怀特论文文献中的扭曲假设:对统治和管理意识形态的神学敏感措施

Pub Date : 2022-03-09 DOI:10.1177/00916471211068044
Caleb Brown, Fred Volk, R. Wallsgrove
{"title":"怀特论文文献中的扭曲假设:对统治和管理意识形态的神学敏感措施","authors":"Caleb Brown, Fred Volk, R. Wallsgrove","doi":"10.1177/00916471211068044","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Since Lynn White’s 1967 discussion of Christianity and environmentalism, numerous quantitative sociological studies have attempted to assess whether White’s historical claim is born out in Christians’ current perspectives. These studies do so in large part by assessing Christians’ dominion and stewardship tendencies, about which they make two assumptions: (1) dominion ideology is inherently anti-environmental and (2) dominion and stewardship ideologies are opposed. Many Christians reject these assumptions, a fact we demonstrate by surveying Roman Catholic, Greek Orthodox, and North American Evangelical sources. Each of these discourses, in clear contradistinction to the quantitative sociological literature, portray dominion as leading to self-sacrificial stewardship of creation, all of which is considered intrinsically valuable. Taking a 2015 study of Christians in Nigeria as a case-study, we demonstrate that this conflict between a) the perspectives assumed in the quantitative literature and b) the perspectives held by many Christians leads to a forced and distortive portrayal of these Christians’ dominion and stewardship perspectives. Finally, we propose ways of measuring dominion and stewardship perspectives that, while not devoid of assumptions, are flexible enough for Christians to register a variety of competing understandings of these concepts.","PeriodicalId":0,"journal":{"name":"","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-03-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Distortive Assumptions in the Literature on White’s Thesis: Toward Theologically Sensitive Measures of Dominion and Stewardship Ideology\",\"authors\":\"Caleb Brown, Fred Volk, R. Wallsgrove\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/00916471211068044\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Since Lynn White’s 1967 discussion of Christianity and environmentalism, numerous quantitative sociological studies have attempted to assess whether White’s historical claim is born out in Christians’ current perspectives. These studies do so in large part by assessing Christians’ dominion and stewardship tendencies, about which they make two assumptions: (1) dominion ideology is inherently anti-environmental and (2) dominion and stewardship ideologies are opposed. Many Christians reject these assumptions, a fact we demonstrate by surveying Roman Catholic, Greek Orthodox, and North American Evangelical sources. Each of these discourses, in clear contradistinction to the quantitative sociological literature, portray dominion as leading to self-sacrificial stewardship of creation, all of which is considered intrinsically valuable. Taking a 2015 study of Christians in Nigeria as a case-study, we demonstrate that this conflict between a) the perspectives assumed in the quantitative literature and b) the perspectives held by many Christians leads to a forced and distortive portrayal of these Christians’ dominion and stewardship perspectives. Finally, we propose ways of measuring dominion and stewardship perspectives that, while not devoid of assumptions, are flexible enough for Christians to register a variety of competing understandings of these concepts.\",\"PeriodicalId\":0,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-03-09\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/00916471211068044\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00916471211068044","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

自从林恩·怀特(Lynn White) 1967年对基督教和环境保护主义的讨论以来,大量的定量社会学研究试图评估怀特的历史主张是否诞生于基督徒当前的观点中。这些研究在很大程度上是通过评估基督徒的统治和管理倾向来实现的,关于这一点,他们做出了两个假设:(1)统治意识形态本质上是反环境的;(2)统治和管理意识形态是对立的。许多基督徒拒绝这些假设,我们通过调查罗马天主教、希腊东正教和北美福音派的资料来证明这一事实。与定量社会学文献形成鲜明对比的是,这些论述都将统治描述为导致自我牺牲的创造管理,所有这些都被认为具有内在价值。以2015年对尼日利亚基督徒的研究为例,我们证明了a)定量文献中假设的观点与b)许多基督徒持有的观点之间的冲突导致了对这些基督徒统治和管理观点的强迫和扭曲的描述。最后,我们提出了衡量统治和管理观点的方法,虽然不是没有假设,但足够灵活,可以让基督徒对这些概念有各种不同的理解。
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
Distortive Assumptions in the Literature on White’s Thesis: Toward Theologically Sensitive Measures of Dominion and Stewardship Ideology
Since Lynn White’s 1967 discussion of Christianity and environmentalism, numerous quantitative sociological studies have attempted to assess whether White’s historical claim is born out in Christians’ current perspectives. These studies do so in large part by assessing Christians’ dominion and stewardship tendencies, about which they make two assumptions: (1) dominion ideology is inherently anti-environmental and (2) dominion and stewardship ideologies are opposed. Many Christians reject these assumptions, a fact we demonstrate by surveying Roman Catholic, Greek Orthodox, and North American Evangelical sources. Each of these discourses, in clear contradistinction to the quantitative sociological literature, portray dominion as leading to self-sacrificial stewardship of creation, all of which is considered intrinsically valuable. Taking a 2015 study of Christians in Nigeria as a case-study, we demonstrate that this conflict between a) the perspectives assumed in the quantitative literature and b) the perspectives held by many Christians leads to a forced and distortive portrayal of these Christians’ dominion and stewardship perspectives. Finally, we propose ways of measuring dominion and stewardship perspectives that, while not devoid of assumptions, are flexible enough for Christians to register a variety of competing understandings of these concepts.
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
×
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