{"title":"Jonasian Gnosticism","authors":"Aviram Sariel","doi":"10.1017/S0017816023000056","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This article proposes that Jonas’s understanding of gnosticism differs substantially from the account typically associated with him. That standard account takes the basic tenets of existentialism as the foundation to its discussion of alienated individuality, whereas Jonas’s system uses neo-Kantian epistemology to construct both alienation and individuality out of a unified field of human interaction. Within his framework, gnosticism is a single historical-philosophical episode of inauthenticity, highly influential yet isolated in time, unlike the ubiquitous understanding of it. This article reviews Jonas’s system, elements of its early and later acceptance, along with selected issues raised by critics, from Heidegger and Scholem to Colpe, Yamauchi, Williams, and King.","PeriodicalId":46365,"journal":{"name":"HARVARD THEOLOGICAL REVIEW","volume":"116 1","pages":"91 - 122"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"HARVARD THEOLOGICAL REVIEW","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S0017816023000056","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
Abstract This article proposes that Jonas’s understanding of gnosticism differs substantially from the account typically associated with him. That standard account takes the basic tenets of existentialism as the foundation to its discussion of alienated individuality, whereas Jonas’s system uses neo-Kantian epistemology to construct both alienation and individuality out of a unified field of human interaction. Within his framework, gnosticism is a single historical-philosophical episode of inauthenticity, highly influential yet isolated in time, unlike the ubiquitous understanding of it. This article reviews Jonas’s system, elements of its early and later acceptance, along with selected issues raised by critics, from Heidegger and Scholem to Colpe, Yamauchi, Williams, and King.
期刊介绍:
Harvard Theological Review has been a central forum for scholars of religion since its founding in 1908. It continues to publish compelling original research that contributes to the development of scholarly understanding and interpretation in the history and philosophy of religious thought in all traditions and periods - including the areas of Judaic studies, Hebrew Bible, New Testament, Christianity, archaeology, comparative religious studies, theology and ethics.