The dialectic of articulation: a Hegelian response to Adams
This article responds to Nicholas Adams by exploring the affinities between his account and Hegel, with a particular focus on the dialectic of articulation. They seem to agree on the undermining effect of articulation and reflection on implicit commitments. However, Adams diverges from Hegel by ques...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Contributors: | |
| Format: | Electronic Article |
| Language: | English |
| Check availability: | HBZ Gateway |
| Journals Online & Print: | Drawer...
|
| Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
| Published: |
Taylor & Francis
2023
|
| In: |
International journal of philosophy and theology
Year: 2023, Volume: 84, Issue: 5, Pages: 333-339 |
| Standardized Subjects / Keyword chains: | B
Hegel, Georg Wilhelm Friedrich 1770-1831
/ Dialectics
/ Formulation
/ Morals
/ The Modern
/ Scriptural reasoning
|
| RelBib Classification: | AX Inter-religious relations NCA Ethics TJ Modern history TK Recent history VA Philosophy |
| Further subjects: | B
sittlichkeit
B Modernity B Scriptural Reasoning B Hegel B moral reflection B dialectic of articulation |
| Online Access: |
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) |
| Summary: | This article responds to Nicholas Adams by exploring the affinities between his account and Hegel, with a particular focus on the dialectic of articulation. They seem to agree on the undermining effect of articulation and reflection on implicit commitments. However, Adams diverges from Hegel by questioning the consequence and supposed inevitability of this dialectical process. Whereas Hegel argues for the desirability of conscious articulation in the progress towards modernity, Adams contends that it is actually a destructive and oppressive process, challenging Hegel’s Enlightenment optimism and Eurocentrism. Still, I suggest that Hegel’s concern for rational dialogue as an indispensable condition for modern life and community should be taken seriously. Scriptural reasoning, as discussed by Adams, provides a model how we can have a form of rational dialogue that escapes from the dilemma posed by the Hegelian dialectic, and that it may be possible to combine strong ethical commitments with an openness to pluralistic dialogue. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 2169-2335 |
| Reference: | Kritik von "Obstacles to moral articulation in interreligious engagement (2023)"
Kritik in "Reply to my respondents (2023)" |
| Contains: | Enthalten in: International journal of philosophy and theology
|
| Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.1080/21692327.2023.2296651 |