지원사업
학술연구/단체지원/교육 등 연구자 활동을 지속하도록 DBpia가 지원하고 있어요.
커뮤니티
연구자들이 자신의 연구와 전문성을 널리 알리고, 새로운 협력의 기회를 만들 수 있는 네트워킹 공간이에요.
이용수
초록· 키워드
오류제보하기
Habermas` basic interest is a search for the historical totality as the objective connection grasped by dialectic. But, for Pannenberg, this historical totality is no more than a myth of totalitarian reason, because it is the metaphysical principle which must be realized through historical process. In Pannenberg`s view, totality is constructed not through the concept of action but through the experience of meaning. Pannenberg grasps dialectic in the strict point of view. However, it needs apprehending within the interpretive point of view, if we take Habermas` postmodern intention which tries to build a base of critique in the nonfoundational way. Both Habermas and Pannenberg try to acquire totality. However, for latter, any attempt that goes beyond the experience of meaning to reach totality is not appropriate. Habermas, who introduces a concept of self-reflection as a critique of ideology into his critical theory, holds that we cannot free ourselves from ideology only within the hermeneutic experience of meaning. But Pannenberg investigates the possibility of totality in the structure of the experience of meaning supplemented by the eschatological anticipation. But, Pannenberg`s eschatological anticipation does not seem to overcome Hegel`s self-identical teleology. According to Pannenberg, revelation is open to everyone, because it is disclosed indirectly through historical process. We do not have to own faith to grasp God`s revelation. In this point, he seems to get rid of a place of the Holy Spirit in his theology of history. Therefore, his from-below theology should be mediated with the from-above theology such as Barth`s. Pannenberg understands the apocalyptical eschatology within a hermeneutical point of view. But, primarily, it should be grasped within a social-revolutionary point of view.
목차
등록된 정보가 없습니다.
참고문헌 (44)
참고문헌 신청
이 논문의 저자 정보
이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0