| 词条 | Charles Winquist |
| 释义 |
|name = Charles E. Winquist |image = Charles_E._Winquist.jpg |birth_date = {{birth date|1944|6|11|mf=y}} |birth_place = Toledo, Ohio, U.S. |death_date = {{death date and age|2002|4|4|1944|6|11|mf=y}} |death_place = Syracuse, New York, U.S. |nationality = American | title = Thomas J. Watson Professor of Religion, Syracuse University |known_for = contributions in philosophy, theology and religion (e.g., modern and postmodern religion). |influences = Friedrich Nietzsche, Jacques Derrida, Paul Tillich, Evangelos Christou, Robert W. Funk, Paul Ricoeur, Carl Jung, Sigmund Freud, James Hillman || workplaces = Syracuse University California State University, Chico Union College, Barbourville YMCA Community College, Chicago | education = University of Toledo University of Chicago | main_interests = Associate Editor, Journal of the American Academy of Religion (1983 – 2002); Sub-network Editor, Religious Studies Review (1980 - 2002); Member, Board of Trustees, Scholars Press (1978 – 1985); Executive Director, American Academy of Religion (1978 - 1982). || footnotes = Exceptional Merit Service Award, California State University, Chico (1983); Professional Achievement Award, California State University, Chico (1982 - 1986); Outstanding Professor, California State University, Chico (1985).[1] [2] [3] }}Charles Winquist (June 11, 1944 – April 4, 2002) was the Thomas J. Watson Professor of Religion at Syracuse University, and is known for his writings on theology, contemporary continental philosophy and postmodern religion.[4] Before he assumed his position at Syracuse University, he taught religious studies at California State University, Chico, from 1969 to 1986.[5] EducationWinquist received his B.A. in philosophy from the University of Toledo (1965), his M.A. in theology from the University of Chicago (1968), and his Ph.D. in philosophical theology from the University of Chicago (1970).[6] Philosophical and theological workWinquist's work is tactical as well as theoretical, showing what kind of work theology can do in contemporary society. He suggests that theology is closely akin to what Gilles Deleuze and Félix Guattari refer to as a minor intensive use of a major language. The minor intensive theological use of language, Winquist argues, pressures the ordinary weave of discourse and opens it to desire. Thus theology becomes a work against "the disappointment of thinking." [7] Because contemporary religious thinking is often mired in disputes over the exact meaning of religion and theology there is a problem. Serious groups generate ideas periodically that despite their best efforts create conflicting interpretations that diminish, rather than improve the philosophical, dialectic and social scientific foundations of theology. These communities are not isolated groups of the privileged few, but rather people across the world who experience their lives as meaningful and important. A minor intensive theological literature is not what Winquist calls "Sunday-school theology," but rather an effort to weave together daily discussions between the spaces in communication. Communication makes everyday life divine, Wiquist argues (citing Huston Smith). Smith called it divine ordinariness, which came from his understanding of Zen Buddhism. Theology acts on the everyday existence of the overriding secular discourse in communities.[7] [8] Subversion and transcendenceAppeals to the world's mythological traditions and religious customs as a way to reach people throughout communities worldwide is not problematic because of the traditions themselves, but rather through secular dominance that has overridden traditions, limiting their value in daily life.[7] To think about God, even if there is no name for God spoken or written, is an act of transcendence. Thinking symbolically is a form of consciousness that goes far beyond the individual. It is a contemplation of past and future; a reflection of the world within and beyond. Thinking and communicating with abstract symbols is the foundation of all creativity, including language, writing, and mathematics.[9] Winquist noted that in his third Meditation, René Descartes wrote that God transcended "subjective dominance." The very thought of God's attributes creates doubt about the innate ability of human nature to comprehend the existence of God. But thinking formulaically about God takes people beyond themselves. Traces of the divine, or even another human being, identify a discourse of thinking that remains a part of the person. Thinking transcends itself and disrupts its own "recording surface." [10] There is no escape from individual perceptual limitations, which Winquist called a "knot,"[7] but phenomenology is humiliated by consciousness, which peaks when encircled by meaningful nuances that transcend the control of consciousness itself.[14] Edmund Husserl's "phenomenological reduction," a sort of bracketing that allows for the suspension of an object or content of a thought, judgment, or perception, called noema (as well as eidetic reduction), is a helpful key. Maurice Merleau-Ponty also weighed in on bracketing, although primarily because he rejected Husserl's ideas. It is debated whether or not he rejected "reductionism",[11] but it's worth noting that Merleau-Ponty's opposition to Husserl sparked his phenomenology of perception. [12] Merleau-Ponty wrote the most important thing the reduction, and Husserl's constant re-examination of its possibility, was its impossibility. Husserl himself said, according to Merleau-Ponty, that the effort made the philosopher a perpetual beginner who should never take anything for granted, that philosophy "is an ever-renewed experiment in making its own beginning, that it consists wholly in the description of this beginning...." [13]Working from the middleWinquist argued that concerns about beginnings and endings were "fictive productions of heuristic strategies," stating that people were still in the middle, and should not resist being there.[18] When people put themselves (or find themselves), in another person's experience and empathize with, or "simulate" his or her perspective in their personal, surrounding world, it coincides with theirs, even though other factors under which "the other" represents their world must be different. It is known that objects in the world exist independently, despite the "knot" of perceptual subjectivity and particular experiences. Scientists and others are dubious, if even mindful, of the human need for transcendence and God, and posit true knowledge can only come from objectivity. Husserl researched the problem, and gradually adopted a more creative approach, transcendental idealism.[14] The astronomical numbers of unperceived and unexpected features become evident, "intuitively presented," only by further observation.[15] But the focus is not about "being," but about being the questioner. Every structure in a questioner's desire for knowledge mediates meaning; even the sciences factor into "dharma," principles that order understanding. The act of "being the question of being" transcends self-contained content and finds expression in conscious questioning, a process that returns the questioner to look to the foundations of knowing and experience.[14][16] These observations are done from the middle.[18] Acceptance of experience demands interpretation. Experience is often camouflaged, and the significance of our beginning in the middle is not easily accessed. Seeing through the manifest content of experience (see content (Freudian dream analysis)) reveals its hidden voices. This unmasking has been traditionally taught by Jesus, Muhammad, Buddha, Profits from traditions across the globe, and, Winquist argued, psychoanalytic interpretation. The mask of piety that covers deliberate, hurtful acts, for example, simplifies reality and contributes to a “simplicity of denial.” We cannot “dream a story forward” if the story being told is not recognized for what it is.[17] Thus, metaphysical categories (the first principles of things, including abstract concepts such as being, knowing, substance, cause, identity, time and space) are not the essence of meaning. Experience is not reduced to these categories; they are exemplified and enlarged by experiencing the world and its traditions that connect us all.[18] Consciousness takes an object — the other in all its forms — and the act of focused purpose cannot be detached from the renewed or, arguably, revived understanding of the perceiving subject.[19][18] The focus on the "complexity of the middle" centers experience even in the presence of ambiguity and confusion. The human condition is situated between the "semantics" of desire and the "verbum of the hierophanies," the expression of the sacred. People are not "given" to an object. The object remains a mystery, and people are aware of this even in the most ordinary experience. Winquist calls this calm of the unknown a "dark time," or taboo. This is the juncture of understanding that allows one to enter a "range of meaning" that is already a part of who we are. The middle allows an avenue of heightened awareness, even though one remains centered. Many modalities of thought can access the middle, and there is more than one way to turn our thoughts to look upon the process itself. [20] Weak theologyWinquist was an early proponent of weak theology, which emphasizes the responsibility of humans to act in this world here and now — a controversial concept that has created a rift between traditionalists[21] and deconstructionists[22] — and was deeply engaged in the works of Friedrich Nietzsche, Jacques Derrida, Paul Tillich, and Mark C. Taylor, among others. Winquist argues in Desiring Theology, for example, that Derrida's deconstructive criticism is not "wild analysis," but the very careful reading of texts. Jacques Derrida (1930-2004) was the founder of "deconstruction," a way of criticizing not only literary and philosophical texts, but also political institutions. Derrida rejected Platonism, which is defined by the belief that existence is structured in terms of oppositions (separate substances or forms) and that the oppositions are hierarchical, with one side of the opposition being more valuable than the other. Deconstruction attacks such beliefs by reversing hierarchies between the invisible or intelligible, the visible or sensible, essence and appearance and voice and writing. Derrida even rejects hierarchies between the soul and the body, or good and evil.[23] This is why deconstruction is often confusing: it explores what is hidden, not only in written texts, but in ordinary daily language and life. Because people borrow language, it has meanings beyond individuals and cultures. It has a semantic life of its own, and its content can never be fixed. Sounds and syntax come into people's minds uninvited, with one word leading to still more words.[24] Understanding this is a reflection that replaces the source of the reflection — the individual — and opens up meaning beyond self. In Derrida's Glas (book) and others he has written, The Truth in Painting[25] for example (and creative works in general) Winquist argued, return us to the other and the beyond of multiple expressions in the human need for an absolute savior ("the savior absolu").[18] {{quote box| align = right | width = 22em | quote =I will suggest that to seek depth today is to desire a complex association of meanings that are weighted with a sense of being real and important. This is a desire to know an “other” in and of language that can be valued in the forming of personal and communal identity | salign = right | source = —Charles E. Winquist Desiring Theology. }} DeconstructionDeconstruction explores what is "known and immediate," but not readily available, or even understood. A simple word or phrase, for example, spoken between two people, can have multiple meanings. The idea is that different communication styles ("languages") will have the same words, but the way they are used will have different meanings.[26][7] Winquist argues that the inability to access this "hidden text" does not invalidate the experience, or the other viewpoint. This is the significance of the exchange, par excellence, which Winquist calls a "critique." It reveals alternative explorations by shaking up and dislodging "sedimentation," ridged interpretations in the surface content. Simply, in theology, as in life, the problem is not that God is missing, or the feelings and experiences of another, but that the "shadows" opening up in deconstructive work, just as the reality of the other in his or her experience, are already there.[27] Winquist said that while the focus of deconstruction work is about the text, the text itself is not the aggregate of all understanding. Thus all thoughts are based on an external point of reference; deconstruction is deeply concerned with the "other" of language, and people are imprisoned if they are not actively deconstructing.[7][28] Deconstruction is not concerned with digging or looking behind the curtain, but seeing "otherness" itself, traces of alterity that validate existence. Dissatisfaction in modern-day theology comes from explorations that miss the depths in the wide-ranging scope of understandings already established. Skipping across the surface obscures and denigrates the qualitative nature of experiences hidden within, becoming rote and unavailable to daily concerns. Winquist calls this a "literalized, hermeneutical gap," spaces between the past and present, insights that human collaboration keep hidden. Self-satisfaction is partly to blame: It renders renewed meanings mute. But shadows revealed in deconstructive work are as real as what is readily available on the surface. This "knowledge gap," once revealed, renews understanding, and can never be exhausted by continued exploration.[7] Symbols and archetypesPhilosophies that limit the human spirit, or knowledge derived from sense-experience (stimulated by the rise of experimental science), have forced upon humanity a hermeneutics of suspicion against traditional values.[27][29] New understandings contort traditions in search of renewed interpretations. The chaotic, "sparkling new" discovered in the shadowy contrasts between the literal and the "other" leads to a renewed theory of knowledge more detailed and whole. Winquist argued this should — and must — be delineated through images, much like a gestalt, where the whole is more than the sum of its parts, and often metaphorical.[27] Winquist's writings on archetypes clarify his views: Archetypal patterns should be viewed as connected procedures between actual feelings and forms of possibility that have evolved through the collective history of culture. Thus, archetypes are not identifiable with the realm of formal possibilities but are the residue of decisions that make patterns available for the integration of formal possibilities with actual feelings. To feel possibilities is to feel their embodiment in actual relationships. The discernment of an archetypal situation is a consciousness of a relational pattern that is present within the ecology of experience passed through the collective history that contrasts with the immediate pattern of individual decision or with a prevailing cultural pattern.[30] Expression of the sacredArchetypal patterns are not just words and stories, but living truths and psychological realities that build upon human connections — "soul," according to Carl Jung — and use symbolic language.[31] The life of the other, Winquist argued, functions symbolically and it is in the encounter with this life that generates the contrasts at the foundations of new consciousness.[30] Paul Ricoeur, an influential philosopher in Winquist's work, said the creation of new meanings, in connection with the advent of a new manner of questioning, places language and life in a state of "semantic" deficiency; lexicalized metaphor (adding words, set phrases, or word patterns to add depth of meaning) must intervene to compensate for this lack and may even require a trope,[32] which supplements words lacking in language for certain ideas. In short, catachresis is called for; moreover, it can be metonymy or synecdoche as easily as metaphor.[33] Thus, Ricoeur saw a universe of discourse kept in motion by an interplay of attractions and repulsions that ceaselessly promote the interaction and intersection of domains, domains off-centered in relation to one another; domains (subversions and transcendences) that never come to rest in an absolute knowledge that eliminates the tension.[33] Life itself is a part of this process, but nothing superior in creation revealed to humankind. Yahweh, the Lord, Allah, Buddha is subject to the "controlling rules" of verification contemporary society demands ad nauseam. Theology, from the secular perspective is made to look naive, if not outright foolish and stupid. The future of theology is not defined exclusively by the text being read and studied. It is unveiled by showing the possibilities in what Winquist called humanity's "existential elements," which belong to life and the sacred connections revealed in the depths of human limitations.[34][20] Renewal is found in balance with the structures of creation, the very source of human existence.[34] Those who first appeared to stand against God in solidarity with humanistic liberation seemed to have been culpable in the meaning of God as His or Her own condition when unified with the structures of being people encounter in every meeting with reality.[7] Both the self and God are eclipsed with the deconstruction of the "ontotheological tradition," which, according to Tillich, is an analysis of those structures of being encountered in reality. Thus, to have selfhood is to have God; to have God is to have history.[7][35] In trying to understand the factual comprehensibility of space and time, classical notions must be abandoned by enabling each person to discover and learn for herself or himself. It is clearly shown by Einstein’s theory of relativity that a plethora of referential frames exist; that if one seeks to understand similarities and differences between how an idea is understood in "ordinary" usage, and how it is understood when used as a conceptual metaphor, new equations are needed. Simply, humanity cannot return endlessly to an exclusively classical understanding of the world when concrete observations have limitations.[16] Science bears this out — with a caveat. Pierre-Simon de Laplace, a mathematician who believed "an intelligence" could predetermine reality at any given moment, was usurped not only by Einstein, but Heisenberg as well, whose uncertainty principle discredited the idea of an intelligence.[36] Still, the idea that creation is ruled by chance seems less and less likely in this view. Wave functions (wave particle duality), which power computers, have resisted being precisely located with fixed certainty, and yet can still be measured over time by precise mathematical rules.[36] "Quantum determinism" seems to have confirmed anew Laplace's Newtonian ideas.[36] While awareness within oneself may not exist beyond a "picturing consciousness," or beyond the self, it returns to have within itself all contingencies, or "moments." Thus substance becomes subject, and the abstract and lifelessness disappears. The "actual," or simple and universal, manifests itself.[37] The task for theology is to bring awareness to the dimensions of the ultimate," which needs to be opened to every generation. The continuity between the modern situation and the initial revelatory event should be grounded in harmony with the realities of life, under a single horizon that opens to, and enhances, the event — or as Winquist called it: the "becoming of the occasion."[34] Winquist posited that illuminating, or satisfying, the becoming of the occasion was a kind of prehension to finding a structured order: an interaction of subject with event, or entity (the other), that concerned perception, but not always reliable cognition.[16][38] This concept, presented in Winquist’s theological work, and actually grounded in empirical studies, suggested emotional states heighten memory retention.[16][39] Thus, that which integrates physical reality with conceptuality is founded in the "transcendental imagination," a connection that shields, yet binds humanity to reality. People's emotionality coheres to the structures they encounter in life.[16] Winquist argued there is a life history of striving beyond the passage of actualities for which emotions and objective understanding (the conceptions of the transcendental imagination), subjective goals, and the primordial nature of God, bring interpretive, foundational understanding.[16] Positions heldWinquist was professionally active at the national level. He held several offices in the American Academy of Religion, including the office of executive director (see information box). Bibliography
Articles
See also
References1. ^Faculty File Photo (1986) California State University, Chico, Meriam Library Special Collections (from collection UAC 005, 2017-025). {{DEFAULTSORT:Winquist, Charles}}2. ^(2002, April 29) "Memorial service for professor winquist will be held may 4," Syracuse Record, p. 3 (Syracuse University Libraries Special Collections University Archives, November 28, 2017). 3. ^Curriculum Vitae (Syracuse University Libraries Special Collections Research Center University Archives, November 28, 2017). 4. ^(2002, April 29) "Memorial service for professor winquist will be held may 4," Syracuse Record, p. 3 (Syracuse University Libraries Special Collections University Archives, November 28, 2017). 5. ^(2002, April 11) "Charles Winquist." The Post-Standard (Syracuse University Libraries Special Collections University Archives, November 28, 2017). 6. ^Curriculum Vitae (Syracuse University Libraries: Special Collections Research Center University Archives, November 28, 2017) p. 1. 7. ^1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 "Desiring Theology" (Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press, 1995). 8. ^"The World's Religions" (San Francisco: Harper and Row, 1991). 9. ^{{cite news|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2002/02/26/science/when-humans-became-human.html |title=When Humans Became Human|last=Wilford|first=John Nobles |date=26 February 2002|work=The New York Times}} 10. ^Winquist, Charles. (1994). "Theology: Unsettled and Unsettling," Journal of the American Academy of Religion, LXII/4. 11. ^{{cite news|url=https://www.escholar.manchester.ac.uk/api/datastream?publicationPid=uk-ac-man-scw:1b4393&datastreamId=PRE-PEER-REVIEW.PDF |title=Merleau-Ponty and the Phenomenological Reduction |last=Smith|first=Joel|date=2005 |work=Inquiry }} 12. ^{{cite news|url=https://www.sup.org/books/title/?id=4967 |title=Desire and Distance |last=Barbards|first=Renaud |date=2006|work=Stanford University Press}} 13. ^{{cite book|url=http://alfa-omnia.com/resources/Phenomenology+of+Perception.pdf |date=2002 |title=Phenomenology of Perception |last=Merleau-Ponty |first=Maurice |work=London and New York, pp. xv - xvi: Routledge |isbn=0203994612 }} 14. ^Dupré, Louis (1968). "Husserl's Thought on God and Faith," Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, Vol. 29, No. 2, pp. 201-215. 15. ^{{cite news|url=https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/husserl/ |title=Edmund Husserl|work=Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy}} 16. ^1 2 3 4 5 The Transcendental Imagination: An Essay in Philosophical Theology, Winquist, Charles (1972). The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff. 17. ^Winquist, Charles E (1980). Practical Hermeneutics, A Revised Agenda for the Ministry. Chico, California: Scholars Press, pp. 88-90. 18. ^1 2 3 Homecoming: Interpretation, Transformation and Individuation Winquist, Charles (Missoula, MT. Scholars Press, 1978). 19. ^The Logos of the Soul, Christou, Evangelos (Vienna: Dunquin Press, 1963). 20. ^1 "The Subversion and Transcendence of the Subject,” (1980). Journal of the American Academy of Religion, LXVIII/1, 45-60. 21. ^{{cite web|url= https://www.gci.org/god/strong|title= Grace Communion International}} 22. ^{{cite web|url= https://www.westarinstitute.org/projects/seminar-god-human-future/spring-2015-report-on-weak-theology/ |title= Westar Institute}} 23. ^{{cite web|url=https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/derrida/#Dec |title=Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy}} 24. ^{{cite news|url=https://www.nytimes.com/1987/09/13/books/the-book-is-dead-long-live-the-book.html |title=The Book is Dead, Long Live the Book!|last=Sturrock|first=John|date=13 September 1987|work=The New York Times}} 25. ^{{cite news|url=http://arthistoryunstuffed.com/jacques-derrida-deconstruction/ |title= Jacques Derrida and Deconstruction |last= Willette |first=Jeanne |work=Art History Unstuffed}} 26. ^Men Are From Mars, Women Are From Venus, Gray, John (New York: HarperCollins, 1992). 27. ^1 2 "Epiphanies of Darkness: Deconstruction in Theology" (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1986). 28. ^{{cite news|url=http://people.tamu.edu/~sdaniel/derrida.htm |title= Dialogues with Contemporary Continental Thinkers |last=Sturrock |first=Richard |work=Manchester University Press, pp. 120 – 126.}} 29. ^{{cite web|url= https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/nietzsche/ |title= Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy}} 30. ^1 {{cite web|url= https://academic.oup.com/DocumentLibrary/Pages/access_purchase_rights_and_permissions/new-permissions-guidelines-update.pdf |via=Fair use in accordance with American Academy of Religion guidelines |work=Studies in Religion 18 |title=Homecoming: Interpretation, Transformation and Individuation |location=Missoula MT |publisher=Scholars Press |year=1978 |last=Winquist |first=Charles}} 31. ^{{cite encyclopedia |title= Jung's Approach |encyclopedia=The Oxford Companion to the Bible |year=1993 |publisher=Oxford University Press |location=New York and Oxford}} 32. ^{{cite web|url= https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/tropes/ |title= Standford Encyclopedia of Philosophy |language= the existence of "tropes" the world is seen as consisting of ontologically unstructured abstract particulars}} 33. ^1 The Rule of Metaphor trans. Robert Czerny with Kathleen McLaughlin and John Costello (Toronto and Buffalo: University of Toronto Press, 1977). 34. ^1 2 3 4 5 The Surface of the Deep, Winquist, Charles (Colorado: The Davies Group, 2003). 35. ^{{cite book |last1=Niebuhr |first1=Richard H. |title=The Meaning of Revelation |date=1967 |publisher=New York: Macmillam}} 36. ^1 2 {{cite book |last1=Greene |first1=Brian |title=The Elegant Universe |date=2003 |publisher=New York & London: W. W. Norton & Company}} 37. ^{{cite book |last1=Hegel |first1=G. W. F. |title=Phenomenology of Spirit |date=1977 |publisher=Oxford University Press}} 38. ^{{cite book |last1=Whitehead |first1=Alfred North |title=Process and Reality |date=1929 |publisher=London: Cambridge University Press}} 39. ^{{cite book |last1=Jensen |first1=Eric |title=Teaching with the Brain in Mind |date=2005 |publisher=Alexandria, Va: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development}} 4 : 1944 births|2002 deaths|Postmodernists|American theologians |
| 随便看 |
|
开放百科全书收录14589846条英语、德语、日语等多语种百科知识，基本涵盖了大多数领域的百科知识，是一部内容自由、开放的电子版国际百科全书。