不要否定缺席作者:为什么神圣的隐匿和忽视问题不会摧毁范霍泽的作者类比?

IF 0.1 0 RELIGION
Parker Settecase
{"title":"不要否定缺席作者:为什么神圣的隐匿和忽视问题不会摧毁范霍泽的作者类比?","authors":"Parker Settecase","doi":"10.2478/perc-2023-0030","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Kevin Vanhoozer’s authorial analogy for the God-World relation is a strong explanatory analogy which can aid Christians in thinking deeply, fruitfully, and systematically about the God they worship and His relationship to His creation. According to this analogy, God relates to His world in an analogous fashion to that of an author to his or her novel. However, the absolute sovereignty at play in the authorial analogy might serve to exacerbate the problems of divine hiddenness and divine neglect. Taken together and applied to the authorial analogy, I will call this the Absentee Author problem. The Author is absent from those characters who are open to relationship with Him and is likewise absent in situations wherein we would expect Him to lovingly intervene in His story, and furthermore, there doesn’t seem to be any good reason for His absence. If Vanhoozer’s authorial analogy does in fact produce the Absentee Author problem and can offer no defense against it, then perhaps we ought to countermand its use, or at least severally limit its proposed explanatory scope. In this paper, I will argue that while Vanhoozer’s authorial analogy might appear to exacerbate the problems of hiddenness and neglect at first glance, ultimately Vanhoozer’s particular model can provide unique and orthodox answers to these problems which not only exculpate the analogy but commends its further use in theology and philosophy of religion.","PeriodicalId":40786,"journal":{"name":"Perichoresis","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Don’t Write Off the Absentee Author: Why the Problems of Divine Hiddenness and Neglect Don’t Destroy Vanhoozer’s Authorial Analogy\",\"authors\":\"Parker Settecase\",\"doi\":\"10.2478/perc-2023-0030\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract Kevin Vanhoozer’s authorial analogy for the God-World relation is a strong explanatory analogy which can aid Christians in thinking deeply, fruitfully, and systematically about the God they worship and His relationship to His creation. According to this analogy, God relates to His world in an analogous fashion to that of an author to his or her novel. However, the absolute sovereignty at play in the authorial analogy might serve to exacerbate the problems of divine hiddenness and divine neglect. Taken together and applied to the authorial analogy, I will call this the Absentee Author problem. The Author is absent from those characters who are open to relationship with Him and is likewise absent in situations wherein we would expect Him to lovingly intervene in His story, and furthermore, there doesn’t seem to be any good reason for His absence. If Vanhoozer’s authorial analogy does in fact produce the Absentee Author problem and can offer no defense against it, then perhaps we ought to countermand its use, or at least severally limit its proposed explanatory scope. In this paper, I will argue that while Vanhoozer’s authorial analogy might appear to exacerbate the problems of hiddenness and neglect at first glance, ultimately Vanhoozer’s particular model can provide unique and orthodox answers to these problems which not only exculpate the analogy but commends its further use in theology and philosophy of religion.\",\"PeriodicalId\":40786,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Perichoresis\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-11-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Perichoresis\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2478/perc-2023-0030\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"RELIGION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Perichoresis","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2478/perc-2023-0030","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"RELIGION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

摘要 凯文-范霍泽关于上帝与世界关系的作者类比是一个强有力的解释性类比,它可以帮助基督徒深入、富有成效和系统地思考他们所敬拜的上帝以及上帝与他所创造的世界之间的关系。根据这一类比,上帝与祂的世界的关系类似于作家与他或她的小说的关系。然而,作者类比中的绝对主权可能会加剧神的隐蔽性和神的忽视问题。综合起来应用到作者类比中,我将称之为 "缺席作者 "问题。作者缺席了那些愿意与他建立关系的人物,同样也缺席了那些我们期待他以爱介入他的故事的情境,而且,他的缺席似乎没有任何充分的理由。如果范霍泽的作者类比确实产生了 "缺席作者 "的问题,而且无法为其辩护,那么我们或许应该取消其使用,或者至少限制其拟议的解释范围。在本文中,我将论证,尽管范霍泽的作者类比乍看之下可能会加剧隐匿性和忽视性问题,但最终范霍泽的特殊模式可以为这些问题提供独特而正统的答案,这不仅为类比开脱了罪责,而且还值得在神学和宗教哲学中进一步使用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Don’t Write Off the Absentee Author: Why the Problems of Divine Hiddenness and Neglect Don’t Destroy Vanhoozer’s Authorial Analogy
Abstract Kevin Vanhoozer’s authorial analogy for the God-World relation is a strong explanatory analogy which can aid Christians in thinking deeply, fruitfully, and systematically about the God they worship and His relationship to His creation. According to this analogy, God relates to His world in an analogous fashion to that of an author to his or her novel. However, the absolute sovereignty at play in the authorial analogy might serve to exacerbate the problems of divine hiddenness and divine neglect. Taken together and applied to the authorial analogy, I will call this the Absentee Author problem. The Author is absent from those characters who are open to relationship with Him and is likewise absent in situations wherein we would expect Him to lovingly intervene in His story, and furthermore, there doesn’t seem to be any good reason for His absence. If Vanhoozer’s authorial analogy does in fact produce the Absentee Author problem and can offer no defense against it, then perhaps we ought to countermand its use, or at least severally limit its proposed explanatory scope. In this paper, I will argue that while Vanhoozer’s authorial analogy might appear to exacerbate the problems of hiddenness and neglect at first glance, ultimately Vanhoozer’s particular model can provide unique and orthodox answers to these problems which not only exculpate the analogy but commends its further use in theology and philosophy of religion.
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
Perichoresis
Perichoresis RELIGION-
CiteScore
0.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
34
审稿时长
16 weeks
×
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