将朋霍费尔带入当代中国与施密特的对话

IF 0.4 4区 哲学 N/A RELIGION International Journal of Public Theology Pub Date : 2023-05-05 DOI:10.1163/15697320-20230069
Jason Lam
{"title":"将朋霍费尔带入当代中国与施密特的对话","authors":"Jason Lam","doi":"10.1163/15697320-20230069","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nSince the 2000s there has been a group of prominent scholars in China embracing the political views of Carl Schmitt. They are aware of the dangerous side of his thought but have provided reasonable analysis in relation to the Chinese social situation. Outlining their discussions, this article will depict the phenomenon with a focus on Schmitt’s controversial political theology. That will be compared with the thought of Dietrich Bonhoeffer. Although their political alignments were opposed to each other, the theoretical structure of their thinking reveals striking similarities. This article will thus articulate the theological reasons that allow for the differences between their ideas and actions and will produce a reflection on the contemporary situation in China. It is not due to the theoretical structure, but to the image of the sovereign embraced, that the stances of the two thinkers differed. From this we may draw implications from a public theological discussion for constructing a democratic society in the context of China.","PeriodicalId":43324,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Public Theology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Bringing Bonhoeffer into Dialogue with Schmitt in Contemporary China\",\"authors\":\"Jason Lam\",\"doi\":\"10.1163/15697320-20230069\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\nSince the 2000s there has been a group of prominent scholars in China embracing the political views of Carl Schmitt. They are aware of the dangerous side of his thought but have provided reasonable analysis in relation to the Chinese social situation. Outlining their discussions, this article will depict the phenomenon with a focus on Schmitt’s controversial political theology. That will be compared with the thought of Dietrich Bonhoeffer. Although their political alignments were opposed to each other, the theoretical structure of their thinking reveals striking similarities. This article will thus articulate the theological reasons that allow for the differences between their ideas and actions and will produce a reflection on the contemporary situation in China. It is not due to the theoretical structure, but to the image of the sovereign embraced, that the stances of the two thinkers differed. From this we may draw implications from a public theological discussion for constructing a democratic society in the context of China.\",\"PeriodicalId\":43324,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Public Theology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-05-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Public Theology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1163/15697320-20230069\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"N/A\",\"JCRName\":\"RELIGION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Public Theology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/15697320-20230069","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"N/A","JCRName":"RELIGION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

自2000年代以来,中国有一批杰出的学者接受卡尔·施密特的政治观点。他们意识到他的思想的危险的一面,但提供了合理的分析,与中国的社会形势。本文将概述他们的讨论,并将重点放在施密特有争议的政治神学上。这将与迪特里希·邦霍费尔的思想进行比较。虽然他们的政治联盟彼此对立,但他们思想的理论结构却显示出惊人的相似之处。因此,本文将阐明他们的思想和行动之间存在差异的神学原因,并将对当代中国的情况进行反思。这两位思想家的立场不同,不是因为理论结构,而是因为他们所拥抱的君主形象。由此,我们可以从一场公开的神学讨论中,得到在中国背景下构建民主社会的启示。
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
Bringing Bonhoeffer into Dialogue with Schmitt in Contemporary China
Since the 2000s there has been a group of prominent scholars in China embracing the political views of Carl Schmitt. They are aware of the dangerous side of his thought but have provided reasonable analysis in relation to the Chinese social situation. Outlining their discussions, this article will depict the phenomenon with a focus on Schmitt’s controversial political theology. That will be compared with the thought of Dietrich Bonhoeffer. Although their political alignments were opposed to each other, the theoretical structure of their thinking reveals striking similarities. This article will thus articulate the theological reasons that allow for the differences between their ideas and actions and will produce a reflection on the contemporary situation in China. It is not due to the theoretical structure, but to the image of the sovereign embraced, that the stances of the two thinkers differed. From this we may draw implications from a public theological discussion for constructing a democratic society in the context of China.
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
CiteScore
0.70
自引率
50.00%
发文量
35
期刊最新文献
On Critiquing Christian Nationalism: Two Recent Books on the Perils of Christian Nationalism Intersex and Medical Health: a Construction of a Public Health Theology Paradigm for Sexual Polymorphism in Indonesia Beyond the Shadows: a Public Theology of Disability Inclusion Triangulated Challenges to Democracy: a Critical Voice of Public Theology to Counter Fear and Escalating Polarization in Indonesia Binding Citizenship as a Bridge between Communities and Institutions: Dialogues between Christian Social Ethics, Political Philosophy and Social Sciences
×
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