结论

G. Murphy
{"title":"结论","authors":"G. Murphy","doi":"10.1093/oso/9780198864950.003.0007","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Departing from Alexis de Tocqueville’s discussion of American religion as a political institution that strengthens the moral tie as political ties are relaxed, the conclusion briefly restates the major arguments of the book: (1) that the authors discussed treated the issue of religion in a republic by using ideas and tropes drawn from New England anti-Jacobin sentiment during and after the French Revolution; (2) that this led them simultaneously to oppose and to reinforce secularity as it appeared in various forms: Enlightenment reason, pluralistic belief, and the technocratic utility of state church establishment; and (3) that their writings thus engage with enduring questions regarding whether and how morality and virtue should be fostered in a diverse republic for the common good, avoiding pitfalls of narrow-minded bigotry or neoliberal elevation of private individual interest. The conclusion also considers how these arguments and the book as a whole responds to two trends in literary scholarship: the study of women writers rooted in feminist recovery and the turn away from historicist critique seen in recent work by Rita Felski and others.","PeriodicalId":197366,"journal":{"name":"New England Women Writers, Secularity, and the Federalist Politics of Church and State","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-02-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Conclusion\",\"authors\":\"G. Murphy\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/oso/9780198864950.003.0007\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Departing from Alexis de Tocqueville’s discussion of American religion as a political institution that strengthens the moral tie as political ties are relaxed, the conclusion briefly restates the major arguments of the book: (1) that the authors discussed treated the issue of religion in a republic by using ideas and tropes drawn from New England anti-Jacobin sentiment during and after the French Revolution; (2) that this led them simultaneously to oppose and to reinforce secularity as it appeared in various forms: Enlightenment reason, pluralistic belief, and the technocratic utility of state church establishment; and (3) that their writings thus engage with enduring questions regarding whether and how morality and virtue should be fostered in a diverse republic for the common good, avoiding pitfalls of narrow-minded bigotry or neoliberal elevation of private individual interest. The conclusion also considers how these arguments and the book as a whole responds to two trends in literary scholarship: the study of women writers rooted in feminist recovery and the turn away from historicist critique seen in recent work by Rita Felski and others.\",\"PeriodicalId\":197366,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"New England Women Writers, Secularity, and the Federalist Politics of Church and State\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-02-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"New England Women Writers, Secularity, and the Federalist Politics of Church and State\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198864950.003.0007\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"New England Women Writers, Secularity, and the Federalist Politics of Church and State","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198864950.003.0007","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

从托克维尔关于美国宗教作为一种政治制度的讨论出发,随着政治关系的放松,道德纽带得到加强,结论简要地重申了本书的主要论点:(1)作者讨论了共和国的宗教问题,使用了法国大革命期间和之后新英格兰反雅各宾情绪的思想和比喻;(2)这导致他们同时反对和加强世俗主义,因为世俗主义以各种形式出现:启蒙理性、多元信仰和国家教会机构的技术官僚效用;(3)因此,他们的著作涉及了关于道德和美德是否以及如何在一个多元化的共和国中为了共同利益而培养的持久问题,避免了狭隘的偏见或新自由主义对个人利益的提升的陷阱。结论部分还考虑了这些观点和本书作为一个整体是如何回应文学研究的两种趋势的:对植根于女权主义复苏的女性作家的研究,以及丽塔·费尔斯基(Rita Felski)等人最近的作品中对历史主义批评的转向。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Conclusion
Departing from Alexis de Tocqueville’s discussion of American religion as a political institution that strengthens the moral tie as political ties are relaxed, the conclusion briefly restates the major arguments of the book: (1) that the authors discussed treated the issue of religion in a republic by using ideas and tropes drawn from New England anti-Jacobin sentiment during and after the French Revolution; (2) that this led them simultaneously to oppose and to reinforce secularity as it appeared in various forms: Enlightenment reason, pluralistic belief, and the technocratic utility of state church establishment; and (3) that their writings thus engage with enduring questions regarding whether and how morality and virtue should be fostered in a diverse republic for the common good, avoiding pitfalls of narrow-minded bigotry or neoliberal elevation of private individual interest. The conclusion also considers how these arguments and the book as a whole responds to two trends in literary scholarship: the study of women writers rooted in feminist recovery and the turn away from historicist critique seen in recent work by Rita Felski and others.
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