Critical feminist studies in religion seek to articulate a theoretical analytics not in terms of gender and feminine identity but in socio-political terms. They understand wo/men as socio-political subject-citizens who are producing cultural knowledges and religious discourses in situations of domination and alienation.

In the last decades the Cyropaedia enjoyed a renewed interest, mostly addressed to the controversial character of Cyrus, exemplary leader or susceptible to a dark reading. However the character of Cyrus as a child and adolescent, who appears in Cyr. 1.3-4, has been usually overlooked, especially with regard to the psychological side of his behavior, which instead deserves to be carefully analyzed. Xenophon indeed created a complex, multifaced character: on the one hand a Cyrus as a child, who already shows (...) the exceptional character traits of the adult Cyrus; on the other hand – and this is the innovative aspect – a Cyrus as a child and adolescent who shows attitudes and behavior that today we are able to acknowledge as typical of children and adolescents. It is not difficult for us to grasp these attitudes and behavior, but that Xenophon succeeded in creating a character endowed with them is a really amazing achievement, because he could only rely on his observation skills, probably a kind of empathy and his gifts as a writer: an even more amazing achievement if we keep in mind that Greek literature and more generally Greek culture showed very little interest in the child itself, regarded nearly exclusively as the adult he was destined to become or anyway in its relationships with adults. Cyr. 1.4.3 is a very important passage, in which Xenophon gives a kind of overview of those features of Cyrus as a child that will quickly disappear already in the first phase of adolescence: immediately afterwards indeed in Cyr. 1.4.4 Xenophon summarizes in few lines some significant changes that mark the transition, often so abrupt, to adolescence and that will be described as the narration goes on. It is really noteworthy that very recent studies on some psychological processes (especially concerning mirror neurons) offer an explanation of the attitudes and behavior of Cyrus as a child and adolescent as they were narrated by Xenophon. (shrink)

Because the current crisis of scriptural authority is not simply a crisis of Scriptures but also a crisis of modernity, any understanding of that crisis must look to our present intellectual environment as much as it does to the way Scriptures are viewed.

This paper focuses on Leibniz’s engagement with Thomas Hobbes’s political anthropology in the Mainz-period writings, and demonstrates that Leibniz tried to construct an alternative to the English philosopher by conceiving of a physically- and ontologically-grounded psychology of actions. I provide textual evidence of this attempt, and account for Leibniz’s rejection of Hobbes’s political theory and anthropological assumptions. In doing so, I refer to diverse aspects of Leibniz’s work, thereby highlighting his aspiration to congruity and consistency between different areas of investigation. (...) Furthermore, Leibniz’s political writings and letters will reveal another—sometimes neglected—aspect of the issue: his concern to defend and legitimize the existence of pluralist and collective constitutional political systems like the Holy Roman Empire by providing the theoretical ground of their ability to last. (shrink)

Popper a passé sa licence sous la direction de Bühler en 1928. Affirmer que Popper a été profondément influencé, non seulement par la théorie du langage de Bühler, mais aussi par sa psychologie, ne correspond pas à l’opinion courante. Le deuxième chapitre de Die beiden Grundprobleme der Erkenntis montre clairement que Karl Bühler a représenté l’un des points de départ les plus importants de la théorie de l’esprit de Popper. Selon Popper, dans l’épistémologie de Carnap, il y a un « (...) préjudice inductif » : afin de rétablir une opinion neutre et adopter une épistémologie qui soit indépendante de la psychologie, il est nécessaire de démontrer que, dans la psychologie aussi, le déductivisme est possible et concevable. Popper donne des exemples très clairs de psychologie déductive et cite la théorie de Kant, Johannes Mueller, l’École Wuerzburg et Ernst Mach. Le choix de tels exemples est significatif afin de comprendre la nature de la formation de Popper. En particulier, il est important de souligner l’absence de la « psychologie de la Gestalt » ou de ses penseurs, tels que Wertheimer, Koehler, Koffka, etc. En effet, Bühler s’opposait fortement à la psychologie de la Gestalt de l’École Wertheimer et, entre l’Institut Bühler de Vienne et les psychologues de la Gestalt à Berlin, il y avait une véritable rivalité. Popper — qui est normalement considéré, de façon simpliste, comme étant « un psychologue gestaltiste » — a tout à fait adopté l’idée de Bühler.Popper graduated under Bühler's direction in 1928. It's not part of the common view to say that Popper was strongly influenced, not only by Bühler's theory of language, but also by his psychology. The second chapter of Die beiden Grundprobleme der Erkenntnis shows clearly that one of the fundamental starting points for Popper's theory of mind was Karl Bühler. According to Popper, an “inductive prejudice” is contained in Carnap's epistemology : to restore a neutral point of view and to adopt an epistemology independent of psychology, it is necessary to show that, within the psychology, the deductivism is also possible, or thinkable. Popper provides some clear examples of deductive psychology and cites Kant's outlook, Johannes Mueller, the Wuerzburg's school and Ernst Mach. The choice of such examples is very important for the understanding of the nature of Popper's training. It is significant, in particular, the absence of the Gestaltpsychology or of its exponents, such as Wertheimer, Koehler, Koffka etc. In fact, Bühler was in sharp contrast with the Gestaltpsychology of Wertheimer's school and between the Bühler's Vienna Institute and the Berlin Gestalt -psychologists there was a real rivalry. Popper — who by the standard view is simplistically considered “a gestaltist psychologist” — adopted completely the Bühler's point of view. (shrink)

L’Economico di Senofonte contiene un interessante trattato sulla vita matrimoniale: al centro di questo trattato si colloca la figura della moglie di Iscomaco, così come viene delineata da quanto quest’ultimo narra a Socrate. Una figura in parte innovativa, in quanto viene associata alla gestione dell’oikos come responsabile di quanto si svolge all’interno della casa: un ruolo diverso da quello del marito, che si occupa e dirige ciò che si svolge all’esterno: i compiti di moglie e marito risultano quindi diversi ma (...) complementari. Questa differenza di attitudini e quindi di ruoli è presentata come voluta sia dalla divinità, sia dalla natura sia dalla consuetudine. La moglie di Iscomaco viene quindi a configurarsi come una collaboratrice e una compagna per il marito. Tuttavia questa moglie non intrattiene con il marito una relazione paritaria: infatti gestisce attività e persone all’interno della casa secondo le direttive impartite dal marito; anche nella sfera della vita sessuale deve adeguarsi ai desideri e alle convinzioni di Iscomaco; il suo stesso status di moglie sarà mantenuto soltanto se lei risponderà alle sue aspettative: paradossalmente la sua stessa autonomia è in realtà eterodiretta. Se pure può considerarsi una “maîtresse de la maison”, tuttavia, come ha sottolineato con una formula efficacissima Foucault, si tratta comunque di una “maîtresse obéissante de la maison”. (shrink)

Xenophon’s Oeconomicusincludes an interesting treatise on married life, at the hearth of which is the figure of Ischomachus’ wife, such as she is described by Ischomachus’ words to Socrates. It is an almost innovative figure, because she shares the management of the oikosas being responsible for what is carried out within the oikos: her role is different from her husband’s, who runs and manages what is carried out outside of the oikos. Therefore husband’s and wife’s tasks are different, though complementary. (...) The difference in inclinations and, therefore, roles is shown as established by god, nature and custom. So Ischomachus’ wife is a collaborator and companion of her husband, even though she does not have an equal relation with her him: she manages the activities and people within the oikosaccording to her husband’s directives. Also in the sphere of sexual life she has to conform to his desires and convictions; her own status as a wife will be preserved only if she meets his expectations: paradoxically her own autonomy is other-directed. Even if she may be considered a “maîtresse de la maison”, nevertheless, as Foucault outlined with a very incisive expression, she is anyway the “maîtresse obéissante de la maison”. (shrink)

Responsive to the signs of the Latin American situation, liberation theology suggests new interpretations of the symbols of faith and calls for a radical transformation of man and society.

Jurgen Habermas is by far the most preeminent and influential philosopher in Germany today. The scope of his writings is remarkable. Their influence extends over a wide range of disciplines that include philosophy, social theory, hermeneutics, anthropology, linguistics, ethics, educational theory, and public policy. The impact of Habermas's writings on theology alone reaches from fundamental to political theology, from moral to practical theology. The significance of Habermas, Modernity, and Public Theology is twofold. First, it represents a genuine dialogue, an actual (...) conversation, between Habermas and theologians. While theologians have appealed to Habermas's work in innumerable articles and monographs, he himself until now has remained silent. This book, then, is unique insofar as it offers the true give and take of dialogue. Second, this book focuses on Habermas's most recent work, especially his interpretation of modernity, his theory of communicative action, and his development of a discourse ethics. In so doing, it corrects some of the prevalent misreadings of Habermas within the theological literature devoted to him. In examining the relation between critical theory and a public and practical theology, the contributors note both the promise and limitations of Habermas's basic arguments and insights. They challenge Habermas as much as they learn from him. Sharing the conviction that religious traditions contain sources for interpreting human nature and society, they argue that if Habermas would attend more to the role of religion within life and society, he would more fully realize his project for a communicative rationality under the conditions of modernity and would offer amore comprehensive understanding of rationality, society, and modernity. Taking his own turn at the end of the book, Habermas responds to each of the contributors, comments on the broader theological reception of his work, and offers his own fascinating views on the function and development of religion in modernity and on the status and claim to truth of theological discourse. The work concludes with an extremely useful annotated bibliography covering Habermas's own writings, general introductions to Habermas and to critical theory, and works devoted to specific aspects of Habermas's thought. (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:BOOK REVIEWS Systematic Theology: Roman Catholic Perspectives. Edited by FRANCIS SCHUSSLER FIORENZA and JOHN P. GALVIN. Minneapolis: Fortress, 1991. Vol. 1: Pp. xv+ 336. Vol. 2: Pp. xv+ 384. $21.95 each; $39.95 set. Not too long ago a fellow Dominican who wanted to do some personal updating and retooling in theology asked me to recommend to him some hooks in Catholic systematics which would show him the lay (...) of the land in contemporary theology. I was happy to be able to apprise him of the two volumes under review. Most of the essayists do not explore new territory or establish new beachheads (nor was this their task) hut instead skillfully sketch the revised maps of terra cognita and graciously occupy already conquered lands, sometimes repeating their own creative work published elsewhere. Without doubt the majority of the Catholic theological guild who belong to the College Theology Society or the Catholic Theological Society of America would recognize in the overall thrust and import of these articles a broad harmony with the main themes and general methodology of contemporary Catholic theology, while they would also acknowledge in the articles' various emphases and organizational techniques the legitimate pluralistic expressions of that theology. In e:ffect, the authors offer, in a balanced and evenhanded way, albeit from their own individual perspectives (hence the subtitle), a rich distillation and compact presentation of the state of contemporary Catholic theology as it is probably taught by the majority of professors in North America. The editors see the volumes as opening up the diverse theological perspectives within Roman Catholic systematic theology, hut as the list of authors reveals, these perspectives actually cluster within the moderate center-to-left-of-center spectrum of contemporary Catholic theology : Systematic Theology: Tasks and Methods (Fiorenza); Faith and Revelation (Avery Dulles) ; Approaching the Christian Understanding.of God (David Tracy) ; The Trinitarian Mystery of God (Catherine Mowry LaCugna); Creation (Anne M. Clifford); Jesus Christ (Galvin); Church (Michael A. Fahey); Sin and Grace (Roger Haight); Saints and Mary (Elizabeth A. Johnson) ; Sacraments in General, Baptism and Confirmation, Penance, Anointing of the Sick (Regis A. Duffy); Eucharist, Order (David N. Power); Marriage (Fiorenza); Eschatology (Monika K. Hellwig). The traditional topics in the traditional order reveal that the volumes 305 306 BOOK REVIEWS are meant to serve as a summary and survey of the major courses of· fered within most Master of Arts and Master of Divinity programs. The intended audience is the beginning student, the student who needs to review the major themes of systematic theology, and the student who needs some updating in contemporary theology. In my opinion, the best articles for the intended audience and purpose are those hy Fior· enza (Systematic Theology), Dulles, Galvin, Haight and Johnson. The editors asked the authors to bear in mind five specific goals: to root their work in Roman Catholic theology; to help recover, in Rahner 's words, " the forgotten truths " of Catholicism, by displaying how historical studies have uncovered heretofore neglected traditions; to make use of current hermeneutical theories and philosophical reflections ; to take into account the ecumenical dimension of theology, while also clarifying the distinctive Roman Catholic position on various topics; and to he attentive to the current stress on praxis. In general, whenever their topic required it, the authors have fulfilled these goals. What has resulted is a combined work deeply grounded in historical understanding which is ecumenically broad while also distinctively Roman Catholic. The articles have tended to retrieve Catholicism's forgotten truths from the church's patristic era, since the dominant tradition until Vatican II was the one defined by the high Middle Ages and Trent. Indicative of this trend is the fact that, among the brief annotated bibliographies appended to each essay, only those by Dulles and Haight contain a work by Thomas Aquinas-and in Dulles's opinion the treatment of faith in the Summa theologiae is " stilil the most authoritative and incisive Catholic treatise on faith" (I :128). Never· theless, the authors are fair in giving medieval theology its rightful place within the Catholic tradition. Instead of offering even the briefest summary of the seventeen individual essays, since the aui:hors' basic introductory treatment of their topics... (shrink)

RESUMENEste artículo se acerca al papel público que las religiones desempeñan en las democracias. Para ello es necesario que cultiven un doble afán. El primero, que mira hacia el exterior y sitúa a la religión católica entre el resto de esferas que definen nuestras sociedades plurales. El artículo cuestiona la tarea ética que puede ejercer esta tradición religiosa y que ha de reforzar el marco democrático en el que todas estas esferas se incluyen. El segundo, que mira hacia el interior (...) de esta religión y ocupa la mayor parte de este artículo, gira en torno a la teología feminista desarrollada por Elisabeth Schüssler Fiorenza. Su sentido crítico está transformando la identidad de los y las creyentes, los horizontes comprensivos religiosos y puede ayudar así a reforzar el papel de las democracias.PALABRAS CLAVERELIGIÓN, ESPACIO PÚBLICO, DELIBERACIÓN, HERMENÉUTICA CRÍTICA Y TEOLOGÍA FEMINISTA CRÍTICA.ABSTRACTThis article approaches the public part religions play in democracies. On the one hand, the Catholic religion has to be set amidst the rest of the spheres, which define our plural societies. In this first part, we will try to evaluate how the Catholic religion helps reinforcing the democratic frame in which it evolves. On the other hand, the largest part of this article will be devoted to the Catholic feminist theology developed by Elisabeth Schüssler Fiorenza not only as a means of changing the identity of believers and their understanding religious horizons, but also as a way of strengthening the role of democracies.KEYWORDSRELIGION, PUBLIC SPHERE, DELIBERATION, CRITICAL HERMENEUTICS AND CRITICAL FEMINIST THEOLOGY. (shrink)