天主教、多元主义与美国民主

IF 1.3 1区 哲学 Q2 POLITICAL SCIENCE Politics and Religion Pub Date : 2023-04-04 DOI:10.1017/S1755048323000019
Dawid Tatarczyk
{"title":"天主教、多元主义与美国民主","authors":"Dawid Tatarczyk","doi":"10.1017/S1755048323000019","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The subfield of religion and politics, just like other subfields, was founded on the shoulders of giants who came before us. These seminal thinkers sometimes disagreed with each other, but their quarrels also opened new avenues for further discussion. Max Weber argued, for instance, that Protestant dominant countries develop faster and more effectively than Catholic ones because of their dynamic work ethic. The spirit of Protestantism, Weber believed, promoted values such as entrepreneurism and creativity, which facilitated the rise of democracy, all while the ethos of Catholicism lagged behind. Alexis de Tocqueville, on the other hand, had a different opinion about the compatibility of democracy and Catholicism. Traveling throughout the United States, he observed that Catholics—with their emphasis on hierarchy, obedience, and top-down dissemination of teaching—were well predisposed to internalize American laws and regulations. Such predispositions, in turn, helped stabilize the still nascent American democracy. While both thinkers were concerned with the compatibility of Catholicism and democracy, they ended up reaching different conclusions about the matter. In many ways, their disagreement is still not resolved, but two recent books made important contributions to these ongoing debates.","PeriodicalId":45674,"journal":{"name":"Politics and Religion","volume":"55 1","pages":"393 - 398"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Catholicism, Pluralism and American Democracy\",\"authors\":\"Dawid Tatarczyk\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/S1755048323000019\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The subfield of religion and politics, just like other subfields, was founded on the shoulders of giants who came before us. These seminal thinkers sometimes disagreed with each other, but their quarrels also opened new avenues for further discussion. Max Weber argued, for instance, that Protestant dominant countries develop faster and more effectively than Catholic ones because of their dynamic work ethic. The spirit of Protestantism, Weber believed, promoted values such as entrepreneurism and creativity, which facilitated the rise of democracy, all while the ethos of Catholicism lagged behind. Alexis de Tocqueville, on the other hand, had a different opinion about the compatibility of democracy and Catholicism. Traveling throughout the United States, he observed that Catholics—with their emphasis on hierarchy, obedience, and top-down dissemination of teaching—were well predisposed to internalize American laws and regulations. Such predispositions, in turn, helped stabilize the still nascent American democracy. While both thinkers were concerned with the compatibility of Catholicism and democracy, they ended up reaching different conclusions about the matter. In many ways, their disagreement is still not resolved, but two recent books made important contributions to these ongoing debates.\",\"PeriodicalId\":45674,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Politics and Religion\",\"volume\":\"55 1\",\"pages\":\"393 - 398\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-04-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Politics and Religion\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1017/S1755048323000019\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"POLITICAL SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Politics and Religion","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S1755048323000019","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

宗教和政治的子领域,就像其他子领域一样,是建立在我们之前的巨人的肩膀上的。这些影响深远的思想家有时意见不一,但他们的争吵也为进一步的讨论开辟了新的途径。例如,马克斯•韦伯(Max Weber)认为,新教占主导地位的国家比天主教国家发展得更快、更有效,因为他们的职业道德充满活力。韦伯认为,新教的精神促进了企业家精神和创造力等价值观,这些价值观促进了民主的兴起,而天主教的精神则落在了后面。另一方面,亚历克西斯·德·托克维尔对民主和天主教的兼容性有不同的看法。在美国各地旅行时,他观察到天主教徒——他们强调等级制度、服从和自上而下的教学传播——很容易内化美国的法律和法规。这种倾向反过来又帮助稳定了尚处于萌芽阶段的美国民主。虽然两位思想家都关心天主教和民主的兼容性,但他们最终得出了不同的结论。在许多方面,他们的分歧仍然没有解决,但最近的两本书对这些正在进行的辩论做出了重要贡献。
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
Catholicism, Pluralism and American Democracy
The subfield of religion and politics, just like other subfields, was founded on the shoulders of giants who came before us. These seminal thinkers sometimes disagreed with each other, but their quarrels also opened new avenues for further discussion. Max Weber argued, for instance, that Protestant dominant countries develop faster and more effectively than Catholic ones because of their dynamic work ethic. The spirit of Protestantism, Weber believed, promoted values such as entrepreneurism and creativity, which facilitated the rise of democracy, all while the ethos of Catholicism lagged behind. Alexis de Tocqueville, on the other hand, had a different opinion about the compatibility of democracy and Catholicism. Traveling throughout the United States, he observed that Catholics—with their emphasis on hierarchy, obedience, and top-down dissemination of teaching—were well predisposed to internalize American laws and regulations. Such predispositions, in turn, helped stabilize the still nascent American democracy. While both thinkers were concerned with the compatibility of Catholicism and democracy, they ended up reaching different conclusions about the matter. In many ways, their disagreement is still not resolved, but two recent books made important contributions to these ongoing debates.
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
3.00
自引率
13.30%
发文量
34
审稿时长
8 weeks
期刊介绍: Politics and Religion is an international journal publishing high quality peer-reviewed research on the multifaceted relationship between religion and politics around the world. The scope of published work is intentionally broad and we invite innovative work from all methodological approaches in the major subfields of political science, including international relations, American politics, comparative politics, and political theory, that seeks to improve our understanding of religion’s role in some aspect of world politics. The Editors invite normative and empirical investigations of the public representation of religion, the religious and political institutions that shape religious presence in the public square, and the role of religion in shaping citizenship, broadly considered, as well as pieces that attempt to advance our methodological tools for examining religious influence in political life.
期刊最新文献
Do we need a radical redefinition of secularism? A critique of Charles Taylor On Salafism. Concepts and Contexts By Azmi Bishara. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2022. vii+228 pp. $60.00 hardcover. Asymmetric conflation: QAnon and the political cooptation of religion The ingroup love and outgroup hate of Christian Nationalism: experimental evidence about the implementation of the rule of law Evangelicals and Electoral Politics in Latin America: A Kingdom of this World By Taylor C. Boas. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2023. ix+317 pp. $99.99 cloth.
×
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