1994
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Abstract: JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
4
0

Year Published

2005
2005
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
4

Relationship

0
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 14 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
0
4
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Against the Husserlian ‘principle of all principles’, that intuition or what might loosely be called ‘experience’ can only be given against a particular horizon (e.g., a spatio‐temporal horizon) and to a constituting ‘I’, Marion prefers to not place any a priori restrictions or conditions on what can be given or what form experience may take. And so, as he puts it: ‘It is forbidden to forbid!’ For Marion, we cannot rule out the possibility of there being at least some phenomena which are irreducible to an ‘I’ and break the bounds of all horizons and so constitute a ‘pure giveneness’ . But this does not render them inadmissible as objects of phenomenological analysis.…”
Section: The New Phenomenologymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Against the Husserlian ‘principle of all principles’, that intuition or what might loosely be called ‘experience’ can only be given against a particular horizon (e.g., a spatio‐temporal horizon) and to a constituting ‘I’, Marion prefers to not place any a priori restrictions or conditions on what can be given or what form experience may take. And so, as he puts it: ‘It is forbidden to forbid!’ For Marion, we cannot rule out the possibility of there being at least some phenomena which are irreducible to an ‘I’ and break the bounds of all horizons and so constitute a ‘pure giveneness’ . But this does not render them inadmissible as objects of phenomenological analysis.…”
Section: The New Phenomenologymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Perhaps the most promising options are theories of religious affirmations that present them as non‐assertoric. For example, D. Z. Phillips () has been interpreted as proposing that religious affirmations are confessional acts rather than expressions of belief (Oppy & Trakakis, , p. 123) and more recently, Jacques Derrida () and Jean‐Luc Marion () have proposed that religious affirmations (at least those about God) can be understood as a form of non‐doxastic praise or prayer. However, while religious discourse clearly does include prayer, praise and confession, these theories provide no roadmap for how to interpret affirmations that are not in these contexts or where there is no identified addressee.…”
Section: Responsesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In an early article he spoke of phenomenology as providing "relief" for theology. 18 He suggests that phenomenology can provide such relief because it frees theology from its metaphysical constrictions. Marion argues that the "death of God" and the "end of metaphysics" do not imply that talk about the divine is no longer possible, as commonly assumed, but instead means that theology is now freed from the metaphysical restrictions that limited it to particular (false) definitions of God.…”
Section: The Relationship Between Philosophy and Theology In Marion Amentioning
confidence: 99%