Number of the records: 1
Misunderstanding the Talk(s) of the Divine. Theodicy in the Wittgensteinian Tradition
- 1.
SYSNO ASEP 0481323 Document Type J - Journal Article R&D Document Type Journal Article Subsidiary J Článek ve WOS Title Misunderstanding the Talk(s) of the Divine. Theodicy in the Wittgensteinian Tradition Author(s) Beran, Ondřej (FLU-F) RID, ORCID Source Title Sophia. - : Springer - ISSN 0038-1527
Roč. 56, č. 2 (2017), s. 183-205Number of pages 23 s. Publication form Print - P Language eng - English Country NL - Netherlands Keywords Theodicy ; Wittgensteinianphilosophyof religion ; Evil ; Firstpersonaccount ; D. Z. Phillips Subject RIV AA - Philosophy ; Religion OECD category Philosophy, History and Philosophy of science and technology R&D Projects GA13-20785S GA ČR - Czech Science Foundation (CSF) Institutional support FLU-F - RVO:67985955 UT WOS 000412893100004 EID SCOPUS 85018710998 DOI 10.1007/s11841-017-0600-2 Annotation The 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. Workplace Institute of Philosophy Contact Chlumská Simona, chlumska@flu.cas.cz ; Tichá Zuzana, asep@flu.cas.cz Tel: 221 183 360 Year of Publishing 2018
Number of the records: 1