首页> 外文期刊>International Journal for the Semiotics of Law - Revue internationale de Sémiotique juridique >Boundary Work: Transcendence and Authoriality in Religious and Secular Law
【24h】

Boundary Work: Transcendence and Authoriality in Religious and Secular Law

机译:边界工作:宗教和世俗法律的超越与权威

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

The semiotic investigation of the divine or transcendent authoriality of religious law involves, in the context of discussions concerning the propriety or impropriety of the influence of religion in “secular” political and legal systems, preliminary boundary work to discern the meanings of “religion”, “secular”, and “belief.” Jeremy Waldron’s account of the propriety of religion in “secular” politics, mirroring but reversing John Rawls’ account of religion’s impropriety in that context, can be contrasted with neo-Calvinist (and other) conceptions of pluralism and the inevitability of fundamental “beliefs” in all political and legal thought. In the latter perspectives, religious believers are neither unique in their appeal to transcendent values, nor relegated to advancing theocracy (because pluralism is conceived as a religious value rather than religion’s opposite). A workable alternative to the conventional discourse of religious influence in politics and law is therefore evident.
机译:在关于宗教在“世俗”政治和法律制度中的影响的适当性或不当性的讨论中,对宗教法的神圣或超凡权威进行的符号学研究涉及到初步的边界工作,以辨别“宗教”的含义, “世俗”和“信仰”。杰里米·沃尔德隆(Jeremy Waldron)在“世俗”政治中对宗教礼仪的论述,与在这种情况下约翰·罗尔斯(John Rawls)对宗教不当现象的阐述相映成趣,但却与之相反,这可以与新加尔文主义(及其他)多元化概念以及基本“信仰”的必然性形成对比。在所有政治和法律思想中。从后一种观点来看,宗教信徒既不是对先验价值的诉求,也不是降级于神权政治的推进(因为多元主义被认为是一种宗教价值而不是宗教的对立面)。因此,显然可以用一种可行的方法替代传统的宗教在政治和法律中的论述。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号