes for the discursive upholding of claims to validity,”1 then “rationalization” would be defined as the optimization of the discursive upholding of validity claims. The Christian religion asserted such validity claims in Antiquity: It intended that the consensus within a specific religious group as to the truth of certain doctrines and behavioral prescriptions should be shared by the entire society. One notable rationalistic impulse was provided by the so-called Christian Alexandrians, and not by coincidence, as the already Hellenized Judaism of Alexandria had laid the foundations for it, and the city’s character as a center of learning was fertile ground for such a rationalizing impulse.2 The Christian Alexandrians, principally Clement of Alexandria (c. 140/150–220 CE) and Origen (c. 185–254 CE), argued for the validity of Christian precepts regarding the world and of behavioral prescriptions according to contemporary criteria of rationality; in contrast to the preceding generations of Christian theologians, they were familiar with those criteria from the source texts of Platonic and Stoic philosophy and not just from compendia or general educational tracts.3 These Alexandrians optimized the hitherto prevalent ways of reflecting upon Christianity as it had existed from the earliest days of Christendom, from Paul in the first century and through apologists such as Justin and bishops like Irenaeus of Lyons in the second century. We can join Gethmann in regarding such a purposeful optimization of rationality as “rationalization.”4","PeriodicalId":266198,"journal":{"name":"Rationalization in Religions","volume":"24 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-12-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Rationalization in Religions","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110446395-006","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

The thesis to be presented in this paper is relatively simple: I wish to demonstrate that a central element of rationalization, and not only in Antiquity, lies in resolving dualisms, or more precisely, dual models of reality. If we subscribe to Carl Friedrich Gethmann’s process-oriented definition of “rationality” as “developing processes for the discursive upholding of claims to validity,”1 then “rationalization” would be defined as the optimization of the discursive upholding of validity claims. The Christian religion asserted such validity claims in Antiquity: It intended that the consensus within a specific religious group as to the truth of certain doctrines and behavioral prescriptions should be shared by the entire society. One notable rationalistic impulse was provided by the so-called Christian Alexandrians, and not by coincidence, as the already Hellenized Judaism of Alexandria had laid the foundations for it, and the city’s character as a center of learning was fertile ground for such a rationalizing impulse.2 The Christian Alexandrians, principally Clement of Alexandria (c. 140/150–220 CE) and Origen (c. 185–254 CE), argued for the validity of Christian precepts regarding the world and of behavioral prescriptions according to contemporary criteria of rationality; in contrast to the preceding generations of Christian theologians, they were familiar with those criteria from the source texts of Platonic and Stoic philosophy and not just from compendia or general educational tracts.3 These Alexandrians optimized the hitherto prevalent ways of reflecting upon Christianity as it had existed from the earliest days of Christendom, from Paul in the first century and through apologists such as Justin and bishops like Irenaeus of Lyons in the second century. We can join Gethmann in regarding such a purposeful optimization of rationality as “rationalization.”4
亚历山大的奥利根:圣经与哲学理性,或:传统二元论的问题
本文提出的论点相对简单:我希望证明,理性的一个核心要素,不仅在古代,在于解决二元论,或者更准确地说,现实的双重模型。如果我们认同卡尔·弗里德里希·格斯曼(Carl Friedrich Gethmann)以过程为导向的定义,即“合理性”是“对有效性主张的话语支持的发展过程”,那么“合理化”将被定义为对有效性主张的话语支持的优化。基督教在古代就提出了这样的有效性主张:它的目的是在一个特定的宗教团体内就某些教义和行为准则的真理达成共识,并为整个社会所共享。一个著名的理性主义冲动是由所谓的基督教亚历山大人提供的,这并非巧合,因为亚历山大已经希腊化的犹太教为它奠定了基础,而这座城市作为学习中心的特点为这种理性冲动提供了肥沃的土壤基督教的亚历山大派,主要是亚历山大的克莱门特(公元140/150-220年)和奥利金(公元185-254年),根据当时的理性标准,主张基督教关于世界的戒律和行为处方的有效性;与前几代基督教神学家相比,他们从柏拉图和斯多葛派哲学的原始文本中熟悉这些标准,而不仅仅是从纲要或一般的教育小册子中这些亚历山德里亚人优化了迄今为止普遍存在的对基督教的反思方式,从基督教早期就存在,从一世纪的保罗,到二世纪的犹斯丁等护教者和里昂的爱任纽等主教。我们可以和格斯曼一样,把这种对理性的有目的的优化称为“理性化”
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信