在原教旨主义的耻辱之下——对一个有争议的概念的思考

IF 0.1 0 RELIGION
Daniel Rocha
{"title":"在原教旨主义的耻辱之下——对一个有争议的概念的思考","authors":"Daniel Rocha","doi":"10.5752/P.2175-5841.2020V18N56P455","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article seeks to discuss the current inflated use of the concept of fundamentalism (in the media and in academic reflection) and to present some reflections about the limits and controversies surrounding the notion of fundamentalism. From the perspective of the History of Concepts, especially the reflections of Reinhart Koselleck, the text seeks to reconstruct the history of the concept of fundamentalism in America, presenting some essential moments to understand the transformations in the use of the concept throughout the 20th century. The importance of differenciating between “historical fundamentalismo” (Protestant ans American) and its expansion towards “global fundamentalism” – a perspective that gained streght in academia since the 1980s – is emphasized. From this reflections, this article seeks to presente a current debate between defenders of the use of fundamentalism in a comparative perspective and those who consider that the use os an expanded concept of fundamentalism has become more a complicator than a relevant analytical tool in contemporary studies of religion.","PeriodicalId":43247,"journal":{"name":"Horizonte-Revista de Estudos de Teologia e Ciencias da Religiao","volume":"18 1","pages":"455-455"},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2020-08-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Sob o estigma do fundamentalismo: algumas reflexões sobre um conceito controverso\",\"authors\":\"Daniel Rocha\",\"doi\":\"10.5752/P.2175-5841.2020V18N56P455\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This article seeks to discuss the current inflated use of the concept of fundamentalism (in the media and in academic reflection) and to present some reflections about the limits and controversies surrounding the notion of fundamentalism. From the perspective of the History of Concepts, especially the reflections of Reinhart Koselleck, the text seeks to reconstruct the history of the concept of fundamentalism in America, presenting some essential moments to understand the transformations in the use of the concept throughout the 20th century. The importance of differenciating between “historical fundamentalismo” (Protestant ans American) and its expansion towards “global fundamentalism” – a perspective that gained streght in academia since the 1980s – is emphasized. From this reflections, this article seeks to presente a current debate between defenders of the use of fundamentalism in a comparative perspective and those who consider that the use os an expanded concept of fundamentalism has become more a complicator than a relevant analytical tool in contemporary studies of religion.\",\"PeriodicalId\":43247,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Horizonte-Revista de Estudos de Teologia e Ciencias da Religiao\",\"volume\":\"18 1\",\"pages\":\"455-455\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-08-31\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Horizonte-Revista de Estudos de Teologia e Ciencias da Religiao\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5752/P.2175-5841.2020V18N56P455\",\"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":"Horizonte-Revista de Estudos de Teologia e Ciencias da Religiao","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5752/P.2175-5841.2020V18N56P455","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

本文试图讨论当前(在媒体和学术反思中)原教旨主义概念的过度使用,并对原教旨主义的局限性和争议进行一些反思。本文从概念史的角度,特别是莱因哈特·科塞莱克的反思,试图重建原教旨主义概念在美国的历史,呈现出一些重要的时刻来理解整个20世纪原教旨主义在使用中的转变。强调了区分“历史原教旨主义”(新教徒和美国人)及其向“全球原教旨主义(自20世纪80年代以来在学术界备受关注的观点)扩张的重要性。从这些反思中,本文试图从比较的角度阐述当前原教旨主义使用的捍卫者与那些认为在当代宗教研究中,原教旨主义的扩展概念的使用与其说是一种相关的分析工具,不如说是一个同谋的人之间的辩论。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Sob o estigma do fundamentalismo: algumas reflexões sobre um conceito controverso
This article seeks to discuss the current inflated use of the concept of fundamentalism (in the media and in academic reflection) and to present some reflections about the limits and controversies surrounding the notion of fundamentalism. From the perspective of the History of Concepts, especially the reflections of Reinhart Koselleck, the text seeks to reconstruct the history of the concept of fundamentalism in America, presenting some essential moments to understand the transformations in the use of the concept throughout the 20th century. The importance of differenciating between “historical fundamentalismo” (Protestant ans American) and its expansion towards “global fundamentalism” – a perspective that gained streght in academia since the 1980s – is emphasized. From this reflections, this article seeks to presente a current debate between defenders of the use of fundamentalism in a comparative perspective and those who consider that the use os an expanded concept of fundamentalism has become more a complicator than a relevant analytical tool in contemporary studies 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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
15 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