Friday, August 20, 2004

what the hell was I talking about?

I think I may have been more pedantic than usual in my most recent post on religious pluralism. After consulting with Andi about whether I should provide some sort of primer or glossary that might (might) help the layman make heads or tails of my post, I've decided, with Andi's blessing, to do just that.

But not now. I simply don't have time.

Some items (people and terms) that'll be explained:

1. John Hick & his pluralistic hypothesis
2. S. Mark Heim and orientational pluralism
3. Stephen Kaplan and holographic pluralism
4. The terms "exclusivism," "inclusivism," and "pluralism" as commonly understood by most scholars today
5. ontology and soteriology
6. post-axial tradition/faith/religion
7. why the word "tradition" often appears in place of "faith" or "religion" in my essays (and in the works of scholars)
8. Raimondo Panikkar & why he doesn't quite fit any of the standard typologies
9. convergent vs. divergent pluralism
10. praxis
11. essentialism and nonessentialism
12. crypto-inclusivism
13. metanoia
14. the term "ultimate" and the question of multiple ultimates
15. "philosophical Taoism" as opposed to just talking about "Taoism"
16. Karl Rahner and the notion of the "anonymous Christian"
17. why John Hick's pluralistic paradigm is often called "neo-Kantian"

The above isn't comprehensive... I can also see it ballooning into a gigantic post of its own. In the spirit of Dr. Hodges's explanation of middle knowledge, I'll try to keep my explanations as clear and concise as I can. Write in with complaints if it seems like I've merely muddied things for you.


No comments: