Ethics After Comparative Religious Ethics: Rereading Little and Twiss in a Pragmatic Light

IF 0.5 3区 哲学 0 RELIGION JOURNAL OF RELIGIOUS ETHICS Pub Date : 2023-10-12 DOI:10.1111/jore.12450
Jung H. Lee
{"title":"Ethics After Comparative Religious Ethics: Rereading Little and Twiss in a Pragmatic Light","authors":"Jung H. Lee","doi":"10.1111/jore.12450","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>This paper presents a rereading of David Little and Sumner Twiss's <i>Comparative Religious Ethics</i> in the context of its initial reception and legacy within the field of religious ethics and argues that we can read it more charitably as a piece of pragmatism rather than as a work of formalism or semi-formalism. If one does not read Little and Twiss as committed positivists concerned with realizing a specific research program associated with the “twilight of logical empiricism,” then their theoretical and methodological recommendations, illustrated in their case studies, appear more pragmatic in nature and less excessively rigid. By rereading <i>Comparative Religious Ethics</i> in this light, we can see more clearly its relevance for the field today, particularly regarding the fundamental importance of the discursive activity of practical reasoning, or the game of giving and asking for reasons, in the study of religious ethics.</p>","PeriodicalId":45722,"journal":{"name":"JOURNAL OF RELIGIOUS ETHICS","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/jore.12450","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JOURNAL OF RELIGIOUS ETHICS","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jore.12450","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"RELIGION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This paper presents a rereading of David Little and Sumner Twiss's Comparative Religious Ethics in the context of its initial reception and legacy within the field of religious ethics and argues that we can read it more charitably as a piece of pragmatism rather than as a work of formalism or semi-formalism. If one does not read Little and Twiss as committed positivists concerned with realizing a specific research program associated with the “twilight of logical empiricism,” then their theoretical and methodological recommendations, illustrated in their case studies, appear more pragmatic in nature and less excessively rigid. By rereading Comparative Religious Ethics in this light, we can see more clearly its relevance for the field today, particularly regarding the fundamental importance of the discursive activity of practical reasoning, or the game of giving and asking for reasons, in the study of religious ethics.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
比较宗教伦理学之后的伦理学:从实用主义的角度重读利特尔和特维斯
本文从戴维-利特尔和萨姆纳-特维斯的《比较宗教伦理学》最初在宗教伦理学领域的接受情况和传承情况出发,对该书进行了重读,并认为我们可以将其作为一部实用主义作品而非形式主义或半形式主义作品进行更为善意的解读。如果我们不把利特尔和特维斯当作坚定的实证主义者来解读,而是把他们当作与 "逻辑经验主义的黄昏 "相关的特定研究计划的实现者,那么他们在案例研究中提出的理论和方法建议就会显得更加务实,而不会过于僵化。从这个角度重读《比较宗教伦理学》,我们可以更清楚地看到它对当今这一领域的现实意义,尤其是实践推理的话语活动,或者说给出理由和询问理由的游戏,在宗教伦理学研究中的根本重要性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.80
自引率
25.00%
发文量
33
期刊介绍: Founded in 1973, the Journal of Religious Ethics is committed to publishing the very best scholarship in religious ethics, to fostering new work in neglected areas, and to stimulating exchange on significant issues. Emphasizing comparative religious ethics, foundational conceptual and methodological issues in religious ethics, and historical studies of influential figures and texts, each issue contains independent essays, commissioned articles, and a book review essay, as well as a Letters, Notes, and Comments section. Published primarily for scholars working in ethics, religious studies, history of religions, and theology, the journal is also of interest to scholars working in related fields such as philosophy, history, social and political theory, and literary studies.
期刊最新文献
Issue Information Religion, Race, and the Limit of Ethics: Historical Considerations A Daoist Critique of Effort in Pierre Hadot's Philosophy Animism, Eco-Immanence, and Divine Transcendence: Toward an Integrated Religious Framework for Environmental Ethics Kierkegaard, Social Media, and Despair
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1