反驳叶泽尔:拉比话语的邪恶倾向与局限

IF 0.2 2区 哲学 0 PHILOSOPHY JOURNAL OF JEWISH THOUGHT & PHILOSOPHY Pub Date : 2009-01-01 DOI:10.1163/105369909X12506863090396
Ishay Rosen-Zvi
{"title":"反驳叶泽尔:拉比话语的邪恶倾向与局限","authors":"Ishay Rosen-Zvi","doi":"10.1163/105369909X12506863090396","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Rabbinic literature contains several examples of a manner of silencing impious arguments that is usually identified only with later forms of piety, namely, ascribing the arguments to the evil inclination ( yetzerhara ). Arguments attributed to the yetzer represent serious discursive threats against rabbinic doctrine, marking fundamental problems in both its legal and nonlegal (aggadic) parts. Identifying a question or refutation as belonging to the yetzer automatically invalidates it. By ascribing arguments to the yetzer , the rabbis prevent their audience from actually engaging them, thus marking the limits of rabbinic dialogism.","PeriodicalId":42022,"journal":{"name":"JOURNAL OF JEWISH THOUGHT & PHILOSOPHY","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2009-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Refuting the Yetzer: The Evil Inclination and the Limits of Rabbinic Discourse\",\"authors\":\"Ishay Rosen-Zvi\",\"doi\":\"10.1163/105369909X12506863090396\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Rabbinic literature contains several examples of a manner of silencing impious arguments that is usually identified only with later forms of piety, namely, ascribing the arguments to the evil inclination ( yetzerhara ). Arguments attributed to the yetzer represent serious discursive threats against rabbinic doctrine, marking fundamental problems in both its legal and nonlegal (aggadic) parts. Identifying a question or refutation as belonging to the yetzer automatically invalidates it. By ascribing arguments to the yetzer , the rabbis prevent their audience from actually engaging them, thus marking the limits of rabbinic dialogism.\",\"PeriodicalId\":42022,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"JOURNAL OF JEWISH THOUGHT & PHILOSOPHY\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2009-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"JOURNAL OF JEWISH THOUGHT & PHILOSOPHY\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1163/105369909X12506863090396\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"PHILOSOPHY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JOURNAL OF JEWISH THOUGHT & PHILOSOPHY","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/105369909X12506863090396","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"PHILOSOPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

拉比文学包含了几个例子的方式沉默不虔诚的论点,通常只与后来形式的虔诚,即,归因于邪恶的倾向(yetzerhara)的论点。归因于《耶策》的争论代表了对拉比教义的严重话语威胁,标志着其法律和非法律(aggadic)部分的根本问题。识别属于yetzer的问题或反驳会自动使其无效。拉比们把论点归于耶特泽,从而阻止了他们的听众真正参与其中,从而标志着拉比对话的局限性。
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
Refuting the Yetzer: The Evil Inclination and the Limits of Rabbinic Discourse
Rabbinic literature contains several examples of a manner of silencing impious arguments that is usually identified only with later forms of piety, namely, ascribing the arguments to the evil inclination ( yetzerhara ). Arguments attributed to the yetzer represent serious discursive threats against rabbinic doctrine, marking fundamental problems in both its legal and nonlegal (aggadic) parts. Identifying a question or refutation as belonging to the yetzer automatically invalidates it. By ascribing arguments to the yetzer , the rabbis prevent their audience from actually engaging them, thus marking the limits of rabbinic dialogism.
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
0.40
自引率
25.00%
发文量
12
期刊最新文献
Farmers versus Technocrats: A Comparative Analysis of A. D. Gordon and Theodor Herzl on Nature and Technology Making Sense of God: Samson Raphael Hirsch and Franz Rosenzweig on Translation and Anthropomorphisms A Hasidic Commentary on the Passover Haggadah for the New World The Double-Mirror Gaze, Transcoded Testimony, and Disqualified Witnesses in the Talmud A Still Small Voice: Psalms and Correlation as Media of Communication in Hermann Cohen’s Philosophy
×
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