What is the universality of the uniform

Document details:

Title: The theology's reference to reason
Subtitle: A European heritage and its threats
Author (s): LÖFFLER, Winfried
Journal: ET studies
Volume: 11    Issue: 1   Date: 2020   
Pages: 3-23
DOI: 10.2143 / ETS.11.1.3287650

Abstract:
In the fundamental scholarly form of theology (which shows itself institutionally in its embedding in the university) and in its affirmation of human rights, two aspects of its obligation to a unified and universal reason can be seen, one of which shapes the theoretical, the other the practical use of reason. The article briefly recalls the historical genesis of this 'European' heritage, which was by no means easily worked out, pleads for its indispensability and contains suggestions for exploring what 'unity' and 'universality' of reason could mean at all. Postmodern conceptions of reason, as they are astonishingly popular in contemporary theology, call this uniformity and universality into question. In the theoretical area, however, their self-contradiction is obvious and for the purposes of the semantic stabilization of a revealed religion they are, if considered more closely, hardly useful. And even if the accusation of practical relativism against postmodern thinking is partially unjustified, in view of the danger of political erosion to which the human rights ethos is currently subject, it represents an unhelpful intellectual headwind for defending a universalist conception of human rights.



In the fundamental academic form of theology (which shows itself institutionally in its being embedded in the university) and in its affirmation of human rights, two partial aspects of its commitment to a reason that is uniform and universal become apparent: one of which more strongly shapes the theoretical and the other the practical use of reason. This article briefly recalls the genesis of this 'European' heritage, which was only worked out with considerable effort, and argues for its enduring necessity. It also contains suggestions for explaining what the 'uniformity' and 'universality' of reason could mean in general. Postmodern conceptions of reason, which enjoy amazing popularity in contemporary theology, question this uniformity and universality. However, in the theoretical field the self-contradiction of these ideas is obvious and, for the purpose of semantic stabilization in a religion of revelation, they are, when viewed closely, hardly useful. Even if the accusation of practical relativism against postmodern thinking is partly unjustified, in view of the danger of political erosion to which the human rights ethos is currently subject, postmodernism represents an unhelpful intellectual headwind for the task of defending a universal conception of human rights.



Dans la forme académique fondamentale de la théologie (institutionnellement liée à l'université) et dans son affirmation des droits de l'homme, deux aspects partiels de son engagement envers une raison uniforme et universelle apparaissent: l'un façonne plus fortement l'utilisation theorique de la raison et l'autre son utilization pratique. Cet article rappelle brièvement la genèse de cet héritage "européen" qui ne s’est construit qu’au prix d’efforts considérables et plaide pour la nécessité de sa durée. Il suggère également comment explicitly ce que l ’" uniformité "et l’ "universalité" de la raison pourraient signifier en général. The conceptions post-modern de la raison, qui jouissent d’une étonnante popularité dans la théologie contemporaine, remettent en question cette uniformité et cette universalité. Toutefois, dans le domaine théorique, il est évident que ces idées se contredisent elles-mêmes et, dans la perspective d’une stabilization sémantique dans une religion révélée, quand on les regarde de près, elles ne sont guère utiles. Même si l'accusation de relativisme pratique à l'encontre de la pensée post-modern est en partie injustifiée, compte tenu du danger de dégradation politique auquel l'éthos des droits de l'homme est actuellement soumis, le postmodernisme représente un vent intellectuel contraire, inutile quand il s'agit de défendre une conception universelle des droits de l'homme.

download article