Systematic Theology as a Rationally Justified Public Discourse about God

Name: Systematic Theology as a Rationally Justified Public Discourse about God
Brand: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht
Price: 150.0 EUR
Availability: OnlineOnly

Michael Agerbo Mørch(Author)

Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht (Publisher)

1st Edition

Published on 23. January 2023

415 pages

E-Book

PDF without DRM

System requirements

978-3-647-56871-3 (ISBN)

€150.00incl. 7% vat

System requirements

for PDF without DRM

E-Book Single Licence

Available for download

Description

More details

Other editions

Person

Content

Intro
Title Page
Copyright
Acknowledgements
Table of Contents
Part One: Introduction and Background for the Book
Chapter One: Introduction
1.1 Background for the Book
1.2 The Research Problem
1.2.1 Terminology
1.3 Material
1.4 Method
1.4.1 Outline
1.5 Aim and Relevance of the Book
Chapter Two: A Selected Overview of The Historical Background
2.1 Introduction
2.2 Debates in the 20th Century
2.2.1 The Barth-Scholz Debate
2.2.2 The German Debate in the 60s through the 80s
2.2.3 Lund versus Uppsala
2.2.4 Chicago vs. Yale
2.3 Conclusion
Part Two: A Scalar Understanding of Systematic Theology
Chapter Three: A Definition of Scientific Systematic Theology
3.1 Introduction
3.2 Level One (Systematic Theology 1)
3.3 Level Two (Systematic Theology 2)
3.4 Level Three (Systematic Theology 3)
3.4.1 Niels Henrik Gregersen's Understanding of Systematic Theology 3
3.4.2 Systematic Theology 3 as Normative Ontology
3.4.3 Why Systematic Theology 3 May be Scientific and Systematic Theology 1 and 2 Only Derivatively So
3.4.4 The Sources of Systematic Theology 3
3.4.4.1 Thought Experiments as a Source for Systematic Theology 3
3.4.4.2 The Natural Sciences
3.4.4.3 The Bible and Tradition
3.4.5 On the Possibility of a Synchronic Constitution of Systematic Theology
3.4.5.1 Lorenz Puntel's Structural-Systematic Approach to a Theory of Being and God
3.4.6 The Concept of "Truth Candidate"
3.4.7 A Short Introduction to Rescher's Coherence Theory of Truth
3.4.8 How to Compare Ontologies. A Puntelian Approach
3.4.9 Conclusion
Part Three: Objections to Systematic Theology as Scientific
Introduction
Chapter Four: Objection 1-Testability
4.1 Introduction
4.2 Premise 1
4.2.1 Definition of Testability
4.2.2 Testing Single Propositions: Confirmation Theory
4.2.2.1 The Defence of Testing Single Propositions
4.2.2.2 The Critique of Testing Single Propositions
4.2.3 Excursus: Inferences - The Steps from Tests to Conclusions
4.2.3.1 Induction
4.2.3.2 Inference to the Best Explanation
4.2.3.3 Conclusion to Excursus About Inferences
4.2.4 Testing Whole Theories: Coherence Theory
4.2.5 Conclusion on Premise 1
4.3 Premise 2
4.3.1 Introduction
4.3.2 Examination of Coherence I
4.3.3 Wolfhart Pannenberg
4.3.4 Alister McGrath
4.3.5 Nancey Murphy
4.3.5.1 Christianity's Crises
4.3.5.2 Naturalism's Solution
4.3.5.3 Naturalism's Crises
4.3.5.4 Christianity's Solution
4.3.6 Examination of Coherence II
4.3.7 Conclusion on Premise 2
4.4 Conclusion
Chapter Five: Objection 2-Falsifiability
5.1 Introduction
5.2 Premise 1
5.2.1 What is Falsification?
5.2.2 Karl Popper
5.2.3 Thomas Kuhn
5.2.4 Imre Lakatos
5.2.5 Paul Feyerabend
5.2.6 Larry Laudan
5.2.7 Falsification at Work 1: The Hypothetico-Deductive Method
5.2.7.1 The Deductive-Nomological Model
5.2.7.2 The Hypothetico-Deductive Method
5.2.8 Falsification at Work 2: Comparing Degrees of Coherence
5.2.8.1 Falsification as Comparison of Degrees of Coherence between Ontologies
5.2.8.2 Systematization
5.2.8.3 Theoretical Framework
5.2.8.4 Scientific Theories must be Falsifiable but not Actually Falsified
5.2.9 Conclusion on Premise 1
5.3 Premise 2
5.3.1 Examples of Uses of Falsification
5.3.2 The Concept of Eschatological Verification
5.3.3 Excursus: Falsification at the Level of Systematic Theology 2
5.3.4 Recent Attempts at Rendering Ontologies Comparable
5.3.5 Conclusion on Premise 2
5.4 Conclusion
Chapter Six: Objection 3-Intersubjectivity
6.1 Introduction
6.2 Premise 1
6.2.1 What is Intersubjectivity?
6.2.1.1 Two Major Positions
6.2.1.2 What Does Intersubjectivity Presuppose?
6.2.2 What is the Best Understanding of the Criterion of Intersubjectivity in Research?
6.2.2.1 Methods, Presuppositions, Data, and Results must be Publicly Accessible
6.2.2.2 Methods, Data, and Results must be Independent from the Researcher
6.2.2.3 The Importance of Criticism for Intersubjectivity
6.2.3 What is Gained from Intersubjectivity?
6.2.4 Difficulties for a Clear Concept of Intersubjectivity
6.2.4.1 Cognitive Biases in Relation to Intersubjective Criticism
6.2.4.2 Interpretive Communities and Paradigmatic Thinking as Possible Problems for Intersubjective Criticism
6.2.4.3 The Epistemology of Testimony
6.2.4.4 Epistemology and Ontology are Related Holistically
6.2.5 Conclusion on Premise 1
6.3. Premise 2
6.3.1 Stating the Problem
6.3.2 Models for Intersubjectivity in Systematic Theology
6.3.2.1 Demarcated Intersubjectivity
6.3.2.2 Paradigmatic Intersubjectivity
6.3.2.3 Critical Intersubjectivity
6.3.3 Complexities in systematic theology in Relation to Intersubjectivity
6.3.4 Insecurities in systematic theology in Relation to Intersubjectivity
6.3.4.1. Ontology Deals with Comprehensiveness, Which Often Creates Insecurity
6.3.4.2 Accepted Insecurities in an Ontological Theory
6.3.5 Conclusion on Premise 2
6.4 Conclusion
Chapter Seven: Objection 4-Normativity
7.1 Introduction
7.2 Premise 1
7.2.1 What is Normativity?
7.2.1.1 Short Working Definition of Normativity
7.2.1.2 Major Positions
7.2.1.3 The Inevitability of Normativity
7.2.2 What is Normativity Given the Presuppositions of this Book?
7.2.2.1 Normativity and Truth
7.2.2.2 Normativity and CUDOS
7.2.2.3 Normativity and Revision
7.2.3 Conclusion of Premise 1
7.3 Premise 2
7.3.1 Stating the Problem of Strong Normativity in Three Claims
7.3.1.1 Strong Normativity Becomes a Problem when it Rests on Questionable Foundations
7.3.1.2 Strong Normativity Becomes a Problem When There is a Claim of Truth concerning Supernatural Entities
7.3.1.3 Strong Normativity Becomes a Problem When it is Based on Limited Data
7.3.2 Models of normativity for Systematic Theology
7.3.2.1 As in Religious Studies
7.3.2.2 Orthodoxy
7.3.2.3 No Normativity-All Theology Is Contextual
7.3.3 Strong Normativity in Relation to Coherence in Systematic Theology
7.3.4 Conclusion concerning Premise 2
7.4 Conclusion
Chapter Eight: Objection 5-Distinct Discipline with Distinct Research
8.1 Introduction
8.2 Premise 1
8.2.1 What is Distinct Research?
8.2.2 Why is the Criterion of Distinct Research Important?
8.2.3 Conclusion on Premise 1
8.3 Premise 2
8.3.1 What is the General Problem?
8.3.2 Supposed Problems for systematic theology as Distinct Research
8.3.2.1 Systematic Theology Cannot Identify its Object of Study
8.3.2.2 Systematic Theology Cannot Identify its Methods Because of the First Problem
8.3.2.3 Systematic Theology Cannot Explain, Only Describe (Systematic Theology 1)
8.3.2.4 Systematic Theology Builds on a Weak Foundation of Evidence
8.3.3 What Are the Distinctive Marks of Systematic Theology 3?
8.3.3.1 Contra Religious Studies
8.3.3.2 Contra Philosophy
8.3.4 Conclusion on Premise 2
8.4 Conclusion
Part Four: Conclusion
Chapter Nine
9.1 Summary of the Findings
9.2 Conclusion
9.3 Theses of the Book
Bibliography
Index
Index of Person
Index of Subjects
Body

System requirements

Save as PDF Copy link into clipboard

Schweitzer Fachinformationen

Systematic Theology as a Rationally Justified Public Discourse about God

Description

More details

Other editions

Additional editions

Person

Content

System requirements