By Daniel Guerriere
The query is, what constitutes fact in faith? Represented this is the entire spectrum of phenomenology--transcendental, existential, hermeneutic, moral, and deconstructive--presented by means of the most revered names within the philosophy of faith at the present time: Louis Dupre, Merold Westphal, and Edward Farley. this is additionally engagement with a large choice of twentieth-century thinkers comparable to Husserl, Scheler, and Heidegger; Ricoeur, Gadamer, and Derrida; Freud, van der Leeuw, and Eliade; and Rosenzweig, Tillich, and Schillebeeks.
Read or Download Phenomenology of the Truth Proper to Religion PDF
Best religious books
Even if non secular lifestyles in medieval Durham was once governed by way of its prince bishop and priory, the laity flourished and performed an incredible position within the affairs of the parish, as Margaret Harvey demonstrates. utilizing a number of assets, she presents an entire account of its background from the Conquest to the Dissolution of the priory, with a selected emphasis at the fourteenth and 15th centuries.
The query is, what constitutes fact in faith? Represented this is the full spectrum of phenomenology--transcendental, existential, hermeneutic, moral, and deconstructive--presented via essentially the most revered names within the philosophy of faith this day: Louis Dupre, Merold Westphal, and Edward Farley.
It's one of many ironies of our instances that, because the instruction of faith wanes, a theoretical curiosity in it at the a part of many anthropologists, psychologists, sociologists and philosophers waxes. between those, in simple terms philosophers convey to their activity an extended historical past of theological and reli gious family.
- The Columbia Guide to Religion in American History
- An Atheist's History of Belief: Understanding Our Most Extraordinary Invention
- A Companion to Philosophy of Religion
- Oxford Analytic Theology
Additional info for Phenomenology of the Truth Proper to Religion
It may be < previous page page_43 If you like this book, buy it! next page > page_44 < previous page next page > Page 44 hoped that this sort of an inquiry will supplement those of other contributors to this volume's project. My analysis will proceed dialectically via three successive modes of construing scientific and religious truth. I begin with the scientist's "natural attitude," the traditional view of science as a strictly rational practice aimed at objective truth, and with religion as its polar opposite.
All the more so since these models originated long before any positivist restrictions were attached to them. Even though religion unfolds its own truth, it is forced to do so within the available categories of general discourse. Revelation itself cannot be rendered intelligible unless it still proves capable of being assumed within the modern pattern of speaking and thinking. However sublime and unique, a message confronts the elementary fact that, in order to be expressed, it must adopt an existing language and thereby integrate itself within a praxis of discourse.
In a sense, then, it is philosophyor at least its available apparatusrather than religion, that is being examined here. " For truth, in whatever manner envisaged, must, in principle, be able to accommodate all legitimate claims of truth. If recent philosophy has often rejected the legitimacy of religious claims, the application of the basic models, rather than the models themselves, may be at fault. If, however, the religious concept of truth were to prove intractably resistant to any integration with other concepts of truth (such as the scientific ones) within the existing models, this would create a serious problem in the religious truth-claims themselves.