对信仰、怀疑和危机的双重处理方法

P. Butakov
{"title":"对信仰、怀疑和危机的双重处理方法","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":"{\"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}","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

摘要

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。
A dual-process approach to faith, doubt, and diakrisis
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.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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