Translating God: Derrida, Ricoeur, Kearney

The purpose of the present essay is to defend two related notions. The more specific notion that I seek to defend is Richard Kearney’s conception of God as posse, of God as a possible God. His position has recently been criticized for three separate reasons: that it is not radical enough, that it...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Lynn Sebastian Purcell
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: University of Calgary 2012-06-01
Series:Journal of Applied Hermeneutics
Online Access:https://journalhosting.ucalgary.ca/index.php/jah/article/view/53195
_version_ 1818902472503066624
author Lynn Sebastian Purcell
author_facet Lynn Sebastian Purcell
author_sort Lynn Sebastian Purcell
collection DOAJ
description The purpose of the present essay is to defend two related notions. The more specific notion that I seek to defend is Richard Kearney’s conception of God as posse, of God as a possible God. His position has recently been criticized for three separate reasons: that it is not radical enough, that it is crypto-metaphysical, and that it forecloses the most profound aims of ethics. At a broader level what seems to be at stake is the opposition between partisans of radical finitude, those who hold that the most profound questions are encountered at the limits of thought, and an alternative “infinite†conception that Kearney shares with Paul Ricoeur, which maintains that fidelity to unpredictable events opens the way to what is most profound about the human condition. In response I argue that the criticisms fail to hit their mark because they presuppose a broadly Derridian or post-modern position in order to make their argument, when it is just those presuppositions that are in question.
first_indexed 2024-12-19T20:36:12Z
format Article
id doaj.art-d37dd8841dcb4c3d86280c46d2ec48a0
institution Directory Open Access Journal
issn 1927-4416
language English
last_indexed 2024-12-19T20:36:12Z
publishDate 2012-06-01
publisher University of Calgary
record_format Article
series Journal of Applied Hermeneutics
spelling doaj.art-d37dd8841dcb4c3d86280c46d2ec48a02022-12-21T20:06:33ZengUniversity of CalgaryJournal of Applied Hermeneutics1927-44162012-06-0110.11575/jah.v0i0.53195Translating God: Derrida, Ricoeur, KearneyLynn Sebastian Purcell0SUNY CortlandThe purpose of the present essay is to defend two related notions. The more specific notion that I seek to defend is Richard Kearney’s conception of God as posse, of God as a possible God. His position has recently been criticized for three separate reasons: that it is not radical enough, that it is crypto-metaphysical, and that it forecloses the most profound aims of ethics. At a broader level what seems to be at stake is the opposition between partisans of radical finitude, those who hold that the most profound questions are encountered at the limits of thought, and an alternative “infinite†conception that Kearney shares with Paul Ricoeur, which maintains that fidelity to unpredictable events opens the way to what is most profound about the human condition. In response I argue that the criticisms fail to hit their mark because they presuppose a broadly Derridian or post-modern position in order to make their argument, when it is just those presuppositions that are in question.https://journalhosting.ucalgary.ca/index.php/jah/article/view/53195
spellingShingle Lynn Sebastian Purcell
Translating God: Derrida, Ricoeur, Kearney
Journal of Applied Hermeneutics
title Translating God: Derrida, Ricoeur, Kearney
title_full Translating God: Derrida, Ricoeur, Kearney
title_fullStr Translating God: Derrida, Ricoeur, Kearney
title_full_unstemmed Translating God: Derrida, Ricoeur, Kearney
title_short Translating God: Derrida, Ricoeur, Kearney
title_sort translating god derrida ricoeur kearney
url https://journalhosting.ucalgary.ca/index.php/jah/article/view/53195
work_keys_str_mv AT lynnsebastianpurcell translatinggodderridaricoeurkearney