Sacredness and Aesthetics: Kearney and Desmond on Prayer
Heidegger famously asserted that one cannot pray to the God of onto-theo-logic. God is here made into a determinate concept, the highest idea of reason, and thereby loses its constitutive transcendence and personhood. To think of God appropriately after Heidegger means to think of God in a way amena...
| 主要作者: | |
|---|---|
| 格式: | 電子 Article |
| 語言: | English |
| Check availability: | HBZ Gateway |
| Journals Online & Print: | 載入...
|
| Interlibrary Loan: | Interlibrary Loan for the Fachinformationsdienste (Specialized Information Services in Germany) |
| 出版: |
[2021]
|
| In: |
Modern theology
Year: 2021, 卷: 37, 發布: 1, Pages: 3-22 |
| Standardized Subjects / Keyword chains: | B
Kearney, Richard 1954-
/ Desmond, William 1951-
/ 禱告
/ 形而上學
/ 神
|
| IxTheo Classification: | CB Christian life; spirituality KAJ Church history 1914-; recent history NBC Doctrine of God VA Philosophy |
| 在線閱讀: |
Volltext (Publisher) Volltext (doi) |
| 總結: | Heidegger famously asserted that one cannot pray to the God of onto-theo-logic. God is here made into a determinate concept, the highest idea of reason, and thereby loses its constitutive transcendence and personhood. To think of God appropriately after Heidegger means to think of God in a way amenable to prayer. It is widely recognized that deconstruction does not fare well on this score as it turns prayer into some form of meditation/contemplation. In response, one ought to look for something between onto-theo-logic and deconstruction. In this article, I explore and assess two attempts to do so, by Richard Kearney and William Desmond respectively. I argue that Kearney does not manage to escape the trap of deconstruction because he does not allow for an intimation of God in prayer. This is achieved in a more metaphysical register by Desmond. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 1468-0025 |
| Contains: | Enthalten in: Modern theology
|
| Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.1111/moth.12589 |
