死者的民主?神学中多数意见的相关性

Isaac Choi
{"title":"死者的民主?神学中多数意见的相关性","authors":"Isaac Choi","doi":"10.1093/oso/9780198849865.003.0011","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Chapter 11 explores whether the majority opinion in Christian theology should be deferred to, or strongly preferred, whether it be the majority opinion over the history of the church (as in G. K. Chesterton’s “democracy of the dead”) or the majority opinion of contemporary theologians. It is argued that because of the vast differences in accessible evidence between past and present-day theologians, diachronic majority opinion is not a good indicator of where the truth lies. In the synchronic case, ignorance of minority arguments, biases, selection effects, and the difficulty to deciding who gets to vote present many opportunities for majorities to be wrong. Finally, it is considered whether the internal testimony of the Holy Spirit could rescue the democracy of the dead, but the conclusion is reached that given the gentle way God corrects us, diachronic majority opinion, apart from belief in a very basic set of truths, is not epistemically bolstered by the Spirit.","PeriodicalId":190347,"journal":{"name":"Religious Disagreement and Pluralism","volume":"52 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-11-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Democracy of the Dead? The Relevance of Majority Opinion in Theology\",\"authors\":\"Isaac Choi\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/oso/9780198849865.003.0011\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Chapter 11 explores whether the majority opinion in Christian theology should be deferred to, or strongly preferred, whether it be the majority opinion over the history of the church (as in G. K. Chesterton’s “democracy of the dead”) or the majority opinion of contemporary theologians. It is argued that because of the vast differences in accessible evidence between past and present-day theologians, diachronic majority opinion is not a good indicator of where the truth lies. In the synchronic case, ignorance of minority arguments, biases, selection effects, and the difficulty to deciding who gets to vote present many opportunities for majorities to be wrong. Finally, it is considered whether the internal testimony of the Holy Spirit could rescue the democracy of the dead, but the conclusion is reached that given the gentle way God corrects us, diachronic majority opinion, apart from belief in a very basic set of truths, is not epistemically bolstered by the Spirit.\",\"PeriodicalId\":190347,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Religious Disagreement and Pluralism\",\"volume\":\"52 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-11-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Religious Disagreement and Pluralism\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198849865.003.0011\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Religious Disagreement and Pluralism","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198849865.003.0011","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

第11章探讨了基督教神学的多数意见是否应该被推迟,或者强烈偏爱,无论是对教会历史的多数意见(如G. K.切斯特顿的“死者的民主”)还是当代神学家的多数意见。有人认为,由于过去和现在的神学家在可获得的证据上存在巨大差异,历时性的多数意见并不能很好地指示真相在哪里。在同步性的情况下,对少数派观点、偏见、选择效应的无知,以及决定谁来投票的困难,给多数人带来了很多错误的机会。最后,它考虑了圣灵的内部见证是否可以拯救死者的民主,但得出的结论是,鉴于上帝纠正我们的温和方式,历时多数人的意见,除了相信一套非常基本的真理外,在认识论上并没有圣灵的支持。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Democracy of the Dead? The Relevance of Majority Opinion in Theology
Chapter 11 explores whether the majority opinion in Christian theology should be deferred to, or strongly preferred, whether it be the majority opinion over the history of the church (as in G. K. Chesterton’s “democracy of the dead”) or the majority opinion of contemporary theologians. It is argued that because of the vast differences in accessible evidence between past and present-day theologians, diachronic majority opinion is not a good indicator of where the truth lies. In the synchronic case, ignorance of minority arguments, biases, selection effects, and the difficulty to deciding who gets to vote present many opportunities for majorities to be wrong. Finally, it is considered whether the internal testimony of the Holy Spirit could rescue the democracy of the dead, but the conclusion is reached that given the gentle way God corrects us, diachronic majority opinion, apart from belief in a very basic set of truths, is not epistemically bolstered by the Spirit.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
How to Be an Inclusivist The Loyalty of Religious Disagreement Rationalist Resistance to Disagreement-Motivated Religious Skepticism Disagreement, Testimony, and Religious Understanding Is There Something Special About Religious Disagreement?
×
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