Abstract
Religion is back in Philosophy as a respectable subject. Part 1 first charts what MacIntyre, Taylor and Derrida have meant in this regard. Subsequently, it turns to the Enlightenment to determine what constituted the breakthrough. It is found that even where the Enlightenment gave maximum room to religion i.e. as a civic religion and as “religion of the heart”) it still excluded a constitutive relation to a transcendent revelation. Part 2 centres on the religion-faith distinction in reformational philosophy. Similar to the Enlightenment, religion is understood as part of human nature. However, human nature itself is conceived as intrinsically religious and depending for its light on revelation. Secondly, “religion” in this context also encompasses idols and religious substitutes. Thus, it directs attention to shopping malls, football stadiums, health policy, et cetera, as possible contexts of a return of religion. Examples show that this has become a popular approach. However, most of the publications surveyed fail to distinguish between an “analogical” and a “pistically qualified” use of religion, and are open to exaggerations (the shopping mall and football stadiums as temples, etc.). At this junction, the relevance is shown of the religion-faith distinction as well as of Elaine Botha’s theory of metaphors. The epilogue offers an integration of parts one and two.
Highlights
Part 2 centres on the religion-faith distinction in reformational philosophy
The first fact to take note of is, until not long ago, many philosophers subscribed to their own variety of the modernisation theories, assuming that, religious issues still remained after decades of secularisation, it was not worth being taken seriously
The words unfolding and opening are significant. It indicates that the criterion for assessment is the contribution to an unfolding of potentials, including the potentials of the Christian religion. Viewed from this angle, we are not dealing with a religion being forced to concessions, but rather with the crucible of the Enlightenment helping to bring out the strength of the former
Summary
Peter Berger, the noted sociologist, once said that, with respect to religion, he had made a huge mistake and had had a big insight. The first fact to take note of is, until not long ago, many philosophers subscribed to their own variety of the modernisation theories, assuming that, religious issues still remained after decades of secularisation, it was not worth being taken seriously Whenever these issues came up in philosophical gatherings, it was rare to find genuine openness. With respect to our subject, his book, After virtue (MacIntyre, 1981) marks a new phase In this book he strongly takes issue with the prevailing uncritical acceptance of the is-ought divide in moral philosophy and the social sciences (the divide that was thought to keep religious issues at a distance). More about these three philosophers in the concluding section of Part 1
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
