International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 69 (1):29-43 (2011)
AbstractThis paper critically evaluates the work of Charles Taylor and Alasdair MacIntyre by comparing their understanding of the narrative structure of selfhood with paradigms derived from three other sources: Heidegger’s conception of human being as Dasein; Rowan Williams’ interpretation of Dostoevsky’s theology of narrative; and Kierkegaard’s project of reading the Old Testament narrative of Abraham and Isaac as part of the Christian God’s autobiography. These comparisons suggest that Taylor and MacIntyre’s own narratives of Western culture lack a certain, theologically required openness to a variety of specific ways in which both individuality and history resist understanding in narrative terms as much as they demand it
Similar books and articles
Reading for Good: Narrative Theology and Ethics in the Joseph Story From the Perspective of Ricoeur's Hermeneutics.Theo L. Hettema - 1996 - Kok Pharos.
Reading the Bible: Intention, Text, Interpretation.Robert D. Lane (ed.) - 1994 - University Press of America.
Charles Taylor and Paul Ricoeur on Self-Interpretations and Narrative Identity.Arto Laitinen - 2002 - In Rauno Huttunen, Hannu Heikkinen & Leena Syrjälä (eds.), Narrative Research. Voices of Teachers and Philosophers. SoPhi. pp. 57-71.
The Mess Inside: Narrative, Emotion, and the Mind.Peter Goldie - 2012 - Oxford University Press.
Narrative, Morality and Religion.J. Wesley Robbins - 1980 - Journal of Religious Ethics 8 (1):161 - 176.
Pole Position : Space, Narrative, and Religion.Anders Lisdorf - 2010 - In Armin W. Geertz & Jeppe Sinding Jensen (eds.), Religious Narrative, Cognition, and Culture: Image and Word in the Mind of Narrative. Equinox.
Added to PP
Historical graph of downloads
Citations of this work
Learning From MacIntyre About Learning: Finding Room for a Second‐Person Perspective?Joseph Dunne - 2020 - Journal of Philosophy of Education 54 (5):1147-1166.
References found in this work
Philosophical Investigations.Ludwig Wittgenstein & G. E. M. Anscombe - 1953 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 4 (15):258-260.