The personality of Metropolitan Bartolomeu Valeriu Anania has been extremely complex, first of all due to the various domains of his work - literature, essays, art history, theology and biblical theology -, and secondly due to his relation to politics, especially his connections with the Legionary Movement and with Communism. Despite having been incarcerated as a political prisoner in some of Bolshevik Romania's famous prisons (Jilava, Pitești, Aiud), Bartolomeu Valeriu Anania is still accused of having collaborated with the political (...) police of Ceaușescu's regime, Securitatea . The present text analyses the writer's work in order to explain the relationship between religion, literature, and politics, stressing both their connections, as well as his journey from being a writer to being the theologian commenting on and revising the translation of the Holy Scripture. The analysis is therefore oriented towards Valeriu Anania's literary works, namely his poetry, prose, and theatre, so as to underline its religious background, be it either theological or alluding to Romanian popular religiosity; furthermore, it focuses on his theology, from icon to biblical theology, stressing the associations with literature and the importance of literary workmanship. Finally, based on the cultural analyses which unveil his deep affection for the Romanian spirituality and considering several politically controversial episodes of his biography, the text will attempt to argue in favour of the lack of sufficient and reliable evidence that could prove his collaboration with the political police of Communist Romania. (shrink)

How can controversy promote mutual respect in analytical psychology? Analytical psychology is a broad church, and influences areas such as literature, cultural studies, and religion. However, in common with psychoanalysis, there are many different schools of thought and practice which have resulted in divisions within the field. _Controversies in Analytical Psychology_ picks up on these and explores many of the most hotly contested issues in and around analytical psychology. A group of leading international Jungian authors have contributed papers (...) from contrasting perspectives on a series of key controversies. Some of these concern clinical issues such as what helps patients get better, or how closely analysts should work with the transference. Other contributions focus on the relationship between analytical psychology and other disciplines including evolutionary theory, linguistics, politics and religion. A critical eye is cast over Jungian theories and practices, and a number of questions are raised: * are they homophobic? * do they denigrate women? * do they confuse absolute with narrative truth? * are the frequency of sessions chosen for political rather than clinical reasons? _Controversies in Analytical Psychology_ encourages critical thinking on a variety of issues, helping foster dialogue and investigation in a climate of mutual respect and understanding. It will be invaluable for Jungian analysts and psychoanalysts in training and practice and psychotherapists. (shrink)

In the present study, we tried to deal with the controversial concept of Alevism. Over the years, it has drawn our attention that controversial concepts have increased remarkably in various articles and studies. Especially heterodoxy, orthodoxy, syncretism, etc. It has been seen that the main concepts come to the fore as the main discussion axis in Alevism studies. However, without knowing what these concepts are, Alevism is being dragged into completely different channels with the tendency of slogans such (...) as "Alevism is heterodoxy, Alawism is syncretism". From this point of view, the need to deal with controversial concepts that create the hidden agenda has emerged. From this point of view, we tried to deal with the main platform concepts and discussions encountered in Alevism studies. In particular, we tried to deal with the controversial concepts formed around the speculations produced by the West and that create the hidden agenda. The Ottoman Safavid rivalry attracted the attention of Europe which sought to expand its research and experience in the field. To date, incomparable literature has been produced in this field. Over time, this literature has become a reference source for modern Alevism studies. Although these studies are partially objective, the ambassadors, clerics, travelers, and researchers who wrote them could not escape the influence of the educational, cultural, and religious political perspective from which they came. This accumulation, which was transferred to the present over time, was transmitted to other generations and formed a tradition of perception. Alevism, which was condemned to vicious circles such as sectarianism, left-wing radicalism, etc., was included in the script of studies that aimed at politicization, marginalization, and conceptual distortions by separating it from the religion of Islam. But at the same time, the changes in knowledge and methods produced by each period were reflected in this literature. In this context, the research products on Alevism have formed the information infrastructure in politicization and orientation activities. This long-standing interest of the Europeans eventually allowed the emergence of new concepts and some evaluations from their own perspectives. Due to the lack of systematic theology of Alevism and its structure as a mythological theological understanding based on oral literature and traditions, no consensus could be reached on the definition. As a natural result of this, Alevism operates with the belief that it is in a race to be defined by different people and groups, and each one of them is the right one. Thus, Alevism is an emotional state where everyone can speak and even feel themselves in absolute truth. As a method, we tried to examine the leading controversial concepts with their current counterparts in a concrete way, so that they can find concrete answers in the minds of researchers. In addition, we have tried to deal with the works that set the agenda in the past and today. Thus, it will reflect the general view of the controversial concepts of Alevism. This situation of Alevism has attracted the attention of orientalist researchers (George White, Irène Mélikoff, Marcus Dressler, Hans Lucas Kieser) in the historical process, and they have shown interest in this field with political, ideological, religious, and other motives. While doing this, they preferred to use the concepts found in the history of Christianity and Judaism in the field of Alevism. These researchers have used the historical understanding and patterns of their cultures, such as Christianity and Judaism, to which they originally belonged, in interpreting Alevism. All these approaches prevent the correct perception of Alevism and lead to an environment of mental confusion and chaos. It has caused Alevism to move away from the scientific understanding it deserves. (shrink)

Religion is an important cultural and individual difference variable. Yet, despite its obvious importance in consumers’ lives, religion in the United States has been under-researched. This study addresses that gap in the literature and investigates the influence of consumer religion in the buyer–seller dyad. Specifically, this study examines the influence of consumer religious commitment and a Christian consumer’s conservative beliefs in the United States on store loyalty when retailers make business decisions which are potentially reli- gious (...) objectionable. This study uses structural equation modeling and applies Anderson and Gerbing’s :411–423, 1988 ) two-step approach to exam- ine data obtained from a national sample of 531 consumers. The results from this study suggest that consumers evaluate seller’s actions and form ethical judgments. These judgments are a major explanatory variable in consumer store loyalty intentions. (shrink)

Andrew Fiala's Against Religion, Wars, and States: The Case for Enlightenment Atheism, Just War Pacifism, and Liberal-Democratic Anarchism argues that we need to overcome the idea of the nation-state and look toward global justice, that we need to develop a more critical stance toward religion while embracing enlightened humanism and natural science, and that we need to look beyond violent solutions to social problems in order to build world peace.

Cet ouvrage est une réédition numérique d’un livre paru au XXe siècle, désormais indisponible dans son format d’origine.

There is an understanding that it is impossible for the Creator to have a proper name-proper noun on the grounds that there is only one Creator of the universe and that is for all religions. Biblical facts record in the OT-Hebrew or Tanakh, there are 6750 names of YHWH which appear as proper noun. The problem arises when the world of translation does not agree in transcribing or translating the name of the Creator. In the world of translation, grammatically, any (...) proper noun, especially those with a personality, is always copied according to the sound of the letters that compose it, different from the commom noun (general designation) which can be translated according to the corresponding (local) vocabulary of the language concerned. The facts show that most of the translations “change” the name YHWH to become a general designation but are written in all capital letters to avoid collisions with the common designation that already exists and is the same, namely Adonay (God) or in successive designations such as Adonay YHWH. The next misconception is that the name YHWH is said to have been known only in the time of Moses based on Exodus. 6: 3 (2). Re-translate Exodus 6: 3 (2) accurately states that the name YHWH was known to Abraham-Isaac-Jacob, even their ancestors, preceding His introduction by the name El-Shadday. This research uses qualitative methods with literature review approaches, grammatical studies, exegesis, and analysis. (shrink)

Al Seckel has rescued many of Bertrand Russell's best essays on religion, free thought, and nationalism from their resting places in obscure pamphlets, hard-to-find books, and out-of print periodicals to form a superb compilation.

The phenomenon "religion" has been studied critically by many disciplines. Philosophy, natural and social sciences, literature, and linguistics have joined the confessional traditions of Catholic and Protestant theology to offer critiques of religious belief and experience. This volume approaches the subject from diverse disciplinary perspectives. It explores their distinctive approaches, methodologies and areas of interest. It also makes a case for interdisciplinarity as a path to new insights.

As the century draws to its close, how should we think of religion? Some see it as the survival in our midst of an outmoded, primitive way of thinking, while others accuse its critics of simply being blind to the meaning of religious belief. From a different perspective, the clash between belief and unbelief is not seen as a matter of identifying incoherent systems of thought, but as a clash between different demands made on us by divergent ways of (...) looking at the world. Criticisms will flow between these perspectives. There is, however, another kind of interest in this situation: an interest in giving just characterizations of these different voices, so that the nature of allegiances and oppositions to religion may be better understood. (shrink)

John Dewey and George Santayana engaged in a philosophic controversy that lasted more than forty years, beginning with Dewey's two reviews of The Life of Reason and concluding with a posthumously published essay by Santayana . The most well-known part of this controversy began with Santayana's review of Experience and Nature in which he said that Dewey's naturalism is "half-hearted and short-winded." To this Dewey replied that if his naturalism is half-hearted, then Santayana's is "broken-backed." In Metaphysics as Morals I (...) survey the principle writings of this controversy to show that despite Dewey's surprise at Santayana's criticism of Experience and Nature , many of the issues that emerge there also show up in their earlier writings about each other; the debate, even when ostensibly about such as issues as the role of nature in experience, has more to do with their deeply felt convictions about how life should be lived and the role of reason, philosophy, and art in human existence---in short, it is a moral controversy metaphysical guise; and the debate continued in their subsequent writings, where the moral controversy appears in disputes about politics, literature, art, and religion. ;Both Santayana and Dewey agreed that things and events in the natural world exist independently of human observation, that there is no supernatural realm apart from physical existence, and that consciousness does not occur except in living animal organisms. Santayana regarded conscious life as fundamentally different from physical existence, even though consciousness is produced by physical interactions. Consciousness entails perspectives and purposes, neither of which exist in nature. Dewey focused on the development of consciousness in natural and social environments, and, therefore, emphasized how human knowledge, interests, and activities are part of an ongoing interaction with the world. Dewey's philosophical predilections reflect his concerns for social improvement, intelligent practical activity, and educational reform. Santayana's philosophy is an expression of his discomfort with the practical world and his belief that human life is most vital in moments of contemplation. (shrink)

This article examines the controversial issue of blasphemy in literature from the viewpoint of reception inside and outside the academia. The thesis of the article is that blasphemy in literature, though inherently related to religion and language, has a plurality of connotations and interpretations (dissidence, intertextuality, critique of colonialism, discursive strategy, alterity/Otherness, ethnicity, subversive text). Consequently, blasphemy in literature is an incentive for fruitful discussions regarding tolerance, freedom of expression, and the re-situation of the (post)modern (...) self in today’s world, dominated by an uncanny admixture of secular and religious values. (shrink)

_The Gift of Death_, Jacques Derrida’s most sustained consideration of religion, explores questions first introduced in his book _Given Time_ about the limits of the rational and responsible that one reaches in granting or accepting death, whether by sacrifice, murder, execution, or suicide. Derrida analyzes Czech philosopher Jan Patocka’s _Heretical Essays in the Philosophy of History _and develops and compares his ideas to the works of Heidegger, Lévinas, and Kierkegaard. One of Derrida’s major works, _The Gift of Death_ resonates (...) with much of his earlier writing, and this highly anticipated second edition is greatly enhanced by David Wills’s updated translation. This new edition also features the first-ever English translation of Derrida’s _Literature in Secret_. In it, Derrida continues his discussion of the sacrifice of Isaac, which leads to bracing meditations on secrecy, forgiveness, literature, and democracy. He also offers a reading of Kafka’s _Letter to His Father_ and uses the story of the flood in Genesis as an embarkation point for a consideration of divine sovereignty. “An important contribution to the critical study of ethics that commends itself to philosophers, social scientists, scholars of religion... [and those] made curious by the controversy that so often attends Derrida.”—_Booklist_, on the first edition. (shrink)

Dionysus after Nietzsche examines the way that The Birth of Tragedy (1872) by Friedrich Nietzsche irrevocably influenced twentieth-century literature and thought. Adam Lecznar argues that Nietzsche's Dionysus became a symbol of the irrational forces of culture that cannot be contained, and explores the presence of Nietzsche's Greeks in the diverse writings of Jane Harrison, D. H. Lawrence, Martin Heidegger, Richard Schechner and Wole Soyinka (amongst others). From Jane Harrison's controversial ideas about Greek religion in an anthropological modernity, (...) to Wole Soyinka's reimagining of a postcolonial genre of tragedy, each of the writers under discussion used the Nietzschean vision of Greece to develop subversive discourses of temporality, identity, history and classicism. In this way, they all took up Nietzsche's call to disrupt pre-existing discourses of classical meaning and create new modes of thinking about the Classics that speak to the immediate concerns of the present. (shrink)

While there is hardly an aspect of Hume’s work that has not produced controversy of one sort or another, deciphering and evaluating his views on aesthetics involves overcoming interpretive barriers of a particular sort. In addition to what is generally taken as the anachronistic attribution of “aesthetic theories” to any thinker of the eighteenth century, Hume presents the added difficulty that unlike the other founding-fathers of modern philosophical aesthetics, he produced no systematic work on the subject, and certainly nothing comparable (...) to his efforts in epistemology, morals, politics, history, and religion. Even interpreting Hume’s most definitive expression of his views on aesthetic questions—the famous essay “Of the Standard of Taste”—is fraught with difficulties and, as the diversity of views on the piece demonstrates, only the most confident reader would take it as an unambiguous statement of Hume’s position. (shrink)

In the 1960s Lewis White Beck criticized Kant’s highest good as a moral concept. In 1963 John Silber responded. Thus, the “Beck-Silber controversy.” This paper explores such controversy in the Spanish literature. It begins identifying four criticisms: the problems of heteronomy, derivation, impossibility, and irrelevance. It then identifies a new problem rescued from the Spanish literature: dualism. After categorizing, following Matthew Caswell, the Spanish defenses into revisionists, secularizers, and maximalists, this paper assesses these defenses. The paper also translates (...) sections of such literature into English and leaves us closer to a complete defense of the highest good by salvaging what it can of the Spanish literature’s unique points. (shrink)

A re-examination of the case of Johann Reuchlin, one of the best-known controversies of the 16th century.

The Gift of Death, Jacques Derrida’s most sustained consideration of religion, explores questions first introduced in his book Given Time about the limits of the rational and responsible that one reaches in granting or accepting death, whether by sacrifice, murder, execution, or suicide. Derrida analyzes Czech philosopher Jan Patocka’s Heretical Essays in the Philosophy of History and develops and compares his ideas to the works of Heidegger, Lévinas, and Kierkegaard. One of Derrida’s major works, The Gift of Death resonates (...) with much of his earlier writing, and this highly anticipated second edition is greatly enhanced by David Wills’s updated translation. This new edition also features the first-ever English translation of Derrida’s Literature in Secret. In it, Derrida continues his discussion of the sacrifice of Isaac, which leads to bracing meditations on secrecy, forgiveness, literature, and democracy. He also offers a reading of Kafka’s Letter to His Father and uses the story of the flood in Genesis as an embarkation point for a consideration of divine sovereignty. “An important contribution to the critical study of ethics that commends itself to philosophers, social scientists, scholars of religion... [and those] made curious by the controversy that so often attends Derrida.”—Booklist, on the first edition. (shrink)

The religious controversies of the 17th century are of central importance to any attempt to appraise the role of Christianity in the genesis of "modern secular society." In the 18th century there was a clear understanding that modern philosophy was hostile to religion, as the French Revolution proclaimed. The reappraisal of this relation began in Hegel's Phänomenologie, and became explicit with Max Weber: secularism is the consequence of Christianity. The adjudication of this issue demands an evaluation of the interpretations (...) of the Bible and of Christian morality made by such men as Hobbes, Spinoza, and Bayle. According to the Enlightenment, they speak as believers only in order to interpret Christianity in such a way as to make it tolerate the new philosophy. Rex would correct this view of Bayle's intention; he would show that Protestantism, and in Bayle's case, Calvinism, is the source or a source of the belief in the sovereignty of reason. One may doubt whether Rex has proved that the Enlightenment misunderstood Bayle's intentions. Nevertheless, this study, the first part of which is devoted to the Pensées diverses sur la comète, the second to the Commentaire philosophique, is a very helpful guide to an extensive literature. And in his very attempt to prove his thesis Rex frequently brings to light aspects of Bayle's rhetoric that must be noticed in order to understand his writings.—H. C. (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:Journal of the History of Philosophy 39.2 (2001) 307-308 [Access article in PDF] Mayer, Paola. Jena Romanticism and Its Appropriation of Jakob Böhme: Theosophy, Hagiography, Literature. McGill-Queen's Studies in the History of Ideas, no. 25. Montreal and Kingston: McGill-Queen's University Press, 1999. Pp. x + 242. Cloth, $65.00. Paolo Mayer sets out to revise the accepted image of the influence of Jakob Böhme, the sixteenth-century mystic and theosophist, (...) on the romantic poets and philosophers who congregated at Jena in the years 1798-1803. She convincingly argues that, except for the philosophers and critics Friedrich Schlegel and F. W. J. Schelling, Böhme's direct influence was negligible, more a matter of the self-proclaimed new religion of romanticism making ideological use of a controversial, in some sense subversive, forerunner in German literary history. In the hands of Ludwig Tieck, for instance, or Novalis, Böhme becomes a symbol of the new religion of Poesie and the hostile reception afforded by the orthodox evangelical pastors of his time becomes an allegory for the hostility that the new, "let it all hang out" aesthetic of romanticism encountered in the more classical and form-loving members of the literary culture. In Mayer's terms, Böhme's reception among the poets was hagiographic; he was the romantics' poster child.Böhme lived from 1575 to 1624. The son of peasants, but by no means unlettered, the "mystic shoemaker of Görlitz" claimed the source of his teachings was direct divine revelation. He claimed to have visions in 1600 and 1610, whose content he translated into his unusually graphic writings, interspersed with Pietist attacks on reason and on outward religious observances. This unusual 'theology' blended themes that F. Schlegel and Schelling, at least, found attractive: (a) the idea of a self-generating or developmental God, (b) an approach to the problem of evil that logically seems to place responsibility on God, and (c) a large systematic role for desire and will, rather than reason, in the origin of the world and in human salvation. Notable also is the physicalism of Böhme's theology, and the assignment of a wrathful nature to God the Father. Böhme's reception in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, determined largely by a first biography written in 1652 by a disciple named von Furstenburg, was generally warm in pietist circles, cool in rationalist quarters, e.g., in that of Lessing and Leibniz.The established story is that all the major romantic writers, poets as well as philosophers, were influenced through a direct study of Böhme's texts. Mayer takes issue with that, especially in the case of the poets Tieck and Novalis and the scientists J. W. Ritter. Though each of them writes glowingly of Böhme as a poet—in fact a persecuted poet, a near-martyr for the religion of Poesie—Mayer finds no sound evidence for a direct transmission, either of ideas or of terminology, from Böhme to these figures. What other literary critics have advanced as evidence is, she argues, a body of ideas and vocabulary common to the Neoplatonic, mystic tradition and to Christian thinking in general. If a stricter standard of proving "reception" than mere similarity of language is adopted, it seems that Tieck, Novalis, and Ritter had a slim acquaintance with Böhme's writings, but nonetheless advanced a hagiographic view of the "folk poet." Others among the Jena circle—Schleiermacher, A. W. Schlegel, Dorothea and Caroline Schlegel—took a skeptical view of this propagandistic ploy. Only the more philosophical minds, F. Schlegel and Schelling, read Böhme in any depth or ventured elaborate appropriations. Mayer argues that both these figures went [End Page 307] through an initial phase of enthusiasm for Böhme, to be later followed by personal reservations about him and, eventually, by public criticism from a philosophical or orthodox theological stance. Mayer obviously relishes the irony, in this case, of an initial idolization of Böhme as a representative of the 'new religion... (shrink)

Wells identifies influential mistakes about language embedded in the empiricist philosophical tradition of Locke, Russell and Ayer. He shows how these errors stimulated a religious backlash, in which faith became coupled with commonsense realism. He also covers behaviourism and magical thinking.

Perceptive, passionate, and often controversial, Raymond Tallis's latest debunking of Kulturkritik delves into a host of ethical and philosophical issues central to contemporary thought, raising questions we cannot afford to ignore. After reading Enemies of Hope , those minded to misrepresent mankind in ways that are almost routine among humanist intellectuals may be inclined to think twice. By clearing away the "hysterical humanism" of the present century this book frees us to start thinking constructively about the way forward for (...) humanity in the next. (shrink)

Die Abhängigkeit des Menschen von der Natur ist der Grund der Religion. In diesem Satz verdichtet sich das Religionsverständnis, das Ludwig Feuerbach in seiner kurzen Schrift "Das Wesen der Religion" (1846) dargelegt hat. Mit ihr rückte er den Naturbegriff in den Mittelpunkt seiner Religionsforschung. Gegenüber seiner berühmtesten Abhandlung "Das Wesen des Christentums" (1841) trieb er auf diesem Wege die Gedankengänge, die zum Ursprung der Religion führen sollten, um einige Stollen tiefer. Der Wurzelgrund der Religion liegt nicht (...) allein im Menschen, sondern vielmehr im Verhältnis des Menschen zu der von ihm unabhängigen Natur. Feuerbach erkannte in dieser Bestimmung den Schlüssel zu einem aufgeklärten Religionsverständnis. The Essence of Religion The dependence of human beings on nature is the basis of religion. This statement summarizes the understanding of religion of Ludwig Feuerbach as he presented it in his short treatise "The Essence of Religion" (1846). With this work he shifted the focus of his religious research on the concept of nature. In comparison with his most famous work "The Essence of Christianity" (1841) his thinking, trying to get to the origins of religion, is working here on a somewhat deeper level. The root of religion is not to be found only in humanity but much more in the relationship of humanity with a nature which is independent from human beings. Feuerbach saw in this definition the key to an enligthened understanding of religion. (shrink)