Pub Date : 2018-12-17DOI: 10.1515/9783110446395-006
C. Markschies
The thesis to be presented in this paper is relatively simple: I wish to demonstrate that a central element of rationalization, and not only in Antiquity, lies in resolving dualisms, or more precisely, dual models of reality. If we subscribe to Carl Friedrich Gethmann’s process-oriented definition of “rationality” as “developing processes for the discursive upholding of claims to validity,”1 then “rationalization” would be defined as the optimization of the discursive upholding of validity claims. The Christian religion asserted such validity claims in Antiquity: It intended that the consensus within a specific religious group as to the truth of certain doctrines and behavioral prescriptions should be shared by the entire society. One notable rationalistic impulse was provided by the so-called Christian Alexandrians, and not by coincidence, as the already Hellenized Judaism of Alexandria had laid the foundations for it, and the city’s character as a center of learning was fertile ground for such a rationalizing impulse.2 The Christian Alexandrians, principally Clement of Alexandria (c. 140/150–220 CE) and Origen (c. 185–254 CE), argued for the validity of Christian precepts regarding the world and of behavioral prescriptions according to contemporary criteria of rationality; in contrast to the preceding generations of Christian theologians, they were familiar with those criteria from the source texts of Platonic and Stoic philosophy and not just from compendia or general educational tracts.3 These Alexandrians optimized the hitherto prevalent ways of reflecting upon Christianity as it had existed from the earliest days of Christendom, from Paul in the first century and through apologists such as Justin and bishops like Irenaeus of Lyons in the second century. We can join Gethmann in regarding such a purposeful optimization of rationality as “rationalization.”4
本文提出的论点相对简单:我希望证明，理性的一个核心要素，不仅在古代，在于解决二元论，或者更准确地说，现实的双重模型。如果我们认同卡尔·弗里德里希·格斯曼(Carl Friedrich Gethmann)以过程为导向的定义，即“合理性”是“对有效性主张的话语支持的发展过程”，那么“合理化”将被定义为对有效性主张的话语支持的优化。基督教在古代就提出了这样的有效性主张:它的目的是在一个特定的宗教团体内就某些教义和行为准则的真理达成共识，并为整个社会所共享。一个著名的理性主义冲动是由所谓的基督教亚历山大人提供的，这并非巧合，因为亚历山大已经希腊化的犹太教为它奠定了基础，而这座城市作为学习中心的特点为这种理性冲动提供了肥沃的土壤基督教的亚历山大派，主要是亚历山大的克莱门特(公元140/150-220年)和奥利金(公元185-254年)，根据当时的理性标准，主张基督教关于世界的戒律和行为处方的有效性;与前几代基督教神学家相比，他们从柏拉图和斯多葛派哲学的原始文本中熟悉这些标准，而不仅仅是从纲要或一般的教育小册子中这些亚历山德里亚人优化了迄今为止普遍存在的对基督教的反思方式，从基督教早期就存在，从一世纪的保罗，到二世纪的犹斯丁等护教者和里昂的爱任纽等主教。我们可以和格斯曼一样，把这种对理性的有目的的优化称为“理性化”
{"title":"Origen of Alexandria: The Bible and Philosophical Rationality, or: Problems of Traditional Dualisms","authors":"C. Markschies","doi":"10.1515/9783110446395-006","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110446395-006","url":null,"abstract":"The thesis to be presented in this paper is relatively simple: I wish to demonstrate that a central element of rationalization, and not only in Antiquity, lies in resolving dualisms, or more precisely, dual models of reality. If we subscribe to Carl Friedrich Gethmann’s process-oriented definition of “rationality” as “developing processes for the discursive upholding of claims to validity,”1 then “rationalization” would be defined as the optimization of the discursive upholding of validity claims. The Christian religion asserted such validity claims in Antiquity: It intended that the consensus within a specific religious group as to the truth of certain doctrines and behavioral prescriptions should be shared by the entire society. One notable rationalistic impulse was provided by the so-called Christian Alexandrians, and not by coincidence, as the already Hellenized Judaism of Alexandria had laid the foundations for it, and the city’s character as a center of learning was fertile ground for such a rationalizing impulse.2 The Christian Alexandrians, principally Clement of Alexandria (c. 140/150–220 CE) and Origen (c. 185–254 CE), argued for the validity of Christian precepts regarding the world and of behavioral prescriptions according to contemporary criteria of rationality; in contrast to the preceding generations of Christian theologians, they were familiar with those criteria from the source texts of Platonic and Stoic philosophy and not just from compendia or general educational tracts.3 These Alexandrians optimized the hitherto prevalent ways of reflecting upon Christianity as it had existed from the earliest days of Christendom, from Paul in the first century and through apologists such as Justin and bishops like Irenaeus of Lyons in the second century. We can join Gethmann in regarding such a purposeful optimization of rationality as “rationalization.”4","PeriodicalId":266198,"journal":{"name":"Rationalization in Religions","volume":"24 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-12-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"134170915","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2018-12-17DOI: 10.1515/9783110446395-008
Yonatan Moss
{"title":"“I Trapped You with Guile”: Rationalizing Theology in Late Antiquity","authors":"Yonatan Moss","doi":"10.1515/9783110446395-008","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110446395-008","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":266198,"journal":{"name":"Rationalization in Religions","volume":"48 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-12-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"128839960","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2018-12-17DOI: 10.1515/9783110446395-005
M. Idel
{"title":"Forms of Rationalization in Medieval Jewish Thought","authors":"M. Idel","doi":"10.1515/9783110446395-005","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110446395-005","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":266198,"journal":{"name":"Rationalization in Religions","volume":"83 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-12-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"125703824","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2018-12-17DOI: 10.1515/9783110446395-016
Y. Friedmann
{"title":"Quasi-Rational and Anti-Rational Elements in Radical Muslim Thought: The Case of Abū al-A ʿ lā Mawdūdī","authors":"Y. Friedmann","doi":"10.1515/9783110446395-016","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110446395-016","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":266198,"journal":{"name":"Rationalization in Religions","volume":"16 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-12-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"127638883","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2018-12-17DOI: 10.1515/9783110446395-009
M. Sluhovsky
{"title":"Rationalizing Visions in Early Modern Catholicism","authors":"M. Sluhovsky","doi":"10.1515/9783110446395-009","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110446395-009","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":266198,"journal":{"name":"Rationalization in Religions","volume":"114 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-12-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"125624944","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2018-12-17DOI: 10.1515/9783110446395-010
S. Gerber
{"title":"“They Shall Be All Taught of God”: Schleiermacher on Christianity and Protestantism","authors":"S. Gerber","doi":"10.1515/9783110446395-010","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110446395-010","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":266198,"journal":{"name":"Rationalization in Religions","volume":"11 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-12-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"114674844","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2018-12-17DOI: 10.1515/9783110446395-015
B. Abrahamov
{"title":"Rationality and Rationalism in Islamic Mysticism: The Case of Ibn al- ʿ Arabī","authors":"B. Abrahamov","doi":"10.1515/9783110446395-015","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110446395-015","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":266198,"journal":{"name":"Rationalization in Religions","volume":"47 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-12-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"116137043","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2018-12-17DOI: 10.1515/9783110446395-004
M. Niehoff
{"title":"Philo’s Rationalization of Judaism","authors":"M. Niehoff","doi":"10.1515/9783110446395-004","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110446395-004","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":266198,"journal":{"name":"Rationalization in Religions","volume":"62 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-12-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"126295180","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2018-12-17DOI: 10.1515/9783110446395-003
S. Shaked
{"title":"Dualists against Monotheists: Zoroastrian Debates with Other Religions","authors":"S. Shaked","doi":"10.1515/9783110446395-003","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110446395-003","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":266198,"journal":{"name":"Rationalization in Religions","volume":"5 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-12-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"133581545","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2018-12-17DOI: 10.1515/9783110446395-002
C. Markschies
Philosopher Carl Friedrich Gethmann, a member of the Berlin-Brandenburg Academy, has described rationalization as the “targeted, structured and reproducible operation of optimization.”1 Gethmann’s broad definition covers rationalization across a range of very different areas – in the economy, in society, even in the mind of the individual. In our own field of religious studies, the first scholar who comes to mind in this context is the philosopher and sociologist Max Weber, who introduced the term “rationalization” to the field.2 Maintaining that religious rationalization preceded social rationalization, Weber identified rationalization structures within the Judeo-Christian tradition that, as Gethmann puts it, “encouraged the establishment of rational conceptions of the world and the emergence of a modern consciousness.”3 In his studies of the “economic ethics of the world religions,” Weber developed the notion of a universal historical process of “disenchantment” (Entzauberung4) of the religious-metaphysical conceptions of the world and argued for a “unidirectional rationalization of all world religions.” According to Weber, all paths of religious rationalization lead towards an understanding of the world that is purified of magical notions. Only the occidental path of development, however, leads to a fully decentralized understanding of the world.5 It is not my intention, at this juncture, to provide a full recapitulation of Weber’s view of the rationalization that is inherent in all world religions. His basic assumptions concerning an occidental rationalism, and thus a particularly marked rationalism in the occidental religions, which he set against the Orient and its religions,6 appear highly problematic to us today. In view of the obvious problems in Weber’s conceptualization, I believe it makes more sense, in talking about “rationalization in religions,” to stick with Gethmann’s definition of rationalization and to speak of an optimization of the “rationality” of religion. But what is rationality? I turn again to Gethmann, who defines “rationality” as “developing processes for the discursive upholding of claims to validity, to follow these and to
柏林-勃兰登堡学院成员、哲学家卡尔·弗里德里希·格斯曼(Carl Friedrich Gethmann)将合理化描述为“有针对性的、结构化的、可重复的优化操作”。盖斯曼宽泛的定义涵盖了一系列非常不同领域的合理化——在经济领域、在社会领域，甚至在个人思想领域。在我们自己的宗教研究领域，在这种背景下想到的第一个学者是哲学家和社会学家马克斯·韦伯，他将“合理化”一词引入了这个领域韦伯认为宗教合理化先于社会合理化，他认为犹太教-基督教传统中的合理化结构，正如格斯曼所说，“鼓励了世界理性观念的建立和现代意识的出现。”在他对“世界宗教的经济伦理”的研究中，韦伯提出了对世界的宗教形而上学概念“祛魅”(Entzauberung4)的普遍历史过程的概念，并主张“所有世界宗教的单向合理化”。根据韦伯的观点，所有宗教合理化的道路都指向一种对世界的理解，这种理解是净化了魔法观念的。然而，只有西方的发展道路才能导致对世界的完全分散的理解我的意图不是，在这个节口，提供一个完整的概括，韦伯的观点，理性化，是所有世界宗教固有的。他关于西方理性主义的基本假设，以及因此在西方宗教中特别明显的理性主义，是他用来反对东方及其宗教的，这在今天看来是非常有问题的。鉴于韦伯概念化中存在的明显问题，我认为，在讨论“宗教中的理性化”时，坚持格斯曼对理性化的定义，并谈论宗教的“合理性”的优化，更有意义。但什么是理性?我再次求助于Gethmann，他将“理性”定义为“对有效性主张的话语支持的发展过程，遵循这些并
{"title":"Introduction: Rationalization in Religions","authors":"C. Markschies","doi":"10.1515/9783110446395-002","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110446395-002","url":null,"abstract":"Philosopher Carl Friedrich Gethmann, a member of the Berlin-Brandenburg Academy, has described rationalization as the “targeted, structured and reproducible operation of optimization.”1 Gethmann’s broad definition covers rationalization across a range of very different areas – in the economy, in society, even in the mind of the individual. In our own field of religious studies, the first scholar who comes to mind in this context is the philosopher and sociologist Max Weber, who introduced the term “rationalization” to the field.2 Maintaining that religious rationalization preceded social rationalization, Weber identified rationalization structures within the Judeo-Christian tradition that, as Gethmann puts it, “encouraged the establishment of rational conceptions of the world and the emergence of a modern consciousness.”3 In his studies of the “economic ethics of the world religions,” Weber developed the notion of a universal historical process of “disenchantment” (Entzauberung4) of the religious-metaphysical conceptions of the world and argued for a “unidirectional rationalization of all world religions.” According to Weber, all paths of religious rationalization lead towards an understanding of the world that is purified of magical notions. Only the occidental path of development, however, leads to a fully decentralized understanding of the world.5 It is not my intention, at this juncture, to provide a full recapitulation of Weber’s view of the rationalization that is inherent in all world religions. His basic assumptions concerning an occidental rationalism, and thus a particularly marked rationalism in the occidental religions, which he set against the Orient and its religions,6 appear highly problematic to us today. In view of the obvious problems in Weber’s conceptualization, I believe it makes more sense, in talking about “rationalization in religions,” to stick with Gethmann’s definition of rationalization and to speak of an optimization of the “rationality” of religion. But what is rationality? I turn again to Gethmann, who defines “rationality” as “developing processes for the discursive upholding of claims to validity, to follow these and to","PeriodicalId":266198,"journal":{"name":"Rationalization in Religions","volume":"7 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-12-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"132197325","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：