{"title":"比较理论","authors":"M. Litwa","doi":"10.2307/j.ctvmd867c.5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This chapter presents a positive program of comparison. In doing so, it criticizes the method and presuppositions of mimesis criticism (spearheaded by Dennis Ronald McDonald). Mimesis criticism compares texts on the basis of assuming direct genetic causations. A better theory vouches for polymorphous influence based on dynamic cultural interaction. Also treated is the notion of gospel genre, the identity of the evangelists, the themes of their gospels, and brief biographies of five contemporary Greco-Roman historians who serve as major sources of data: Diodorus of Sicily, Plutarch, Suetonius, Philostratus, and Iamblichus.","PeriodicalId":115187,"journal":{"name":"How the Gospels Became History","volume":"50 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-08-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Theory of Comparison\",\"authors\":\"M. Litwa\",\"doi\":\"10.2307/j.ctvmd867c.5\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This chapter presents a positive program of comparison. In doing so, it criticizes the method and presuppositions of mimesis criticism (spearheaded by Dennis Ronald McDonald). Mimesis criticism compares texts on the basis of assuming direct genetic causations. A better theory vouches for polymorphous influence based on dynamic cultural interaction. Also treated is the notion of gospel genre, the identity of the evangelists, the themes of their gospels, and brief biographies of five contemporary Greco-Roman historians who serve as major sources of data: Diodorus of Sicily, Plutarch, Suetonius, Philostratus, and Iamblichus.\",\"PeriodicalId\":115187,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"How the Gospels Became History\",\"volume\":\"50 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-08-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"How the Gospels Became History\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctvmd867c.5\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"How the Gospels Became History","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctvmd867c.5","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
This chapter presents a positive program of comparison. In doing so, it criticizes the method and presuppositions of mimesis criticism (spearheaded by Dennis Ronald McDonald). Mimesis criticism compares texts on the basis of assuming direct genetic causations. A better theory vouches for polymorphous influence based on dynamic cultural interaction. Also treated is the notion of gospel genre, the identity of the evangelists, the themes of their gospels, and brief biographies of five contemporary Greco-Roman historians who serve as major sources of data: Diodorus of Sicily, Plutarch, Suetonius, Philostratus, and Iamblichus.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
