Passional Reasoning and the Accessibility of Truth: William Wainwright on Arguing About Religion | ||
| پژوهش‌های فلسفی -کلامی | ||
| مقاله 3، دوره 24، شماره 3 - شماره پیاپی 93، مهر 1401، صفحه 29-48 اصل مقاله (2.07 M) | ||
| نوع مقاله: مقاله علمی پژوهشی | ||
| شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.22091/jptr.2022.8443.2743 | ||
| نویسنده | ||
| William Hasker* | ||
| Distinguished Professor of Philosophy Emeritus, Huntington University, Huntington, USA | ||
| چکیده | ||
| Abstract This essay presents William Wainwright’s conception of religious reasoning. He rejects the view that proper reasoning in religion must be limited to “neutral technical reason” (NTR), modes of reasoning that are neutral and acceptable to all parties in a religious disagreement. He emphasizes that religious reasoning, as seen in outstanding practitioners from different religious traditions, incorporates additional elements, such as appeals to revelation, emphasis on religious reading, rhetoric, acknowledgment of mystery, and especially “passional reason,” in which the arguments presented and the conclusions accepted depend essentially on the state of the reasoner’s heart. The essay goes on to consider how Wainwright deals with issues surrounding religious diversity: he rejects all of the standard methods by which it has been argued that differences in belief between traditions either do not really exist or do not ultimately matter. Special attention is given to religious pluralism, as advocated by John Hick and Peter Byrne. This leads to a consideration of exclusivism, in which it is held that the fundamental doctrines of one religion are true, and those of other religions, insofar as they differ from those of the favored religion, are false. Wainwright finds the standard objections against exclusivism to be ineffective or inconclusive. Finally, the essay addresses a question suggested but not resolved by Wainwright’s work: Does religious diversity have the consequence that truth in religion is not accessible to us? | ||
| کلیدواژه‌ها | ||
| William Wainwright؛ passional reasoning؛ William James؛ John Henry Newman؛ Jonathan Edwards؛ religious diversity؛ pluralism؛ exclusivism؛ John Hic | ||
| موضوعات | ||
| فلسفه دین | ||
| عنوان مقاله [English] | ||
| Passional Reasoning and the Accessibility of Truth: William Wainwright on Arguing About Religion | ||
| نویسندگان [English] | ||
| William Hasker | ||
| Distinguished Professor of Philosophy Emeritus, Huntington University, Huntington, USA | ||
| چکیده [English] | ||
| Abstract This essay presents William Wainwright’s conception of religious reasoning. He rejects the view that proper reasoning in religion must be limited to “neutral technical reason” (NTR), modes of reasoning that are neutral and acceptable to all parties in a religious disagreement. He emphasizes that religious reasoning, as seen in outstanding practitioners from different religious traditions, incorporates additional elements, such as appeals to revelation, emphasis on religious reading, rhetoric, acknowledgment of mystery, and especially “passional reason,” in which the arguments presented and the conclusions accepted depend essentially on the state of the reasoner’s heart. The essay goes on to consider how Wainwright deals with issues surrounding religious diversity: he rejects all of the standard methods by which it has been argued that differences in belief between traditions either do not really exist or do not ultimately matter. Special attention is given to religious pluralism, as advocated by John Hick and Peter Byrne. This leads to a consideration of exclusivism, in which it is held that the fundamental doctrines of one religion are true, and those of other religions, insofar as they differ from those of the favored religion, are false. Wainwright finds the standard objections against exclusivism to be ineffective or inconclusive. Finally, the essay addresses a question suggested but not resolved by Wainwright’s work: Does religious diversity have the consequence that truth in religion is not accessible to us? | ||
| کلیدواژه‌ها [English] | ||
| William Wainwright, passional reasoning, William James, John Henry Newman, Jonathan Edwards, religious diversity, pluralism, exclusivism, John Hick | ||
| مراجع | ||
|
Hasker, W. (2011). The many Gods of Hick and Mavrodes. In K. J. Clark & R. C. VanArragon (Eds.), Evidence and religious belief (pp.186-199). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Hick, J.. (2011). Response to Hasker. In K. J. Clark & R. C. VanArragon (Eds.), Evidence and religious belief (pp.199-201). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Hick, J. (1995). A Christian theology of religions: The rainbow of faiths. Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press.
Hick, J. (1889). An interpretation of religion: Human responses to the transcendent. New Haven: Yale University Press. (Second edition 2004.)
Plantinga, A. (1995). Pluralism: A defense of religious exclusivism. In T. D. Senor (Ed.), The rationality of belief and the plurality of faith (pp.191-215). Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
Smith, W. C. (1981). Towards a world theology: Faith and the comparative history of religion. Philadelphia: Westminster Press.
Wainwright, W. (2020). God, love, and interreligious dialogue. Journal of Philosophical Theological Research, 22(85), 5-14. doi: 10.22091/JPTR.2020.5351.2288 Wainwright, W. (2016). Reason, revelation, and devotion: Inference and argument in religion. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Wainwright, W. (2004). Competing religious claims. In W. E. Mann (Ed.), Blackwell guide to the philosophy of religion (pp.220-241). Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons.
Wainwright, W. (1995). Reason and the heart: A prolegomenon to a critique of passional reasoning. Ithaca: Cornell University Press. | ||
|
آمار تعداد مشاهده مقاله: 460 تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله: 430 |
||