论认识论的纪念碑——论无神论和有神论者的命题——论认识论在宗教和神学中的阐发

IF 0.1 0 RELIGION Perichoresis Pub Date : 2023-07-01 DOI:10.2478/perc-2023-0026
J. A. Van Rooyen
{"title":"论认识论的纪念碑——论无神论和有神论者的命题——论认识论在宗教和神学中的阐发","authors":"J. A. Van Rooyen","doi":"10.2478/perc-2023-0026","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract For scholars that are working with epistemology and the importance thereof within the context of the ongoing bickering (fighting/mudslinging) between theist and atheists, or rather between rationality and irrationality of epistemology in theology and religion, may come to view epistemology of religion and theology as a monument from where a better belief system (as an incentive) can have a better effect on the current faith systems. Therefore, the Judeo-Christian-Islamic language games should be able to form this massive, sovereign metaphysical game. This affirmation should follow the historical fact of any metaphysical promise so that such a religious custom, should suggest that not only the Judo-Christian-Islamic language games, yet, all relevant creative queries should also be evaluated as components of the single game, with a solitary position of a decree and therefore all seven headings used in this article are relevant. The author is in a short discussion with Peter Forrest regarding his article Epistemology of Religion (2021) in establishing a positive outlook on how different views on the epistemology of religion and theology may surpass scholars which can expand and then better the current integrity-base epistemology of theology and religions. Intra/interdisciplinary methodology This affirmation, therefore, focuses on queries such as, ‘is it epistemologically sustainable for sapiens to believe in a God’? Is it epistemologically sustainable for sapiens to believe in the Trinity? Or ‘is it epistemologically sustainable that sapiens can be an embodiment of a Deity’? It overlooks such queries as if this belief estimates a consciousness that is empirical and therefore scientific. Moreover, this affirmation also tries to understand the bickering amongst rational idealists and mystics from the context of post-foundationalism who want to explain that faith or belief is not intended and thus it is not a planned commodity, rather it is an epistemological evolutionary process. Notwithstanding that this has a connection to the epistemology of theology and religion they are also the predominant subject matters in natural epistemology. This brings me to the introduction of this article where the purpose is elucidated.","PeriodicalId":40786,"journal":{"name":"Perichoresis","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Monument that is Epistemology a Proposition for Atheists and Theists as Elucidations of Epistemology in Religion and Theology\",\"authors\":\"J. A. Van Rooyen\",\"doi\":\"10.2478/perc-2023-0026\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract For scholars that are working with epistemology and the importance thereof within the context of the ongoing bickering (fighting/mudslinging) between theist and atheists, or rather between rationality and irrationality of epistemology in theology and religion, may come to view epistemology of religion and theology as a monument from where a better belief system (as an incentive) can have a better effect on the current faith systems. Therefore, the Judeo-Christian-Islamic language games should be able to form this massive, sovereign metaphysical game. This affirmation should follow the historical fact of any metaphysical promise so that such a religious custom, should suggest that not only the Judo-Christian-Islamic language games, yet, all relevant creative queries should also be evaluated as components of the single game, with a solitary position of a decree and therefore all seven headings used in this article are relevant. The author is in a short discussion with Peter Forrest regarding his article Epistemology of Religion (2021) in establishing a positive outlook on how different views on the epistemology of religion and theology may surpass scholars which can expand and then better the current integrity-base epistemology of theology and religions. Intra/interdisciplinary methodology This affirmation, therefore, focuses on queries such as, ‘is it epistemologically sustainable for sapiens to believe in a God’? Is it epistemologically sustainable for sapiens to believe in the Trinity? Or ‘is it epistemologically sustainable that sapiens can be an embodiment of a Deity’? It overlooks such queries as if this belief estimates a consciousness that is empirical and therefore scientific. Moreover, this affirmation also tries to understand the bickering amongst rational idealists and mystics from the context of post-foundationalism who want to explain that faith or belief is not intended and thus it is not a planned commodity, rather it is an epistemological evolutionary process. Notwithstanding that this has a connection to the epistemology of theology and religion they are also the predominant subject matters in natural epistemology. This brings me to the introduction of this article where the purpose is elucidated.\",\"PeriodicalId\":40786,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Perichoresis\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Perichoresis\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2478/perc-2023-0026\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"RELIGION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Perichoresis","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2478/perc-2023-0026","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"RELIGION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

对于那些在有神论者和无神论者之间,或者神学和宗教中认识论的理性和非理性之间持续争吵(战斗/诽谤)的背景下研究认识论及其重要性的学者来说,他们可能会将宗教和神学的认识论视为一座纪念碑,从那里更好的信仰体系(作为一种激励)可以对当前的信仰体系产生更好的影响。因此,犹太教-基督教-伊斯兰教的语言游戏应该能够形成这种庞大的、至高无上的形而上学游戏。这种肯定应该遵循任何形而上学承诺的历史事实,这样的宗教习俗应该表明,不仅是犹太教-基督教-伊斯兰语言游戏,而且所有相关的创造性问题也应该作为单一游戏的组成部分进行评估,具有单独的地位,因此本文中使用的所有七个标题都是相关的。作者与彼得·福雷斯特(Peter Forrest)就他的文章《宗教认识论》(2021)进行了简短的讨论,以建立一个积极的观点,即宗教和神学认识论的不同观点如何超越学者,从而扩展并改进当前基于完整性的神学和宗教认识论。因此,这一断言关注的问题是,“人类相信上帝在认识论上是可持续的吗?”智人相信三位一体在认识论上是可持续的吗?或者“从认识论上讲,智人可以是神的化身吗?”它忽略了这样的质疑,好像这种信念估计了一种经验的意识,因此是科学的。此外,这种肯定也试图理解理性唯心主义者和神秘主义者之间的争吵,从后基础主义的背景下,他们想要解释信仰或信仰不是有意的,因此它不是一个计划好的商品,而是一个认识论的进化过程。尽管这与神学和宗教的认识论有关,但它们也是自然认识论的主要主题。这就引出了本文的前言,并在其中阐明了本文的目的。
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
The Monument that is Epistemology a Proposition for Atheists and Theists as Elucidations of Epistemology in Religion and Theology
Abstract For scholars that are working with epistemology and the importance thereof within the context of the ongoing bickering (fighting/mudslinging) between theist and atheists, or rather between rationality and irrationality of epistemology in theology and religion, may come to view epistemology of religion and theology as a monument from where a better belief system (as an incentive) can have a better effect on the current faith systems. Therefore, the Judeo-Christian-Islamic language games should be able to form this massive, sovereign metaphysical game. This affirmation should follow the historical fact of any metaphysical promise so that such a religious custom, should suggest that not only the Judo-Christian-Islamic language games, yet, all relevant creative queries should also be evaluated as components of the single game, with a solitary position of a decree and therefore all seven headings used in this article are relevant. The author is in a short discussion with Peter Forrest regarding his article Epistemology of Religion (2021) in establishing a positive outlook on how different views on the epistemology of religion and theology may surpass scholars which can expand and then better the current integrity-base epistemology of theology and religions. Intra/interdisciplinary methodology This affirmation, therefore, focuses on queries such as, ‘is it epistemologically sustainable for sapiens to believe in a God’? Is it epistemologically sustainable for sapiens to believe in the Trinity? Or ‘is it epistemologically sustainable that sapiens can be an embodiment of a Deity’? It overlooks such queries as if this belief estimates a consciousness that is empirical and therefore scientific. Moreover, this affirmation also tries to understand the bickering amongst rational idealists and mystics from the context of post-foundationalism who want to explain that faith or belief is not intended and thus it is not a planned commodity, rather it is an epistemological evolutionary process. Notwithstanding that this has a connection to the epistemology of theology and religion they are also the predominant subject matters in natural epistemology. This brings me to the introduction of this article where the purpose is elucidated.
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
Perichoresis
Perichoresis RELIGION-
CiteScore
0.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
34
审稿时长
16 weeks
期刊最新文献
Rev 3:10: Rapture or Preservation? Analyzing Professions of Faith in the Fourth Gospel: is Everyone Who Believes Saved? Sin and Perfection in 1 John Theological Affinities Between the Fourth Gospel and the Book of Revelation John and the Synoptic Gospels. What John Knew and What John Used
×
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