HEYTHROP JOURNAL最新文献

{"title":"Trinitarian Ecclesiology: Charles Journet, the Divine Missions, and the Mystery of the Church. By John F. O'Neill. Washington, D.C.: Catholic University of America Press, 2024. Pp. 432. $75.00.","authors":"Jack Green","doi":"10.1111/heyj.14380","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/heyj.14380","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":54105,"journal":{"name":"HEYTHROP JOURNAL","volume":"65 6","pages":"732-734"},"PeriodicalIF":0.1,"publicationDate":"2024-11-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142692045","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Buddhism as ‘Chinese Philosophy’: Buddhism in Hegel's History of Philosophy1","authors":"Jay Martin","doi":"10.1111/heyj.14371","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/heyj.14371","url":null,"abstract":"<p>The question of Hegel's views on Buddhism and its place within his system must be asked again as the history of effects, transmission, and reception continues to unfold. This unfolding highlights not only Hegel's effect on the Western European reception and understanding of Buddhism (and its sharp orientalist critique), but also the canny use of Hegel's philosophy by certain members of the so-called Kyoto School of Japanese neo-Buddhist philosophy, who, though primarily concerning themselves with Heidegger, were notable in their creative use of Hegel's philosophy of spirit (especially Nishida, Nishitani, Tanabe, and Abe). Our present task is likewise to look back to Hegel's own writing on Buddhism through the lens of the history of its effects—that is, to read Hegel again with his legacy in mind—so that we might, as strange as it may perhaps seem, see things more clearly. Our goal is relatively modest, as it aims only to seek out and coordinate Buddhism within Hegel's history of philosophy. Thus, as we have a proximate goal in mind, we also have an order of importance with respect to Hegel's texts, which, of course, brings the <i>Lectures on the History of Philosophy</i> to the fore.</p>","PeriodicalId":54105,"journal":{"name":"HEYTHROP JOURNAL","volume":"65 6","pages":"613-628"},"PeriodicalIF":0.1,"publicationDate":"2024-10-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142692035","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Seeing Otherwise: ‘The Least of These’ and Revelation in Jean-Luc Marion","authors":"Thomas Breedlove Ph.D.","doi":"10.1111/heyj.14372","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/heyj.14372","url":null,"abstract":"<p>In his familiar essay in <i>Phenomenology and the ‘Theological Turn’</i>, Jean-François Courtine writes that the ‘cardinal experience’ of revelatory phenomena would undoubtedly be the incarnation. But in its singularity, this experience, he admits, seems to elude phenomenological thought. Against such a judgement, many Christian traditions affirm Christ's ongoing presence in diverse privileged sites, in the eucharist, saints, the Church itself, and, via Christ's own identification with ‘the least of these’ in Matthew's parable, in those who suffer. This essay considers this last possibility of divine manifestation, taking up ‘the least of these’ to reconsider the relationship between finitude and the infinite in Jean-Luc Marion's phenomenogical account of revelation and saturation. While the heart of Marion's account, both in his words and according to his critics, has primarily concerned revelation's contradiction of finite experience, this essay argues that the development of Marion's own hermeneutics and his attentiveness to paradox and kenosis also reveal the confirmation of finitude at the heart of revelation. Revelation, that is, though it comes from elsewhere, is not <i>other than</i> finitude, but finitude <i>otherwise</i>, finitude's transfiguration.</p>","PeriodicalId":54105,"journal":{"name":"HEYTHROP JOURNAL","volume":"66 1","pages":"54-71"},"PeriodicalIF":0.1,"publicationDate":"2024-10-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/heyj.14372","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143119796","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Premortalism and the Problem of Involuntary Suffering","authors":"Andrew Hronich","doi":"10.1111/heyj.14370","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/heyj.14370","url":null,"abstract":"<p>In a recent article, James Spiegel has suggested ways in which premortalism may bolster the free will defence in response to the logical problem of evil. Building on his presentation, this present article further reinforces the premortalist free will defence whilst also critiquing similarly related defences (such as the necessity of nomic regularity for significant freedom). Contrary to expectation, the premortalist defence is compatible with diverse accounts of divine knowledge (<i>i.e.</i>, middle knowledge, dynamic omniscience, <i>etc</i>.) and does not present overly problematic questions of identity if substance dualism is presupposed. More importantly, the premortalist free will defence raises critical questions of consent and agential contractualism that are often overlooked in the literature. Over against a consequentialist framework, the premortalist defence acknowledges the importance of treating the agent as an end in and of herself. Questions of eschatology naturally arise, and contra James Spiegel, this article will propose that universalism, the belief that <i>eventually</i> all will be saved, is nigh undeniable on a premortalist account, given perfect being theism.</p>","PeriodicalId":54105,"journal":{"name":"HEYTHROP JOURNAL","volume":"65 6","pages":"629-644"},"PeriodicalIF":0.1,"publicationDate":"2024-09-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/heyj.14370","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142692125","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Thomas Kuhn's Quasi-Fideism","authors":"Thomas Marré","doi":"10.1111/heyj.14369","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/heyj.14369","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Abstract: I argue that Kuhn's account of scientific practice is profitably understood as a kind of hinge epistemology: like our epistemic practices more generally, scientific inquiry is made possible precisely by the fact that certain things are <i>not</i> subject to doubt. In Kuhn's own words, ‘dogmatism’ is essential to scientific practice and one of the primary engines of its success. For this reason, I argue that Kuhn's account is a rich source for reflection on the relationship between faith and reason. At the same time, Kuhn has faced objections similar to those which have faced hinge-epistemologists: how can disputes grounded in different, incompatible ‘dogmas’ be rationally resolved? Kuhn's response is similar to one put forward by Duncan Pritchard, but is, I argue, an improvement on it. In particular, the hinges on which deep scientific disagreement turns are for Kuhn certain shared <i>values</i> in light of which debate is possible. The choice among competing dogmas can, I argue, be understood on analogy with a prudential judgement of practical reasoning, <i>i.e.,</i> an exercise of <i>phronēsis</i>.</p>","PeriodicalId":54105,"journal":{"name":"HEYTHROP JOURNAL","volume":"65 6","pages":"645-661"},"PeriodicalIF":0.1,"publicationDate":"2024-09-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142685275","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"In defence of the desire for everlasting life: why secular faith cannot ground human meaning and solidarity","authors":"Roman A. Montero","doi":"10.1111/heyj.14366","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/heyj.14366","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Abstract: In this article, I argue that human meaning and value are grounded in an infinite horizon as opposed to the finite horizon of the building of a life. This infinite grounding of human meaning and value makes sense of and justifies the desire for everlasting life. I also argue that this infinite horizon can motivate an ethic of social justice better than the necessity of building a life within a finite timeframe could. In this article I take Martin Hägglund's <i>This Life: Secular Faith and Spiritual Freedom</i> as representative of the position that meaning and value can only be made sense of in light of the horizon of death; and I draw on phenomenologist Michel Henry's concept of Life and Jean-Luc Marion's concept of the saturated phenomenon to argue against that position. I then draw on Friedrich Nietzsche, Karl Marx, and David Graeber to argue that social justice cannot be grounded in secular faith of temporal finitude but is rather best made sense of in view of an everlasting hope and a move to the infinite.</p>","PeriodicalId":54105,"journal":{"name":"HEYTHROP JOURNAL","volume":"65 6","pages":"662-680"},"PeriodicalIF":0.1,"publicationDate":"2024-09-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142691322","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"The prayers of the Enlightenment deists and the religious Enlightenment","authors":"Joseph Waligore","doi":"10.1111/heyj.14368","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/heyj.14368","url":null,"abstract":"&lt;p&gt;Throughout most of the twentieth century, the Enlightenment was seen as a period when people used the light of reason and science to free themselves from the shackles of religious beliefs. For example, Henry Steele Commager said, ‘the men of the Enlightenment … are the first fully to emancipate themselves from religious superstition and to understand the nature of man in the light of science and reason’.1 Similarly, Peter Gay stated that there was a unified Enlightenment whose proponents rejected the religious beliefs they grew up with while being on a mission to develop ‘a naturalistic world view, a secular ethical system, and above all a triumphant scientific method’.2 Moreover, the deists were seen as major proponents of secularism, naturalism, and the scientific method. Gay asserted that the deists living in England had a very important role in the Enlightenment mission of developing a secular and scientific worldview because they were ‘the first men in modern times to set out on this mission … they redrew the religious map of Europe’.3&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;In the decades since Gay's time, his view of a unified Enlightenment has been widely challenged. This challenge was initiated by Roy Porter and Mikuláš Teich in their 1982 book, &lt;i&gt;The Enlightenment in National Context&lt;/i&gt;. Porter and Teich, and other scholars who follow them, say that the Enlightenment took many different forms in different national contexts and that in many countries religious belief was seen as compatible with ‘the light of science and reason’. The idea that there was a singular, unified Enlightenment has been rejected by many scholars in favour of the idea that there was a ‘family of Enlightenments’, or many different Enlightenments in different countries.4&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Jonathan Israel disagrees with the idea of seeing the Enlightenment as a family of Enlightenments. He agrees that there was a moderate Enlightenment whose proponents were motivated by their religious beliefs. However, he argues that there was a much more important and more secular Radical Enlightenment. Israel maintains that the proponents of the Radical Enlightenment were the progenitors of the modern world because they, unlike the proponents of the moderate Enlightenment, advocated equality, comprehensive freedom of thought, democratic politics, and personal liberty. Israel asserts that, ‘the view that there was not one Enlightenment but rather a “family of enlightenments” leads to distraction from the core issues, and even a meaningless relativism contributing to the loss of basic values needed by modern society’.5&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;David Sorkin adds the concept of the religious Enlightenment to Israel's concepts of the moderate and Radical Enlightenments. Sorkin says that while the Radical Enlightenment flanked one side of the moderate Enlightenment, ‘flanking the moderate Enlightenment on the other side, and significantly overlapping with it, was the religious Enlightenment’. According to Sorkin, this religious Enlightenment con","PeriodicalId":54105,"journal":{"name":"HEYTHROP JOURNAL","volume":"65 6","pages":"681-694"},"PeriodicalIF":0.1,"publicationDate":"2024-09-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/heyj.14368","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142685328","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Twofold Theodicy","authors":"Roberto Di Ceglie","doi":"10.1111/heyj.14367","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/heyj.14367","url":null,"abstract":"<p><b>Abstract:</b> Theodicy is often rejected because a suffering person is hardly interested in abstract arguments—even if these arguments were convincing, they might not change the suffering she is experiencing. I propose a twofold theodicy. First, Christians are invited to promote positive apologetics—they should show the internal consistency of divine revelation, which recommends that they should alleviate suffering and promote flourishing. Second, Christians should develop negative apologetics and show the untenability of objections to the Christian view of evil and suffering, including the seemingly uncontroversial objection that a world without innocent suffering would be better in terms of justice than the one we live in. My argument is that in both positive and negative apologetics believers should be guided by devotion and commitment to God. The more they love and trust God, and consequently believe what God has revealed, the more they are expected to encourage both flourishing and rational confrontation.</p>","PeriodicalId":54105,"journal":{"name":"HEYTHROP JOURNAL","volume":"65 6","pages":"695-710"},"PeriodicalIF":0.1,"publicationDate":"2024-09-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142685301","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"The Contradictory Christ. By Jc Beall. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2021. Pp. xv, 185. £45.00","authors":"Benjamin Murphy","doi":"10.1111/heyj.14356","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/heyj.14356","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":54105,"journal":{"name":"HEYTHROP JOURNAL","volume":"65 5","pages":"595"},"PeriodicalIF":0.1,"publicationDate":"2024-09-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142234762","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Nature and Nature's God: A Philosophical and Scientific Defense of Aquinas's Unmoved Mover Argument. By Daniel Shields. Washington, D.C.: Catholic University of America Press, 2023. Pp. 328. $75.00.","authors":"Gaven Kerr","doi":"10.1111/heyj.14362","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/heyj.14362","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":54105,"journal":{"name":"HEYTHROP JOURNAL","volume":"65 5","pages":"605-606"},"PeriodicalIF":0.1,"publicationDate":"2024-09-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142234764","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}