世俗主义、乌托邦与神话辨析

R. Boer
{"title":"世俗主义、乌托邦与神话辨析","authors":"R. Boer","doi":"10.17077/2168-569X.1056","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Is spiritual experience the best way to account for the host of newer religious sensibilities that are cropping up, in enabling the crossing of borders between older religious systems that scatter the cultural landscape as the newer intolerances that have taken their place? In order to offer a theoretical angle on the question of spiritual experience I want to deal with four issues: secularism, post-structuralism, the utopian possibilities of religion, and what I want to call, following Ernst Bloch (1972), the discernment of myths. The specific issue relating to post-secularism is the widespread denigration of “religion” in favor of “spirituality.” No one, it seems, wants to be religious any more; no one, in fact has been religious for a good time now; in popular parlance, worship halls reek of incense gone rancid, moth-eaten robes, and empty temples, whether Jewish synagogues or Hindu stupas. However, what one can be is spiritual, removed from any institutional taint, free to pick up lost forms of spirituality or any variety of the new forms that spring up daily. If I add that spirituality now is characterized by bricolage and eclecticism, that it expresses a deep desire to be free from political as well as institutional taint, then we have a definition of spirituality. It is, in other words, the properly late capitalist and consumerist approach to religion. The popularity and valorization of the spiritual is so often taken as a mark of the new post-secular order, and religion has become the bogey term. The seemingly rapid appearance of such a distinction hit me while teaching in 1999. In a course entitled “Culture, Religion and Spirituality” I found that not one of the students in the course would admit to being religious: if they were anything, it was spiritual, Secularism, Utopia and the Discernment of Myth","PeriodicalId":448595,"journal":{"name":"The Iowa Journal of Cultural Studies","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Secularism, Utopia and the Discernment of Myth\",\"authors\":\"R. Boer\",\"doi\":\"10.17077/2168-569X.1056\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Is spiritual experience the best way to account for the host of newer religious sensibilities that are cropping up, in enabling the crossing of borders between older religious systems that scatter the cultural landscape as the newer intolerances that have taken their place? In order to offer a theoretical angle on the question of spiritual experience I want to deal with four issues: secularism, post-structuralism, the utopian possibilities of religion, and what I want to call, following Ernst Bloch (1972), the discernment of myths. The specific issue relating to post-secularism is the widespread denigration of “religion” in favor of “spirituality.” No one, it seems, wants to be religious any more; no one, in fact has been religious for a good time now; in popular parlance, worship halls reek of incense gone rancid, moth-eaten robes, and empty temples, whether Jewish synagogues or Hindu stupas. However, what one can be is spiritual, removed from any institutional taint, free to pick up lost forms of spirituality or any variety of the new forms that spring up daily. If I add that spirituality now is characterized by bricolage and eclecticism, that it expresses a deep desire to be free from political as well as institutional taint, then we have a definition of spirituality. It is, in other words, the properly late capitalist and consumerist approach to religion. The popularity and valorization of the spiritual is so often taken as a mark of the new post-secular order, and religion has become the bogey term. The seemingly rapid appearance of such a distinction hit me while teaching in 1999. In a course entitled “Culture, Religion and Spirituality” I found that not one of the students in the course would admit to being religious: if they were anything, it was spiritual, Secularism, Utopia and the Discernment of Myth\",\"PeriodicalId\":448595,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The Iowa Journal of Cultural Studies\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1900-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The Iowa Journal of Cultural Studies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.17077/2168-569X.1056\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Iowa Journal of Cultural Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17077/2168-569X.1056","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

精神体验是解释新出现的宗教情感的最好方式吗?旧宗教系统之间的边界跨越了,这些旧宗教系统分散了文化景观,而新的不宽容取代了它们?为了提供一个关于精神体验问题的理论角度,我想处理四个问题:世俗主义、后结构主义、宗教的乌托邦可能性,以及我想按照恩斯特·布洛赫(Ernst Bloch, 1972)的说法,称之为神话的辨明。与后世俗主义相关的具体问题是“宗教”的广泛诋毁,而支持“灵性”。似乎没有人再想信仰宗教了;事实上,没有人信仰宗教已经有一段时间了;用流行的说法,礼拜大厅散发着腐臭的熏香,虫蛀的长袍,空荡荡的寺庙,无论是犹太教会堂还是印度教佛塔。然而,你所能成为的是灵性的,从任何制度的污点中移除,自由地拾起丢失的灵性形式或每天涌现的任何新形式的变种。如果我补充说,现在的灵性以拼凑和折衷主义为特征,它表达了一种摆脱政治和制度污染的深刻愿望,那么我们就有了灵性的定义。换句话说,这是正确的晚期资本主义和消费主义的宗教方法。精神的普及和价值的增值经常被视为新的后世俗秩序的标志,宗教已经成为一个可怕的术语。1999年,当我在教书的时候,这种区别似乎很快就出现了。在一门名为“文化、宗教与灵性”的课程中,我发现这门课上的学生没有一个会承认自己有宗教信仰:如果他们有的话,那就是精神、世俗主义、乌托邦和神话的洞察力
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Secularism, Utopia and the Discernment of Myth
Is spiritual experience the best way to account for the host of newer religious sensibilities that are cropping up, in enabling the crossing of borders between older religious systems that scatter the cultural landscape as the newer intolerances that have taken their place? In order to offer a theoretical angle on the question of spiritual experience I want to deal with four issues: secularism, post-structuralism, the utopian possibilities of religion, and what I want to call, following Ernst Bloch (1972), the discernment of myths. The specific issue relating to post-secularism is the widespread denigration of “religion” in favor of “spirituality.” No one, it seems, wants to be religious any more; no one, in fact has been religious for a good time now; in popular parlance, worship halls reek of incense gone rancid, moth-eaten robes, and empty temples, whether Jewish synagogues or Hindu stupas. However, what one can be is spiritual, removed from any institutional taint, free to pick up lost forms of spirituality or any variety of the new forms that spring up daily. If I add that spirituality now is characterized by bricolage and eclecticism, that it expresses a deep desire to be free from political as well as institutional taint, then we have a definition of spirituality. It is, in other words, the properly late capitalist and consumerist approach to religion. The popularity and valorization of the spiritual is so often taken as a mark of the new post-secular order, and religion has become the bogey term. The seemingly rapid appearance of such a distinction hit me while teaching in 1999. In a course entitled “Culture, Religion and Spirituality” I found that not one of the students in the course would admit to being religious: if they were anything, it was spiritual, Secularism, Utopia and the Discernment of Myth
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信