引言:在田野笔记中寻找上帝

Q2 Arts and Humanities Ecclesial Practices Pub Date : 2021-06-03 DOI:10.1163/22144471-BJA10009
Kyle B. T. Lambelet, J. Shields
{"title":"引言:在田野笔记中寻找上帝","authors":"Kyle B. T. Lambelet, J. Shields","doi":"10.1163/22144471-BJA10009","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Where is God? What locations should we turn to in order to identify God’s activity in the world? What methods would be appropriate to attend to the presence (or absence) of God? And then, once we identify God’s presence, what should we do in response? This special issue of Ecclesial Practices, compiled by the Fieldwork in Ethics interest group of the Society of Christian Ethics, highlights a dual post-liberal and liberationist inheritance, before arguing in the essays that follow, that Christian ethicists emerging from both orientations are unable to evade normative questions by turning to qualitative research. However, such an evasion was never true to our task. Instead, immersing ourselves in normative lifeworlds marked by brokenness and grace prompts us engage the grounds for ethical judgement anew: to reflect on God’s presence, the presence of God’s absence, and the persistent hope of liberation. Over the past fifteen years, field work has become an established method for such attention in Christian ethics. Book series such as the T&T Clark Studies in Social Ethics, Ethnography and Theology; distilling volumes like Anna Vigen and Christian Scharen’s Ethnography as Christian Theology and Ethics; and this journal Ecclesial Practice all testify to the new emergence of ethnography as an accepted method of Christian ethics.1 Ethicists no longer argue about whether ethnographic methods of participant observation,","PeriodicalId":37169,"journal":{"name":"Ecclesial Practices","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-06-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Introduction: Finding God in the Fieldnotes\",\"authors\":\"Kyle B. T. Lambelet, J. Shields\",\"doi\":\"10.1163/22144471-BJA10009\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Where is God? What locations should we turn to in order to identify God’s activity in the world? What methods would be appropriate to attend to the presence (or absence) of God? And then, once we identify God’s presence, what should we do in response? This special issue of Ecclesial Practices, compiled by the Fieldwork in Ethics interest group of the Society of Christian Ethics, highlights a dual post-liberal and liberationist inheritance, before arguing in the essays that follow, that Christian ethicists emerging from both orientations are unable to evade normative questions by turning to qualitative research. However, such an evasion was never true to our task. Instead, immersing ourselves in normative lifeworlds marked by brokenness and grace prompts us engage the grounds for ethical judgement anew: to reflect on God’s presence, the presence of God’s absence, and the persistent hope of liberation. Over the past fifteen years, field work has become an established method for such attention in Christian ethics. Book series such as the T&T Clark Studies in Social Ethics, Ethnography and Theology; distilling volumes like Anna Vigen and Christian Scharen’s Ethnography as Christian Theology and Ethics; and this journal Ecclesial Practice all testify to the new emergence of ethnography as an accepted method of Christian ethics.1 Ethicists no longer argue about whether ethnographic methods of participant observation,\",\"PeriodicalId\":37169,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Ecclesial Practices\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-06-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Ecclesial Practices\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1163/22144471-BJA10009\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Arts and Humanities\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ecclesial Practices","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/22144471-BJA10009","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

上帝在哪里?为了识别上帝在世界上的活动,我们应该求助于什么地方?什么样的方法才是合适的,以照顾神的存在(或不存在)?然后,一旦我们确认了上帝的存在,我们应该做什么来回应?这期《教会实践》特刊由基督教伦理学会伦理领域兴趣小组编辑,强调了后自由主义和解放主义的双重继承,然后在随后的文章中辩称,从这两种方向出现的基督教伦理学家无法通过转向质性研究来回避规范性问题。然而,这种逃避从来就不是我们的任务。相反,沉浸在以破碎和优雅为标志的规范生活世界中,促使我们重新参与道德判断的基础:反思上帝的存在、上帝缺席的存在,以及解放的持久希望。在过去的十五年里,田野调查已经成为基督教伦理学中关注这一问题的一种既定方法。《社会伦理学、人种学和神学研究》等系列丛书;将Anna Vigen和Christian Scharen的《民族志》等书籍提炼为基督教神学和伦理学;以及这本《教会实践》杂志都证明了民族志作为一种公认的基督教伦理方法的新出现。1伦理主义者不再争论参与者观察的民族志方法,
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
Introduction: Finding God in the Fieldnotes
Where is God? What locations should we turn to in order to identify God’s activity in the world? What methods would be appropriate to attend to the presence (or absence) of God? And then, once we identify God’s presence, what should we do in response? This special issue of Ecclesial Practices, compiled by the Fieldwork in Ethics interest group of the Society of Christian Ethics, highlights a dual post-liberal and liberationist inheritance, before arguing in the essays that follow, that Christian ethicists emerging from both orientations are unable to evade normative questions by turning to qualitative research. However, such an evasion was never true to our task. Instead, immersing ourselves in normative lifeworlds marked by brokenness and grace prompts us engage the grounds for ethical judgement anew: to reflect on God’s presence, the presence of God’s absence, and the persistent hope of liberation. Over the past fifteen years, field work has become an established method for such attention in Christian ethics. Book series such as the T&T Clark Studies in Social Ethics, Ethnography and Theology; distilling volumes like Anna Vigen and Christian Scharen’s Ethnography as Christian Theology and Ethics; and this journal Ecclesial Practice all testify to the new emergence of ethnography as an accepted method of Christian ethics.1 Ethicists no longer argue about whether ethnographic methods of participant observation,
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
Ecclesial Practices
Ecclesial Practices Arts and Humanities-Religious Studies
CiteScore
0.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
12
期刊最新文献
Is Qualitative Research the Best or Only Way to Study Lived Theology? ‘Give the Grant Money to the Youth’: From Youth Departure to Belonging in the Ethnic Church Practicing Reflexivity at the American Academy of Religion Qualitative Research in Theology. A Spiritual Turn? Ethno-Apophasis: An Ethnographic Theology of Thinness and Refusal
×
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