查詢結果分析
來源資料
相關文獻
- 宗教經典教育的「反思性實踐」--一個後傳統的宗教社會學觀點
- Broadening the Concepts of Moore's Transactional Distance Theory in the Light of Relevant Adult Education Theories and the New Telecommunications Technologies
- Beyond Abstract Objectivism and Individual Subjectivism: Bakhtin's Theories of the Novel in The Dialogic Imagination
- 布魯斯.艾克曼社會正義之研究
- 聯合國氣候變化綱要公約第23次締約方大會紀實與檢討
- 數位科技對工作世界的挑戰:以法國對於工時規範之討論為例
- 新創事業營運成本之管控--從加班費之給付談起
- Osmotic Demyelination Syndrome with Two-Phase Movement Disorders: Case Report
- Repeated Lumbar Sympathetic Blockade for Complex Regional Pain Syndromes Type Ⅰ--A Case Report
- 年老父母居住安排的心理學研究:孝道觀點的探討
頁籤選單縮合
題 名 | 宗教經典教育的「反思性實踐」--一個後傳統的宗教社會學觀點=The "Reflexive Practices" in the Education of the Religious Canon: A Post-Traditional Perspective Based on Sociology of Religion |
---|---|
作 者 | 鄒川雄; | 書刊名 | 世界宗教學刊 |
卷 期 | 2 2003.11[民92.11] |
頁 次 | 頁33-61 |
分類號 | 203 |
關鍵詞 | 後傳統社會; 反思性實踐; 自主; 占有的個人主義; 經驗的存封; 對話; Post-traditional society; Reflexive practices; Autonomy; Possessive individualism; The sequestration of experience; Dialogue; |
語 文 | 中文(Chinese) |
中文摘要 | 本文從宗教社會學的觀點來探究當代宗教經典教育的實踐課題。現今社會是一個傳統已然瓦解的後傳統社會,也是一個已分化的高度複雜社會。本文關注的焦點為:在這樣一個具備高度反思性的社會中,蓋上傳統印記的宗教經典教育,如何以反思性實踐的精神而存續,並在後傳統社會之發揮積極作用。作者首先指出,與傳統社會不同,在高度分化的反思社會中,宗教已喪失對其他社會領域的支配法權,宗教生活不僅日益往個體化與世俗化方向發展,而且宗教自身也面臨分化的趨勢,但這對宗教自身的發展並非壞事,因為宗教也獲致了自主權; 其次,作者以「佔有的個人主義」、「生活世界的殖民化」、「經驗的封存」與「風險社會」等當代社會理論所提供的四個視角,來描繪現代人的基本處境;第三,作者透過三個歷史階段的知識與宗教形式,來探究後屆交蒙時代語境下的宗教經典詮釋的模式,並以 Lindbeck 及 Hick 的宗教理論為佐證;最後,以四種不同的反忠實踐的方式歷史的、對話的、批判的與生命的來建構後傳統的宗教經典教育的可能形式。 |
英文摘要 | This article studies the practice subject of the modern religious canon education from a sociological perspective of religion. The author considers our modern society is not only a post traditional society but also a differentiated and highly complex society. Therefore, the focus of this article is that: in a society with high reflexivity, how can it possible for the education of religious canon (having a traditional marking) to persist continually, and actively exert its function and impact in a post traditional society, through the spirit of "reflexive practices"? There are four arguments of this analysis: First, the author analyzes that, in our modern time, religion field had already lost its legitimately dominant power over other fields of the society, which is very different from the situation in traditional society. Besides, the religious life has become more individualized and secularized, and also more differentiated in itself. However, this kind of development is not a bad thing for the religion, because religion itself has achieved its autonomy in the same time; Secondly, the author uses four perspectives from contemporary sociology theory (including: possessive individualism, colonization of the life world, the sequestration of experience, and risk society) to delineate the basic existential situation for a person in the modern society; Thirdly, the author inquires the patterns of interpretation for the religion canon in the Post-Enlightment era, through an analysis of three historical stages of "the forms of knowledge and religion", with the religion theory from Lindbeck and Hick; Finally, the author tries to reconstruct a possible post traditional education form for the religious canon, through four different dimensions of "reflexive practices", including the dimensions of history, dialogue, critique, and life. |
本系統中英文摘要資訊取自各篇刊載內容。