The Religious Phenomenon comprehended from the opening to transcendence: posibility or limit? A critical look from Charles Taylor’s thought

Authors

  • Ignacio Sepúlveda del Río Universidad Loyola Andalucia

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.14422/pen.v72.i271.y2016.006

Keywords:

religion, transcendence, critics to religion, critics to transcendence, Charles Taylor

Abstract

There are different ways to understand and to define religion. The Canadian philosopher Charles Taylor —who has been working the religious phenomenon during the last years— has tried to define religion through transcendence. This definition is not exempt of difficulties and critics: one of them focuses on the idea that religion proposes too high human ideals such as asceticism, mortification or the renounce to the ordinary objectives of human life. The second critic focuses on the idea that religion is not able to assume and recognize violence and conflict as a very important aspect in human kind. Thus, religion tends to expurgate it from reality. This article will give an overview of these critics and which can be the main ways to answer them.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

ABBEY, R. (2010). A Secular Age: The Missing Question Mark. En: Leask, I., Cassidy, E., et allii (eds.). (2010). The Taylor Effect: Responding to a Secular Age. Cambridge: Cambridge Scholars Publishing, pp. 8-25.

BELLAH, R. (2011). Religion in Human Evolution. From the Paleolithic to the Axial Age. Cambridge, Massachusetts, London, England: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.

BROWN. P. (1993). El Cuerpo y la Sociedad. Los hombres, las mujeres y la renuncia sexual en el cristianismo primitivo. Barcelona: Muchnik Editores, S.A.

BRUGGER, W. (1978). Diccionario de Filosofia. Barcelona: Editorial Herder.

CASANOVA , J. (2012). Genealogías de la Secularización. Barcelona: Anthropos.

Código de Derecho Canónico (CIC). (1983). Madrid: Biblioteca de Autores Cristianos (BAC).

Concilio Vaticano II. Constitución Pastoral Gaudium et Spes sobre la Iglesia en el mundo actual. En: http://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_const_19651207_gaudium-et-spes_sp.html Accedido el 25 de junio de 2015.

CONILL, J. (1991). El Enigma del Animal Fantástico. Madrid: Tecnos.

LULING HAUGHTON, R. (1999). «Transcendence and the Bewilderment of Being Modern». En: A Catholic Modernity? Charles Taylor”s Marianist Award Lecture, with responses by William M. Shea, ed. James L. Herft. New York, Oxford: Oxford University Press.

MICKLETHEWAIT, J. and WOOLDRIDGE, A. (2009). God is Back. How the Global Rise of Faith is Changing the World. London: Allen Lane.

NIETZCHE, F. (2007). Más allá del bien y el mal. Preludio de una filosofía del futuro. Madrid: Alianza Editorial.

NUSSBAUM, M. (1986). The Fragility of Goodness. Luck and ethics in Greek tragedy and philosophy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

NUSSBAUM, M. (1992). Love”s Knowledge. Essays on Philosophy and Literature. New York —Oxford: Oxford University Press.

RAHNER, K. (1978). Curso Fundamental Sobre la Fe: Introducción al concepto de cristianismo. Barcelona: Herder.

SMITH, J. (1987). «Afterlife: an overview». En: Lindsay & Jones (ed.) (2005). Encyclopedia of Religion, Vol. I. London – New York: Thomson – Gale, 128-135.

TAYLOR, Ch. (1988). Critical Notice of Martha C. Nussbaum, «The Fragility of Goodness: Luck and Ethics in Greek Tragedy and Philosophy» (Book Review). Canadian Journal of Philosophy, 18, (4), pp. 805-815.

TAYLOR, Ch. (1999). A Catholic Modernity. Charles Taylor”s Marianist Award Lecture with responses by William M. Shea. Ed. James L. Herft. New York, Oxford: Oxford University Press.

TAYLOR, Ch. (2006). Fuentes del Yo: La construcción de la sociedad moderna. Barcelona: Paidós.

TAYLOR, Ch. (2007). A Secular Age. Cambridge: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.

How to Cite

Sepúlveda del Río, I. (2016). The Religious Phenomenon comprehended from the opening to transcendence: posibility or limit? A critical look from Charles Taylor’s thought. Pensamiento. Revista De Investigación E Información Filosófica, 72(271), 335–353. https://doi.org/10.14422/pen.v72.i271.y2016.006

Issue

Section

Estudios, textos, notas y comentarios