Tragedy as Contingency Acknowledgement: Towards a Practical Religious-Scientific Theory

IF 1.4 0 RELIGION
E. V. Dalen, Michael Scherer-Rath, H. Laarhoven, G. Wiegers, C. Hermans
{"title":"Tragedy as Contingency Acknowledgement: Towards a Practical Religious-Scientific Theory","authors":"E. V. Dalen, Michael Scherer-Rath, H. Laarhoven, G. Wiegers, C. Hermans","doi":"10.1163/15709256-12341393","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nAccording to philosopher of religion Kurt Wuchterl, contingency acknowledgement (German: Kontingenzanerkennung) means that rational thinking is inadequate for explaining contingency experiences. The authors argue that, in the tragic narrative of a contingency experience, subjects face limitations in three dimensions: in the individual, social and transcending dimensions. The individual dimension is expressed in powerful, visual metaphors for the confrontation with forces that do not take the human dimension into account in any way, even coercing the subjects to relinquish their existence. The social dimension concerns the tragic subject’s feeling of being avoided and excluded by some individuals in their environment. The transcending dimension emerges in the complaint “Why me?”, which religious persons address to a religious power, using moral arguments. Empirical research suggests that the acknowledgement of one’s own limitations resulting from a contingency experience can be seen as a sign of strength rather than weakness, for, by doing so, one shows the courage to let go of past interpretative frameworks and be vulnerable. This creates the possibility of an opening in the interpretation crisis, which can lead to an unexpected, new perspective.","PeriodicalId":42786,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Empirical Theology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2019-11-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1163/15709256-12341393","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Empirical Theology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/15709256-12341393","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"RELIGION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

According to philosopher of religion Kurt Wuchterl, contingency acknowledgement (German: Kontingenzanerkennung) means that rational thinking is inadequate for explaining contingency experiences. The authors argue that, in the tragic narrative of a contingency experience, subjects face limitations in three dimensions: in the individual, social and transcending dimensions. The individual dimension is expressed in powerful, visual metaphors for the confrontation with forces that do not take the human dimension into account in any way, even coercing the subjects to relinquish their existence. The social dimension concerns the tragic subject’s feeling of being avoided and excluded by some individuals in their environment. The transcending dimension emerges in the complaint “Why me?”, which religious persons address to a religious power, using moral arguments. Empirical research suggests that the acknowledgement of one’s own limitations resulting from a contingency experience can be seen as a sign of strength rather than weakness, for, by doing so, one shows the courage to let go of past interpretative frameworks and be vulnerable. This creates the possibility of an opening in the interpretation crisis, which can lead to an unexpected, new perspective.
悲剧作为偶然性的承认:一种实用的宗教科学理论
根据宗教哲学家Kurt Wuchterl的说法,偶然性承认(德语:Kontingenzanerkennung)意味着理性思维不足以解释偶然性体验。作者认为,在偶然性体验的悲剧叙事中,主体面临着三个维度的局限:个体维度、社会维度和超越维度。个体维度以强有力的视觉隐喻来表达,以对抗那些以任何方式都没有考虑到人类维度的力量,甚至迫使主体放弃他们的存在。社会维度涉及悲剧主体在其所处环境中被某些个体所回避和排斥的感觉。超越维度出现在“为什么是我?”的抱怨中,宗教人士用道德论据来称呼宗教力量。实证研究表明,承认自己因偶然经历而产生的局限性可以被视为一种力量而非弱点的标志,因为这样做表明了一个人放弃过去解释框架并变得脆弱的勇气。这就创造了解读危机的可能性,这可能会带来一个意想不到的新视角。
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
CiteScore
1.00
自引率
25.00%
发文量
7
×
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