Academic literature on the topic 'Radical fideism'

The article analyzes the forms of rationalism and fideism proposed by Ukrainian Protestant theologians at the beginning of the XXI century. It turns out that these forms of rationalism and fideism were made possible by overcoming the anti-intellectualism that was characteristic of Protestantism in Soviet times. The opposition of tendencies to rationalism and fideism is connected with the positioning of Ukrainian Protestants in the postmodern times. Proponents of de facto rationalism propose to reconstruct the modern religious worldview, re-synthesizing elements of liberal and fundamentalist concepts. The study shows that hopes for the restoration of the modern worldview in the face of the challenges of the early XXI century contain elements of utopianism. Proponents of Fideism suggest taking full account of the real state of affairs in the postmodern era and recognizing the impossibility for Christians to use modern rationalism in all its forms. At the same time, faith acquires special significance as an expression of the personal relations of the holy people with God. Ukrainian Protestant rationalism in the article is analyzed on the example of the work of Sergei Golovin as the most consistent expression of this worldview. It has been proven that his ideas depend on the concepts of Norman Geisler, a prominent Protestant theologian. Golovin, imitating Geisler, believes that the Christian worldview should be the final superstructure over the foundation of classical logical rationalism and the ontology of being. This logic comes from classical Thomism. Golovin's rationalism is the rationalism of formal logic. Golovin's first controversial proposal is to reduce the paradoxes and contradictions contained in the Bible. Such a reduction contradicts the biblical studies of the beginning of the 21st century, and therefore can no longer be convincing for professional theologians. For ordinary believers, this reduction is an obscure rationalization of the image of God they have in reading the Scriptures. The second controversial proposition is to convert people first to logical rationality as the ideological foundation of humanity, and then to their conversion to Christianity. Such a proposal is largely outdated, because in the twentieth century it became clear that rationality in itself can be an instrument of any worldview and does not ensure the preservation or rehabilitation of humanity. By comparing it with theological practices of restoring humanity through the ethics of accepting another, the author argues that the restoration of humanity is possible through recourse to the potential of existentialist spirituality, theology of interpersonal communication, and other practical strategies of Christian theology. The biggest shortcoming of Sergei Golovin's rationalism is the proposal to build his own "scientific creationism", which denies the basic scientific theories of today. The most successful element of Golovin's system was social ethics, which offers the idea of ​​a modern state governed by the rule of law as one that can be deduced from the spirit and letter of the biblical commandments. The fideism of Ukrainian Protestant theology is born from the understanding that the ethical acceptance of others and love for them is possible only on the basis of personal faith. The challenges of the beginning of the 21st century require the acceptance of another, but individuals and communities lack the natural strength to accept such. And only faith and faith-generated love help to be open to others. Also, the post-capitalist economy of mutual gift, proposed by theologians and Christian communities, is based only on personal faith. It has been proven that the fideism of Ukrainian Protestant theology is closer to the ideas of postconservatism than the concepts of postliberalism. It has been found that radical protection of individual rights and humane treatment of others is common to the rationalism and fideism of modern Ukrainian Protestant theology. It is these ideas that are important for understanding what humanity is, which should be a prerequisite for being a true Christian.

ABSTRACTThe controversy over teleology raged in the early modern period with particular intensity. In this paper, I will show that Guillaume Lamy represents a “radical” current of antifinalism, devoid of weakness, and far from compromise with his adversaries. This antifinalism makes of Lamy not so much a sincere supporter of the unknowability of God’s ends, as scholars have maintained — in other words, a proto–fideist — but rather a radical Lucretian materialist, whose aim is to openly distance himself equally from the partial Cartesian rejection of final causes and from the sugar–coated Epicureanism of the Gassendists.

The article deals with the political and economic situation in Hungary in the last several years. The author firstly points to the causes of decline of influence of the previous socialist government and the heavy defeat of the socialists in the 2010 elections and the success of the right party Fidesz. After winning the elections, the Viktor Orban government started, at an accelerated rate, to implement the pre-election programme of Fidesz that had been prepared for a long time while it was an opposition party. The author is of the opinion that this programme is atypical, very radical and unique by many characteristics in the Europe of today. He points out that only a year after Fidesz victory the government and the parliament adopted quite a number of laws, a new Constitution and a set of risky measures of recovery that should lead to a substantial economic reform. The author particularly underlines the fact that the government decided to break of negotiation with IMF, reject its recommendations and try to overcome over-indebtedness by carrying out its own ideas.

AbstractPhilosophy, as an intellectual discipline emerging from Hellenism, had an ambiguous and disputed role in the theology and apologetics of Islam and continues to be contentious. In this article, I examine the arguments over the legitimacy of philosophy between the philosophical school of Mullā Ṣadrā (d.c. 1635), dominant in the present Shiʿi seminary in Iran, and its detractors in themaktab-i tafkīkwho insist that knowledge of reality and the faith only derives from the teachings of the Shiʿi Imams and cannot be contaminated with Aristotelianism. After an introduction to this fideist school of separating religious and ‘foreign’ sciences, three questions are analysed. What is philosophy? How do we know God? How can we demonstrate the Qurʾanic doctrine of the resurrection of bodies? What emerges is a more radical challenge touṣūlīrationalism than that posed previously from theAkhbāriyyaand their insistence upon aḥadīth-based jurisprudence.

Fidesz and Jobbik are the most important Hungarian right wing parties. The first one leads actually a government which has such a majority in the Parliament that gives it the opportunity to rule the country without having to face an effective opposition. This situation allowed it to change the pre-existing Constitution with a conservative and nationalist Charter. The second one represents the most extreme aspirations of the Hungarian political right wing and its references are more proletarian and militant than the ones of the Fidesz. Jobbik has actually three eurodeputies and 47 deputies at the Hungarian Parliament. For a better comprehension of the Magyar nationalism it is very useful to consider such crucial moments of the contemporary history of the country as for instance the peace treaties that followed the end of the First World War and imposed to Hungary such severe territorial losses. The treaties have become the subject of a rhetoric which is based upon the historical injustice that Hungary suffered. This aspect is part of the Hungarian collective feeling and it is one of the main topics of the conservative circles and the radical right wing.

There have been three main types of political outcome from the Great Recession. The first is an insurgency from the left exemplified by Podemos, now in decline, in Spain. It demands a return to classic European social democracy, but presents itself in a more radical rhetorical garb than its mid twentieth century forbears. The second is an insurgency from the right, best exemplified by Hungary’s Victor Orbán and his Fidesz Party. It demands a return to a national capitalism reminiscent of the 1930s. The third is the uniquely Italian phenomenon of the Five Star Movement-Lega combination combined with the rise of technocratic governments called into existence by an increasingly activist presidency. What explains this third, mixed model?

AbstractThe populist radical right (PRR) is increasingly associated with welfare chauvinism, but the literature mainly focuses on Western and Northern European cases. Turning attention to Central Eastern Europe, this article investigates how PRR parties in Hungary frame welfare issues in five social policy areas from 2010 to 2016. This is done through a critical frame analysis applied to party manifestos and State of the Nation speeches by the Fidesz and Jobbik parties. Special care is taken to delineate the interlocking but not interchangeable concepts of nationalism and populism, as recent research asserts this distinction is often overlooked. The main findings are threefold: First, these parties articulate their positions chiefly through nationalist rather than populist framing; Second, while Hungary's PRR exhibits welfare chauvinist framing similar to Western and Northern Europe, a main difference detected was the role of the communist legacy; Third, beyond the article's original goals, the findings revealed a strong connection between nationalist framing and the role of gender, suggesting that the two are not mutually exclusive.

The co-existence between Hungarians and Islam has been considered balanced, until the spring of 2015 when a wave of migrants appeared in Europe. “Opening to the East”, the foreign policy announced by the government in 2011 heralded a new chapter of cooperation with Arabic/Muslim countries, predominantly due to economic considerations. The migrant crisis turned government communication, as well as the stance of Jobbik, the largest opposition party, upside down. This paper discusses the unique phenomenon of what role the political debate about Islam and the construction of the temporary border barrier protecting the Hungarian national borders played in the competitive communication of the national-radical, pro-Muslim opposition Jobbik party (achieving a lead in the polls) and the centre-right governing parties Fidesz-kdnp which typically emphasise their Christian character.

The problem of the „beginning of faith” (initium fidei) was among those which vividly captured the attention of theologians at the beginning of the 5th century, particularly in the wider context of the controversy concerning the relationship be­tween free will and God’s grace in the work of salvation. Generally it is assumed that John Cassian, concerned, on the one hand, to show the Pelagians the neces­sity of grace and the radical Augustinians, on the other, the need for cooperation with the work of divine grace, failed to avoid errors which would subsequently be referred to as semi-pelagianism. With regard to the „beginning of faith”, his error is supposed to consist in the fact that the salvific initiative could derive from man. This view, however, derives from an over simplification of the thought of the Abbot of St. Victor: not only because most of his comments underline the neces­sity for grace in order for faith to begin in man (theological argument), but also because even in his rare „semipelagian” affirmations Cassian speaks of scintilla of good will in man, without however calling this the moment of faith strictly under­stood (philological argument). Above all, however, it is forgotten that for Cassian, who was educated in the spirit of oriental theology, salvation is simultaneously divine and human and lacks any form of „arithmetical” parity between God and man, which would make man an equal partner with God in the work of salvation. For Cassian, everything concerning the primacy of God in salvation is beyond question and human efforts are nothing other than the response expected by the Divine Pedagogue of His pupils as He leads them along the path of salvation, from the initium fidei to its end.

O propósito do presente estudo é analisar a possibilidade de desobediência à lei humana no pensamento de Francisco Suárez. A particulariadade de nossa investigação radica em que centramos a análise em De legibus (1612), que precede a Defensio Fidei (1613), obra esta em que O Eximio trata concretamente da questão atinente à resistência e à desobediência ao tirano. Todavia, interessa-nos indagar sobre o problema proposto em De Legibus, sem desconhecer o tratamento específico em Defensio Fidei, o qual tem sido objeto de numerosas investigações. Primeiramente exporemos algumas questões que desembocam no problema principal desse trabalho. Assim, referimo-nos às leis justas e injustas segundo Suárez; logo à sociabilidade como fundamento da necessidade de leis positivas e das autoridades civis, tanto quanto ao bem comum como um dos principais fins que a lei humana deve perseguir. Na parte final deste trabalho interessa-nos demonstrar que, somente quando faltam as condições que a lei deve reunir, é que O Eximio admite a desobediência à norma injusta, a qual, por esse motivo, perde sua condicição de lei.

Fideism, or basing one’s religious belief on faith, is popular especially amongst modern Protestant Christians. For the fideist, religious belief-systems are not subject to rational evaluation, and faith as the act of belief forms the essence of truth and the ultimate criterion for embracing a religion. Critics of fideism say that epistemologically, a hierarchy of methods can be used to derive the truth, and each method gives us varying confidence levels. These methods include mathematics and logic, science, personal experience, history, expert testimony, inference and Faith. Among these, the critic says, pure faith in something is the least successful in getting at the truth. Radical fideists like Kierkegaard do not cite logical reasons for defending their belief that God exists. Personal reasons are instead offered for their decision to believe. In this thesis I seek to demonstrate that the radical fideism advocated by Kierkegaard constitutes good justification for belief in the Christian God. I will begin with a discussion on fideism and some of its proponents, followed by a discussion on the place of faith (as a non-rational belief in God’s existence) in religion. I will then appeal to Kierkegaard’s philosophy in defending my view that religious belief in God is a matter of faith and personal commitment, feeling and passion, and this is an inner process not grounded in arguments. References will be drawn from Kierkegaard’s themes of faith, subjectivity and inwardness. I conclude by saying that even if no objective grounds exist to justify our belief, Kierkegaard standpoint remains right in two ways: Firstly, the fideist rejection of the attempt to justify his belief through offering reasons for it is precisely what makes his decision to believe deeply meaningful in his life. Secondly, those who ‘try to judge faith by objective, critical reflection will go on forever that way, and will never reach the point of having faith and of being religious’. (Peterson et al, 2003:53)