神学是严格的科学？

Svensk Teologisk Kvartalskrift Pub Date : 2024-03-15 DOI:10.51619/stk.v100i1.26096

Anna-Carin Sjöberg

{"title":"神学是严格的科学？","authors":"Anna-Carin Sjöberg","doi":"10.51619/stk.v100i1.26096","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article is written as a response to Mårten Björk's \"Akademisk teologi som universell kunskapsform\" in Svensk Teologisk Kvartalskrift 98 (2022). The article begins with an attempt to identify and describe what the author finds to be a unique quality of Björk's text as well as the deeper intentions of his argument. As a next step, it discusses the consequences of Björk's theological position, critically and constructively. The interpretation centres around questions regarding scientific methods, dominant notions of knowledge, and infrastructural aspects of the contemporary research milieu within the humanities.","PeriodicalId":38534,"journal":{"name":"Svensk Teologisk Kvartalskrift","volume":"70 5","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Teologi som sträng vetenskap?\",\"authors\":\"Anna-Carin Sjöberg\",\"doi\":\"10.51619/stk.v100i1.26096\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This article is written as a response to Mårten Björk's \\\"Akademisk teologi som universell kunskapsform\\\" in Svensk Teologisk Kvartalskrift 98 (2022). The article begins with an attempt to identify and describe what the author finds to be a unique quality of Björk's text as well as the deeper intentions of his argument. As a next step, it discusses the consequences of Björk's theological position, critically and constructively. The interpretation centres around questions regarding scientific methods, dominant notions of knowledge, and infrastructural aspects of the contemporary research milieu within the humanities.\",\"PeriodicalId\":38534,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Svensk Teologisk Kvartalskrift\",\"volume\":\"70 5\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-03-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Svensk Teologisk Kvartalskrift\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.51619/stk.v100i1.26096\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Svensk Teologisk Kvartalskrift","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.51619/stk.v100i1.26096","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

本文是对莫滕-比约克（Mårten Björk）发表在《瑞典教育学报》（Svensk Teologisk Kvartalskrift）第 98 期（2022 年）上的 "Akademisk teologi som universell kunskapsform "一文的回应。文章首先试图找出并描述作者认为比约克文本的独特之处及其论证的深层意图。接下来，文章对比约克神学立场的后果进行了批判性和建设性的讨论。阐释围绕科学方法、主流知识观念以及当代人文学科研究环境的基础设施等问题展开。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

查看原文本刊更多论文

Teologi som sträng vetenskap?

This article is written as a response to Mårten Björk's "Akademisk teologi som universell kunskapsform" in Svensk Teologisk Kvartalskrift 98 (2022). The article begins with an attempt to identify and describe what the author finds to be a unique quality of Björk's text as well as the deeper intentions of his argument. As a next step, it discusses the consequences of Björk's theological position, critically and constructively. The interpretation centres around questions regarding scientific methods, dominant notions of knowledge, and infrastructural aspects of the contemporary research milieu within the humanities.

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

Svensk Teologisk Kvartalskrift Arts and Humanities-Religious Studies

CiteScore

0.30

自引率

0.00%

发文量