Methodological Atheism Considered
Thirty years after the publication of Dominique Janicaud’s criticism of what he termed the “theological turn” of phenomenology in France, what is the state of the debate? This paper addresses that question, by examining the phenomenology of revelation in Marion, Lacoste, and others, in turn replying...
| Auteur principal: | |
|---|---|
| Type de support: | Électronique Article |
| Langue: | Anglais |
| Vérifier la disponibilité: | HBZ Gateway |
| Interlibrary Loan: | Interlibrary Loan for the Fachinformationsdienste (Specialized Information Services in Germany) |
| Publié: |
2022
|
| Dans: |
Journal for continental philosophy of religion
Année: 2022, Volume: 4, Numéro: 2, Pages: 133-165 |
| Sujets non-standardisés: | B
Husserl
B Janicaud B Heidegger B Revelation B Lacoste B Marion |
| Accès en ligne: |
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) |
| Résumé: | Thirty years after the publication of Dominique Janicaud’s criticism of what he termed the “theological turn” of phenomenology in France, what is the state of the debate? This paper addresses that question, by examining the phenomenology of revelation in Marion, Lacoste, and others, in turn replying to various arguments that have been advanced against the theological turn and on behalf of methodological atheism. Not only is revelation a viable topic of phenomenological analysis, the attempts to formulate a methodologically atheist phenomenology fail. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 2588-9613 |
| Contient: | Enthalten in: Journal for continental philosophy of religion
|
| Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.1163/25889613-bja10033 |
