2 resultados para Dennewitz, Battle of, Dennewitz, Germany, 1813.

em Helda - Digital Repository of University of Helsinki


Relevância:

100.00% 100.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

This study is a systematic analysis of mediated immediacy in the production of the Brazilian professor of theology João Batista Libanio. He stresses both ethical mediation and the immediate character of the faith. Libanio has sought an answer to the problem of science and faith. He makes use of the neo-scholastic distinction between matter and form. According to St. Thomas Aquinas, God cannot be known as a scientific object, but it is possible to predicate a formal theological content of other subject matter with the help of revelation. This viewpoint was emphasized in neo-Thomism and supported by the liberation theologians. For them, the material starting point was social science. It becomes a theologizable or revealable (revelabile) reality. This social science has its roots in Latin American Marxism which was influenced by the school of Louis Althusser and considered Marxism a science of history . The synthesis of Thomism and Marxism is a challenge Libanio faced, especially in his Teologia da libertação from 1987. He emphasized the need for a genuinely spiritual and ethical discernment, and was particularly critical of the ethical implications of class struggle. Libanio s thinking has a strong hermeneutic flavor. It is more important to understand than to explain. He does not deny the need for social scientific data, but that they cannot be the exclusive starting point of theology. There are different readings of the world, both scientific and theological. A holistic understanding of the nature of religious experience is needed. Libanio follows the interpretation given by H. C. de Lima Vaz, according to whom the Hegelian dialectic is a rational circulation between the totality and its parts. He also recalls Oscar Cullmann s idea of God s Kingdom that is already and not yet . In other words, there is a continuous mediation of grace into the natural world. This dialectic is reflected in ethics. Faith must be verified in good works. Libanio uses the Thomist fides caritate formata principle and the modern orthopraxis thinking represented by Edward Schillebeeckx. One needs both the ortho of good faith and the praxis of the right action. The mediation of praxis is the mediation of human and divine love. Libanio s theology has strong roots in the Jesuit spirituality that places the emphasis on contemplation in action.

Relevância:

100.00% 100.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

The Russian mathematician, academician and former dissident Igor Shafarevich (b. 1923) is commonly mentioned in Western scholarly studies on perestroika and post-perestroika-era Russian politics as one of the most notable anti-Semites and extreme nationalists of the country. This notoriety owes to Shafarevich’s old samizdat article Russophobia, which was published in 1988. The scandal surrounding Russophobia came to a head when the president of The National Academy of Sciences in the United States asked Shafarevich, its honorary member, to resign. Nothing like this had ever happened in the academy’s history. The present dissertation discusses Shafarevich’s political activities, his texts and ideas as well as their reception. Particular attention is given to Russophobia, whose detailed examination proves very clearly that its reputation as an anti-Semitic text is groundless. The reasons for Russophobia’s hasty but fierce condemnation were many, but only one was that when the Soviet system began to tumble, it was commonly assumed that a vigorous rise in anti-Semitism and extreme nationalism in the Soviet Union/Russia would be just a matter of time. Many observers were highly sensitised to detecting its signs and symptoms. The dissertation also shows that most of those to write the first criticisms of Russophobia and to liken Shafarevich to the ideologues of Nazi Germany were the same people he had criticised in Russophobia for their deterministic view of history and irrational manner of connecting things for the purpose of fanning the flames of distrust between Russia’s Jews and Russians. In retrospect, it is fairly evident that Shafarevich actually managed to effectively “neutralise” the message of many of those obsessed with the Jews among his Russian contemporaries and contributed to the fact that anti-Jewish sentiments have been a great deal less popular in post-communist Russia than so many had feared and expected. The thesis also thoroughly discusses Shafarevich’s other texts and activities before Russophobia’s appearance and after it. In the 1970s, Shafarevich was one of the best-known dissidents in the Soviet Union. He worked together with academician Andrei Sakharov in a dissidents’ unofficial human rights committee and co-operated closely with Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn before Solzhenitsyn’s exile. Then, during the chaotic years of perestroika, Shafarevich defended the basic rights of ordinary citizens and warned that the hype concerning democracy could become counterproductive if the most palpable result of the reforms was the disappearance of citizens’ basic security and elementary social justice. One of the conclusions of the thesis is that even if the world around Shafarevich has changed considerably, his views have remained essentially the same since the late 1960s and early 1970s.