Počet záznamů: 1  

Misunderstanding the Talk(s) of the Divine. Theodicy in the Wittgensteinian Tradition

  1. 1.
    SYSNO ASEP0481323
    Druh ASEPJ - Článek v odborném periodiku
    Zařazení RIVJ - Článek v odborném periodiku
    Poddruh JČlánek ve WOS
    NázevMisunderstanding the Talk(s) of the Divine. Theodicy in the Wittgensteinian Tradition
    Tvůrce(i) Beran, Ondřej (FLU-F) RID, ORCID
    Zdroj.dok.Sophia. - : Springer - ISSN 0038-1527
    Roč. 56, č. 2 (2017), s. 183-205
    Poč.str.23 s.
    Forma vydáníTištěná - P
    Jazyk dok.eng - angličtina
    Země vyd.NL - Nizozemsko
    Klíč. slovaTheodicy ; Wittgensteinianphilosophyof religion ; Evil ; Firstpersonaccount ; D. Z. Phillips
    Vědní obor RIVAA - Filosofie a náboženství
    Obor OECDPhilosophy, History and Philosophy of science and technology
    CEPGA13-20785S GA ČR - Grantová agentura ČR
    Institucionální podporaFLU-F - RVO:67985955
    UT WOS000412893100004
    EID SCOPUS85018710998
    DOI10.1007/s11841-017-0600-2
    AnotaceThe paper discusses the unique approach to the problem of evil employed by the Wittgensteinian philosophy of religion and ethics that is primarily represented by D. Z. Phillips. Unlike traditional solutions to the problem, Phillips' solution consists in questioning its meaningfulness-he attacks the very ideas of God's omnipotence, of His perfect goodness and of the need to 'calculate' God's goodness against the evil within the world. A possible weakness of Phillips' approach is his unreflected use of what he calls 'our religious language', against which he measures the meaningfulness of theodical conceptions. He apparently underestimates both the heterogeneity of the 'ours' and how philosophical ideas pervade and inform the actual practice. On the other hand, Phillips rightly identifies the fact that some theodical conceptions, if understood as general doctrines, commit the sin of insensitivity (cruelty) and do not pay appropriate respect to human suffering. The reason is that they neglect the seriousness and importance of the difference between issuing the theodical accounts in the first person (making sense of one's own situation) and in the third person. He may, however, thereby accuse theodicies of failing in a task that theodicists never intended to undertake. Possible problems are also involved in Phillips' use of the Holocaust as the central discussion example.
    PracovištěFilosofický ústav
    KontaktChlumská Simona, chlumska@flu.cas.cz ; Tichá Zuzana, asep@flu.cas.cz Tel: 221 183 360
    Rok sběru2018
Počet záznamů: 1  

  Tyto stránky využívají soubory cookies, které usnadňují jejich prohlížení. Další informace o tom jak používáme cookies.