Tomasz Detlaf
{"title":"Teza o sekularyzacji Karla Löwitha w świetle krytyki Hansa Blumenberga","authors":"Tomasz Detlaf","doi":"10.31338/2657-599x.ph.2021-2.2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The article aims to defend Karl Löwith’s secularization thesis from the criticism made by Hans Blumenberg. Löwith’s thesis claims that modern philosophy of history is a secularized Christian eschatology. Blumenberg accuses Löwith’s thesis of substantialism. Following Sjoerd Griffioen, the article shows that this criticism fails. The article presents Blumenberg’s arguments that the idea of progress cannot be derived from eschatology. These arguments are refuted by the analysis of the work of Joachim of Fiore and providing a distinction between two kinds of progress. The article is written from the perspective of intellectual history, detaching from the dispute over the judgement of modernity.","PeriodicalId":239308,"journal":{"name":"Przegląd Humanistyczny","volume":"21 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-09-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Przegląd Humanistyczny","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.31338/2657-599x.ph.2021-2.2","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

本文旨在为卡尔Löwith的世俗化理论辩护,驳斥汉斯·布鲁门伯格的批评。Löwith的论文主张现代历史哲学是一种世俗化的基督教末世论。Blumenberg指责Löwith的论点是实体性的。继Sjoerd Griffioen之后,这篇文章表明这种批评是失败的。本文提出了布鲁门伯格的论点,即进步的概念不能从末世论中推导出来。通过对菲奥雷的约阿希姆工作的分析,并对两种进步进行区分,反驳了这些论点。本文从思想史的角度出发,脱离了现代性判断的争论。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Teza o sekularyzacji Karla Löwitha w świetle krytyki Hansa Blumenberga
The article aims to defend Karl Löwith’s secularization thesis from the criticism made by Hans Blumenberg. Löwith’s thesis claims that modern philosophy of history is a secularized Christian eschatology. Blumenberg accuses Löwith’s thesis of substantialism. Following Sjoerd Griffioen, the article shows that this criticism fails. The article presents Blumenberg’s arguments that the idea of progress cannot be derived from eschatology. These arguments are refuted by the analysis of the work of Joachim of Fiore and providing a distinction between two kinds of progress. The article is written from the perspective of intellectual history, detaching from the dispute over the judgement of modernity.
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