{"title":"维特根斯坦与神学应用的相互作用","authors":"Lee C. Barrett","doi":"10.3138/tjt-2024-0004","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Ludwig Wittgenstein's work has appealed to audiences that feared that traditional Christian language was being bandied about with no real significance attached to the ostensibly pious words. Wittgenstein became increasingly attractive to many theologians because his attention to modern philosophical confusions about the nature of language shed light on the linguistic confusion in the churches. Wittgenstein's writings, particularly his later posthumously published notes, promised to be an antidote to the perceived vacuity and superficiality of much Christian discourse. However, Wittgenstein's influence on theology has not been uniform. The elusive and often aphoristic nature of his later reflections has guaranteed that his work has been appropriated in divergent ways. At least two different theological appropriations of his enigmatic remarks have emerged. One set has developed a rather formalistic interpretation of Wittgenstein's remarks about “grammar” and used them to construe Christian doctrines as general rules governing thinking, feeling, and acting. A different variety, while also acknowledging the theme of the grammar of the faith, has emphasized his reflections on the “use” of concepts in the variegated “practices” of specific Christian communities. The first trajectory may best be represented by the Yale theologian George Lindbeck (1923–2018), and the second by another Yale theologian, Paul L. Holmer (1916–2004). In modified and sometimes surreptitious forms, both legacies continue to be influential, often intermingling in complex ways.","PeriodicalId":41209,"journal":{"name":"Toronto Journal of Theology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Wittgenstein and Theology: An Interplay of Appropriations\",\"authors\":\"Lee C. Barrett\",\"doi\":\"10.3138/tjt-2024-0004\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Ludwig Wittgenstein's work has appealed to audiences that feared that traditional Christian language was being bandied about with no real significance attached to the ostensibly pious words. Wittgenstein became increasingly attractive to many theologians because his attention to modern philosophical confusions about the nature of language shed light on the linguistic confusion in the churches. Wittgenstein's writings, particularly his later posthumously published notes, promised to be an antidote to the perceived vacuity and superficiality of much Christian discourse. However, Wittgenstein's influence on theology has not been uniform. The elusive and often aphoristic nature of his later reflections has guaranteed that his work has been appropriated in divergent ways. At least two different theological appropriations of his enigmatic remarks have emerged. One set has developed a rather formalistic interpretation of Wittgenstein's remarks about “grammar” and used them to construe Christian doctrines as general rules governing thinking, feeling, and acting. A different variety, while also acknowledging the theme of the grammar of the faith, has emphasized his reflections on the “use” of concepts in the variegated “practices” of specific Christian communities. The first trajectory may best be represented by the Yale theologian George Lindbeck (1923–2018), and the second by another Yale theologian, Paul L. Holmer (1916–2004). In modified and sometimes surreptitious forms, both legacies continue to be influential, often intermingling in complex ways.\",\"PeriodicalId\":41209,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Toronto Journal of Theology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Toronto Journal of Theology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3138/tjt-2024-0004\",\"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":"Toronto Journal of Theology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3138/tjt-2024-0004","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"RELIGION","Score":null,"Total":0}
Wittgenstein and Theology: An Interplay of Appropriations
Ludwig Wittgenstein's work has appealed to audiences that feared that traditional Christian language was being bandied about with no real significance attached to the ostensibly pious words. Wittgenstein became increasingly attractive to many theologians because his attention to modern philosophical confusions about the nature of language shed light on the linguistic confusion in the churches. Wittgenstein's writings, particularly his later posthumously published notes, promised to be an antidote to the perceived vacuity and superficiality of much Christian discourse. However, Wittgenstein's influence on theology has not been uniform. The elusive and often aphoristic nature of his later reflections has guaranteed that his work has been appropriated in divergent ways. At least two different theological appropriations of his enigmatic remarks have emerged. One set has developed a rather formalistic interpretation of Wittgenstein's remarks about “grammar” and used them to construe Christian doctrines as general rules governing thinking, feeling, and acting. A different variety, while also acknowledging the theme of the grammar of the faith, has emphasized his reflections on the “use” of concepts in the variegated “practices” of specific Christian communities. The first trajectory may best be represented by the Yale theologian George Lindbeck (1923–2018), and the second by another Yale theologian, Paul L. Holmer (1916–2004). In modified and sometimes surreptitious forms, both legacies continue to be influential, often intermingling in complex ways.
期刊介绍:
The Toronto Journal of Theology is a progressive, double-blind refereed journal of analysis and scholarship, reflecting diverse Christian traditions and exploring the full range of theological inquiry: Biblical Studies, History of Christianity, Pastoral Theology, Christian Ethics, Systematic Theology, Philosophy of Religion, and Interdisciplinary Studies. The journal provides a Canadian forum for discussing theological issues in cross-cultural perspectives, featuring pertinent articles, in-depth reviews and information on the latest publications in the field. The Toronto Journal of Theology is of critical interest to academics, clergy, and lay and professional theologians. Anyone concerned with contemporary opinion on theological issues will find the journal essential reading.