Warszawskie Studia Teologiczne, 2009, T. 22, Nr 1

Stały URI dla kolekcjihttps://theo-logos.pl/handle/123456789/43406

Przeglądaj

Przeglądaj Warszawskie Studia Teologiczne, 2009, T. 22, Nr 1 wg Temat "analogy"

Wpisz kilka pierwszych liter i kliknij przycisk przeglądania
Teraz wyświetlane 1 - 1 z 1
  • Brak miniatury
    Pozycja
    Poznanie w religiach opartych na Biblii według I. G. Barboura
    Szewc, Bolesław (Wydawnictwo Archidiecezji Warszawskiej, 2009)
    Ian Graeme Barbour (born 1923) American emeritus professor in science, technology and society build bridges between religion and science. The work focuses on cognitive function of religion described in his works. 1. Individual experiences and events interpreted by acknowledged interpretative categories are the data of religion. The global structures containing the interpretation are the irreducible data in the act of perception. There is no experience without interpretation. The participation in common history is essential for biblical religions. The Revelation is contained in the interpreted history of religious community; it delivers the interpretative categories. There are various kinds of experiences in religion: sense of fear and worship, mystical union, moral duty, conversion and reconciliation, interpersonal relationship, key historical events, order and creativity in the world. 2. Analogies, metaphors, symbols and parables belong to the language of religion. Analogy is a transferring or extending the patterns of reciprocal relationship from one domain of experience to another. Metaphor proposes the analogy between normal context of the word and the new one. Some metaphors are symbols: symbol of height, symbol of light, symbol of water etc. Parables are developed forms of analogies. They are vivid and pictorial, opened to new interpretations and they prompt for making decision. Myth is a story expressing some aspect of cosmic order. Myths deliver means to describe and understand the experience. They express the identity of the community. They express and summon the saving power. They show patterns of conduct. They are repeated in ceremonies. Models are durable structural components of myths. Myths and models have psychological function as they allow to resolve conflicts with the nature and within the community, by expressing them in symbolic language. Delivering interpretative categories as well as expressing and evoking some attitudes are the cognitive functions of myths and models. 3. The paradigms acknowledged by community (being the set of religious convictions) rule the thinking and behavior of it’s members. They rule also the cognitive activity. Paradigm is subject to evaluation according to the criteria: capacity to satisfy sociological and psychological needs; simplicity; cohesion; capacity to describe well the most important experiences; theoretical fruitfulness; generality. 4. I. G. Barbour genuinely reveals cognitive aspect of religion but his analysis is not complete. He diminishes the role of Revelation for Christianity. He emphasizes empiric aspect of cognition in religion whilst it is more rational, basing on faith which means the act of reason and will. He does not notice that some models are determined and some are excluded by the Revelation and cannot be chosen solely with the above mentioned criteria.