Vår tillvaros blomstrande vår
(2024) TLVK10 20232Centre for Theology and Religious Studies
- Abstract
- The aim of this thesis is primarily to explore differences and similarities in the understanding of ontology between two contemporary theologians: Catherine Keller and Richard Kearney. Secondarily, the thesis also investigates the wider implications of their understanding of ontology in contemporary systematic theology. Initially, as a part of the method, I describe how the debate on ontology is revived during the 1900’s, through the philosophy of Martin Heidegger. This serves as a historical backdrop to the coming comparative analysis between Keller and Kearney. The second step is to analyze Keller’s understanding of ontology in The Face of the Deep: A Theology of Becoming (2003), regarding key theological themes. The third step is to... (More)
- The aim of this thesis is primarily to explore differences and similarities in the understanding of ontology between two contemporary theologians: Catherine Keller and Richard Kearney. Secondarily, the thesis also investigates the wider implications of their understanding of ontology in contemporary systematic theology. Initially, as a part of the method, I describe how the debate on ontology is revived during the 1900’s, through the philosophy of Martin Heidegger. This serves as a historical backdrop to the coming comparative analysis between Keller and Kearney. The second step is to analyze Keller’s understanding of ontology in The Face of the Deep: A Theology of Becoming (2003), regarding key theological themes. The third step is to analyze Kearney’s understanding of ontology in The God Who May Be: A Hermeneutics of Religion (2001), also regarding key theological themes. These steps answer the primary question of the thesis. The fourth and final step is to deepen the comparative analysis between Keller and Kearney regarding key theological themes, to answer the secondary question of the further implications in contemporary theology. Theoretically, I enable a wide understanding of ontology in order to catch as many nuances as possible. Philosophers and theologians may understand ontology in mutually exclusive and vastly different terms. To avoid the issues of exclusive stances, I aim to bridge the gap between extremes, which also presupposes a mutually beneficial relationship between philosophy and theology. Hence, I use both Heidegger’s and St. Augustine’s understanding of ontology as wide a theoretical framework. Furthermore, I use the reasoning of John D. Caputo, as underpinning claims of a mutually beneficial relationship between philosophy and theology. The results of this study shows that the contemporary understanding of ontology leans towards a dynamism, relationality, and anti-metaphysics in various ways – which differs vastly from Augustinian (Platonic) and Thomistic (Aristotelian) ontology. I conclude and argue that ontology has deep effects in a wide range of subjects; in contemporary systematic theology, ecology, mental and spiritual health, and finally regarding the debate between faith and reason. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
http://lup.lub.lu.se/student-papers/record/9154148
- author
- Ahlgren, Leo LU
- supervisor
- organization
- course
- TLVK10 20232
- year
- 2024
- type
- M2 - Bachelor Degree
- subject
- keywords
- Keywords: Systematic theology, philosophy, ontology, Dasein, onto-eschatology, relational ontology, Martin Heidegger, Catherine Keller, Richard Kearney.
- language
- Swedish
- id
- 9154148
- date added to LUP
- 2024-09-23 09:31:07
- date last changed
- 2024-09-23 09:31:07
@misc{9154148,
abstract = {{The aim of this thesis is primarily to explore differences and similarities in the understanding of ontology between two contemporary theologians: Catherine Keller and Richard Kearney. Secondarily, the thesis also investigates the wider implications of their understanding of ontology in contemporary systematic theology. Initially, as a part of the method, I describe how the debate on ontology is revived during the 1900’s, through the philosophy of Martin Heidegger. This serves as a historical backdrop to the coming comparative analysis between Keller and Kearney. The second step is to analyze Keller’s understanding of ontology in The Face of the Deep: A Theology of Becoming (2003), regarding key theological themes. The third step is to analyze Kearney’s understanding of ontology in The God Who May Be: A Hermeneutics of Religion (2001), also regarding key theological themes. These steps answer the primary question of the thesis. The fourth and final step is to deepen the comparative analysis between Keller and Kearney regarding key theological themes, to answer the secondary question of the further implications in contemporary theology. Theoretically, I enable a wide understanding of ontology in order to catch as many nuances as possible. Philosophers and theologians may understand ontology in mutually exclusive and vastly different terms. To avoid the issues of exclusive stances, I aim to bridge the gap between extremes, which also presupposes a mutually beneficial relationship between philosophy and theology. Hence, I use both Heidegger’s and St. Augustine’s understanding of ontology as wide a theoretical framework. Furthermore, I use the reasoning of John D. Caputo, as underpinning claims of a mutually beneficial relationship between philosophy and theology. The results of this study shows that the contemporary understanding of ontology leans towards a dynamism, relationality, and anti-metaphysics in various ways – which differs vastly from Augustinian (Platonic) and Thomistic (Aristotelian) ontology. I conclude and argue that ontology has deep effects in a wide range of subjects; in contemporary systematic theology, ecology, mental and spiritual health, and finally regarding the debate between faith and reason.}},
author = {{Ahlgren, Leo}},
language = {{swe}},
note = {{Student Paper}},
title = {{Vår tillvaros blomstrande vår}},
year = {{2024}},
}