"Science, Religion, and Rationality: A Neo-Hegelian Approach": a neo-Hegelian approach

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingChapterpeer-review

Abstract

The paper argues that identifying rational action with action undertaken for a reason yields Popper's well-known identification of rationality with criticism. However, it is also shown, pace Popper, to yield a strong form of normative framework dependency of the kind critical rationalists notoriously reject. But deeming rationality to be framework dependent, it argues further, raises the particularly exasperating problem of the very possibility of rational framework replacement. If the normative framework to which one is committed is presupposed in critical reasoning, how can one ever have normative reason to replace it? The first part of the paper briefly discusses the problem and some of the attempts to solve it, while arguing for an alternative approach. The second part, explores some of the consequences of adopting such an approach first for the historiography of scientific framework transitions, and finally for the theology of inter and intra-religious dialogue, with special reference to what might be termed the confrontational theology of the rabbinic literature of late antiquity.
Original languageEnglish
Title of host publicationMenachem Fisch
Pages319-336
Number of pages18
Volume29
Edition2
StatePublished - 2013

Publication series

NameToronto Journal of Theology
PublisherToronto School of Theology
ISSN (Print)0826-9831

Keywords

  • Christianity
  • Confrontational religiosity
  • Faith and reason
  • Framework transitions
  • Framework-dependency
  • Philosophy
  • Rationality
  • Religion
  • Religion and science
  • Science
  • Self-criticism
  • Theology

RAMBI Publications

  • rambi
  • Jewish law -- Philosophy
  • Judaism and philosophy
  • Judaism and science
  • Religion and science

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of '"Science, Religion, and Rationality: A Neo-Hegelian Approach": a neo-Hegelian approach'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this