mysophobia 潔癖

Nastiness Diagnosis. Anthropology. Religion. Gender. Justice. A Personal Notepad For the General Public.

On the Immanent Frame with Charles Taylor


『內在架構』對查理斯泰勒而言代表的是一種世俗化後的宇宙觀,其構成了一種『自然』秩序。對立於『超自然』,內在架構探索內在的世界而非超越的世界。世界是共有的,即使詮釋有異。
內在架構內的超越(“transcendance in imminance”),則成為了世俗年代的重要表徵。


世俗化並不是無神論者或人文主義者通常聲稱的人類已經走出柏拉圖的洞穴,而張開雙眼看見自然的而非魔幻的世界景觀。事實上,世俗性只不過是另外一種看待世界的方式,其本身也是一種文化建構。無神論者Gauchet與神學家Milbank都認為的世俗性乃是基督教在西方發展下所誕生的產物。泰勒不是文化相對主義者,但承認觀點的相對性。世俗性與其他論點一樣可以定義人類主體的能力。
secular 1 宗教的脈絡 沒有發生
secular 2 公民論述中的宗教的邊緣化 不是實行教義與否而是宗教人士必須把自己的考量轉譯成非神學的公眾領域語言。 發生。(在印尼不適用)
secular 3 信仰成為一種可能性 而非背景 (在印尼不適用)
如此看來,查理斯泰勒的分類還是沒有Casanova卡撒諾法的公眾宗教來的精準,而傾向落入以Belief來定義宗教的窠臼。
“And so we come to understand our lives as taking place within a self-sufficient immanent order; or better, a constellation of orders, cosmic, social and moral… these orders are understood as impersonal. This understanding of our predicament has as background a sense of our history: we have advanced to this grasp of our predicament through earlier more primitive stages of society and self-understanding. In this process, we have come of age… The immanent order can thus slough off the transcendent. But it doesn’t necessarily do so. What I have been describing as the immanent frame is common to all of us in the modern West, or at least that is what I am trying to portray. Some of us want to live it as open to something beyond; some live it as closed. It is something which permits closure, without demanding it.”
也就是說,內在架構所提供的是,一個人可以決定要支持或反對信仰,但這整個架構的中心是由世俗性所定義的,即便世俗性本身是由歷史文化,尤其是基督教的發展,所定義的。世俗性既不排除信仰(事實上這個範疇正是科學定義自身的邊界以外),也不預設信仰。這個架構變成有開放的,也有封閉式的空間,而可以討論宗教。
p549
“that open space where you can feel the winds pulling you, now to belief, now to unbelief…,”
“more specific pictures, the immanent frame as ‘spun’ in ways of openness and closure, which are often dominant in certain milieux.”
p550
“allows of both readings, without compelling us to either. If you grasp our predicament without ideological distortion, and without blinders, then you see that going one way or another requires what is often called a “leap of faith.”
PS
This outlook effectively voids all mystery by splitting nature from supernature. Taylor notes that this provides the modern concept of the “miracle” as “a kind of punctual hole blown in the regular order of things from outside, that is, from the transcendent.” He notes that this is a view “shared between materialists and Christian Fundamentalists. Only for these, it provides proof of ‘miracles’, because certain things are unexplained by the normal course of natural causation. For the materialist, it is a proof that anything transcendent is excluded by ‘science’.” The materialist position is thus that the immanent frame is closed; there is nothing beyond it, while other belief systems allow for transcendence.
這樣的觀點,透過將自然與超自然分開,有效地使所有的神祕事物的失效。這也提供了現代『奇蹟』觀念的基礎,也就是一種從外在,超自然而來的力量帶入平常的事物秩序的一種精準的漏洞。基督基本教義派與物質論者都享有這觀點。正是因為有自然秩序,才提供了奇蹟證據。正是因為超自然的運作在科學的範圍之外,科學有其邊界。。。。
Taylor talks of a “sense of being menaced by fanaticism” as being “one great source of the closure of immanence.” As in nineteenth-century France, an anti-clerical movement turns into rejection of Christianity, or later into atheism.
一種受到狂熱主義威脅的感覺正是內在架構的一個主要來源。如同十九世紀法國反教士運動成為對基督教的拒絕,而後成為無神論一般。
Source: http://onlyagame.typepad.com/only_a_game/2008/10/a-secular-age-7-the-immanent-frame.html

One comment on “On the Immanent Frame with Charles Taylor

  1. Zola
    May 24, 2012

    Taylor’s key words:
    **modern social imaginary:
    the political dilemmas of modernity, the image of horizontally equal citizenship rather than vertical insertion of inclusion, causing the failure of “dignity” conducive to violence.
    **Democratic Exclusion: how to exclude the fundamental values underlying difference as not as fundamental as those values to which the “categoriacal identities” are secondary.
    **Rene Girad’s Violence and the Sacred:
    the theory Taylor relies to frame the roots of ethnic cleansing and nationalist violence as a kind of ritual scapegoating as imagined as an effective resolution of the crisis.
    **the secular democratic dilemma over religion

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Information

This entry was posted on May 24, 2012 by in 【Essence of Cosmos】.
%d bloggers like this: