Uskonto ilman uskontoa : Radikaalin postmodernin uskonnonfilosofian haaste

Religion without religion. The challenge of radical postmodern philosophy of religion. The aim of this study is to examine the central ideas of Mark C. Taylor, Don Cupitt, and Grace Jantzen on the subject of the philosophy of religion. The method is a qualitative, systematic analysis of the works of the aforementioned philosophers. The purpose is to present, analyze, identify, find connections, and to gain an understanding of the original texts. This thesis shows that radical postmodern religion is “religion without religion”. God is “dead” and the concept of God is seen as “writing”, an ideal, a relationship of meanings or a language. In ethics, there are no objective values or principles. People must create their own morality. Reality is each person´s concept of reality. Language is universal in that language and reality cannot be considered separately. The human subject is contingent and formed in the linguistic and social context. According to postmodern feminism, the ideas that men present as facts are often degrading to women, distort reality and support the power of men. For this reason, we should create a new kind of philosophy of religion and a new language that takes women into consideration. Finally, we will study some philosophers, who have used postmodern ideas in a more moderate manner. In this way, we will look for a balanced solution between modernism and postmodernism. This study shows that the postmodern idea of religion is very different from classical Christianity. Ethics becomes subjective, anarchistic and nihilistic. Epistemology is relativistic and the human being becomes the measure of all things. Objective reality becomes blurry. Language is seen to be game-like, and it has no relation to reality. The moral responsibility of a subject becomes problematic. Science and rationality come into question without the permanent core provided by our consciousness. Women are not in an epistemologically privileged position. The truth claims by either men or women must each be evaluated one at a time. Many postmodern ideas can successfully be made of use if used in moderate manner.

Striving for the Impossible : The Hegelian background of Judith Butler

This study analyses the Hegelian roots of the subject-theory and the political theory of Judith Butler. Butler can be seen as the author of "gender performativity". Butler claims that subject's identities are linquistic "terms". Linquistic identities are performative and normative: they produce, according to cultural rules, the identities which they just claim to describe. Butler's theory of the performativity of identities is based on her theory of identities as "ek-static" constructions. This means that there is a relation between the self and the Other in the heart of identities. It is claimed in this study that Butler's theory of the relation between the self and the Other, or, between the subject and the constitutive outside, is based on G.W.F. Hegel's theory of the dialectics of recognition in The Phenomenology of Spirit. Especially the sections dealing with the relation between "Lord" and "Bondsman" set the theoretical base for Butler's theory. Further, it is claimed that Hegel's own solution for the enslaving and instrumentalizing relation between the self and the Other, reciprocal recognition, remains an important alternative to the postmodernist conception supported by political theorists like Butler. Chapter 2, on Hegel, goes through the dialectics of recognition between the self and the Other in The Phenomenology of Spirit up until the ideal of reciprocal recognition and absolute knowledge. Chapter 3 introduces two French interpretations of Hegel, by Alexandre Kojéve and Louis Althusser. Both of these interpretations, especially the Kojevian one, have deeply influenced the contemporary understanding of Hegel as well as the contemporary thought - presented e.g. in the postmodern political thought - on the relations between the self and the Other. The Kojévian Marxist utopia with its notion of "the End of History" as well as the Althusserian theory of the Interpellative formation of subjects have influenced how Hegel's theory of the self and the Other have travelled into Butler's thought. In chapter 5 these influences are analyzed in detail. According to the analysis, Butler, like numerous other poststructuralist theorists, accepts Kojéve's interpretation as basically correct, but rejects his vision of "the End of History" as static and totalitarian. Kojéve's utopian philosophy of history is replaced by the paradoxical idea of an endless striving towards emancipation which, however, could not and should not be reached. In chapter 6 Butler's theory is linked to another postmodern political theory, that of Chantal Mouffe. It is argued that Mouffe's theory is based on a similar view of the relation of the self and the other as Butler's theory. The former, however, deals explicitly with politics. Therefore, it makes the central paradox of striving for the impossible more visible; such a theory is unable to guide political action. Hegel actually anticipated this kind of theorizing in his critique of "Unhappy Consciousness" in the Phenomenology of Spirit. Keywords: Judith Butler, G.W.F. Hegel, Chantal Mouffe, Alexandre Kojéve, Postmodernism, Politics, Identities, Performativity, Self-consciousness, Other

Reconciling Opposites in Organisation Studies: An Aristotelian Approach to Modernism and Post-modernism

In view of the current fragmentation in management and organisation studies, we argue that there is a need to elaborate techniques that help reconcile contradictory and superficially incommensurable standpoints. For this purpose, we draw on ‘pre-modern’ Aristotelian epistemological and methodological sources, particularly the idea of ‘saving the appearances’ (SA), not previously introduced into organisation studies. Using SA as our starting point, we outline a methodology that helps to develop reasonable and acceptable intermediary positions in contemporary debates between ‘modernism’ and ‘post-modernism’. We illustrate the functioning of SA in the case of three issues in the philosophy of science where ‘modernist’ and ‘post-modernist’ scholars seem to have incommensurable standpoints: the nature of scientific knowledge; the conception of causality; and the epistemology of practice. We show in particular how to use the logics of ‘qualification’, ‘new conception’, and ‘complementary combination’ to form the basis for mediating positions which could then be accepted by less extreme proponents of both ‘modernism’ and ‘postmodernism’.

Archaeology and authenticity

In this master s thesis, I have discussed the question of authenticity in postprocessual archaeology. Modern archaeology is a product of the modern world, and postprocessual archaeology in turn is strongly influenced by postmodernism. The way authenticity has been understood in processual archaeology is largely dictated by the modern condition. The understanding of authenticity in postprocessual archaeology, however, rests on notions of simulation and metaphor. It has been argued by postprocessual archaeologists that the past can be experienced by metaphor, and that the relationship between now and then is of a metaphorical kind. In postprocessual archaeology, authenticity has been said to be contextual. This view has been based on a contextualist understanding of the meanings of language and metaphor. I argue that, besides being based on metaphor, authenticity is a conventional attribute based on habits of acting, which in turn have their basis in the material world and the materiality of objects. Authenticity is material meaning, and that meaning can be found out by studying the objects as signs in a chain of signification called semiosis. Authenticity therefore is semiosis.

Changing Paradigms in Biblical Criticism : 2 Kings 22:1 23:30 in the Flux of Discourses

The subject and methodology of biblical scholarship has expanded immense-ly during the last few decades. The traditional text-, literary-, source- and form-critical approaches, labeled historical-critical scholarship , have faced the challenge of social sciences. Various new literary, synchronic readings, sometimes characterized with the vague term postmodernism, have in turn challenged historicalcritical, and social-scientific approaches. Widened limits and diverging methodologies have caused a sense of crisis in biblical criticism. This metatheoretical thesis attempts to bridge the gap between philosophical discussion about the basis of biblical criticism and practical academic biblical scholarship. The study attempts to trace those epistemological changes that have produced the wealth of methods and results within biblical criticism. The account of the cult reform of King Josiah of Judah as reported in 2 Kings 22:1 23:30 serves as the case study because of its importance for critical study of the Hebrew Bible. Various scholarly approaches embracing 2 Kings 22:1 23:30 are experimentally arranged around four methodological positions: text, author, reader, and context. The heuristic model is a tentative application of Oliver Jahraus s model of four paradigms in literary theory. The study argues for six theses: 1) Our knowledge of the world is con-structed, fallible and theory-laden. 2) Methodological plurality is the neces-sary result of changes in epistemology and culture in general. 3) Oliver Jahraus s four methodological positions in regard to literature are also an applicable model within biblical criticism to comprehend the methodological plurality embracing the study of the Hebrew Bible. 4) Underlying the methodological discourse embracing biblical criticism is the epistemological ten-sion between the natural sciences and the humanities. 5) Biblical scholars should reconsider and analyze in detail concepts such as author and editor to overcome the dichotomy between the Göttingen and Cross schools. 6) To say something about the historicity of 2 Kings 22:1 23:30 one must bring together disparate elements from various disciplines and, finally, admit that though it may be possible to draw some permanent results, our conclusions often remain provisional.

Monologeista dialogiksi : Keskustelua koulusta käytävien ohipuhumisten muuttamisesta neuvotteluksi sosiaalisen konstruktionismin hengessä.

From monologues to dialogue. A discussion about changing the fragmented character of the debate concerning schools to one of negotiation, in the spirit of social constructionism. The starting point for the study is the assumption that the interested parties concerning schools such as teachers, students, public servants within school administration or politics construct the idea of the school in disparate ways. It looks as if the representatives of the various interested parties perceive the school in distinctive ways or with particular emphases. Additionally, there are not many discussion forums where these different interested parties have an equal right to speak and be heard. It seems that the lack of dialogue characterizes the debate about school. At the centre of the study are negotiations concerning schools, and the conditions that promote changing the fragmented character of this school debate in a more promising and collectively responsible process of negotiation. The aims of the study are to find both an empirical and theoretical basis for more equal ways to negotiate about school, and to increase cultural self reflection. Social constructionism plays a key role in aspiring to meet these research aims. The research questions are (1) How do the informants of the study construct the idea of school in their texts, and (2) What kind of prospects does social constructionism bring to the negotiations about school. The research informants construct the idea of school in their texts in several ways. To sum up: school is constructed as a place for learning, a place for building the future, a place where ethical education is lived out, a place for social education and Bildung, and a place where the students well-being is ensured. The previously presented assumption that the interested parties of a school construct the idea of a school in disparate ways or with various emphases seems to have support in the informants texts. Based on that, a condition can be put forward: different perspectives should have an equal opportunity to be heard in negotiations about school. It would also be helpful if there was a chance for different perspectives to be documented and/or in some way, visualized. This ensures that different constructions of school are within reach of all the participants. Additionally, while making the process of negotiation transparent, this documentation becomes an important medium for self reflection. On one hand it visualizes the complexity of the school. On the other hand it protects the school and education from serving as the spokesman of any single truth that is presented as objective or universal. Social constructionism seems to offer a stable theoretical basis for changing the fragmented character of the school debate in one of negotiation. More equal and collectively responsible school negotiation presumes that certain aspects or conditions drawn from postmodernism and social constructionism have been studied. In the study, six conditions are presented that can be seen as mediums for changing the fragmented character of the school debate into one of more equal negotiation. Keywords: social constructionism, Kenneth J. Gergen, school negotiation, education policy, dialogue.