Schelling & Theology

Friday, March 20, 2009 — Brad

I may not yet be able to put together a proper book proposal on Schelling and theology — sorry, Continuum — so for now the world will have to settle for my newly-published epochal article in the The Journal of Religion. [PDF here]

Posted in Schelling, theology. 10 Comments »

10 Responses to “Schelling & Theology”

  1. Adam Kotsko Says:
    Friday, March 20, 2009 at 3:48 pm

    Congratulations — one more step in our quest for AUFS hegemony over the entire academic world!

  2. Thomas J Bridges Says:
    Saturday, March 21, 2009 at 6:34 am

    Congratulations on the article Brad.

  3. michaeloneillburns Says:
    Tuesday, March 24, 2009 at 7:10 am

    I hate to be ‘that guy’, but, if you wouldn’t mind sharing the article to those without access to that journal, I’d be quite interested in reading it.

  5. Brad Johnson Says:
    Tuesday, March 24, 2009 at 8:55 am

    Sorry about that. When I first posted, I did not have access to the article either. A PDF has been added.

  7. old Says:
    Tuesday, March 24, 2009 at 11:11 pm

    Congratulations!

    I just can’t swallow the anti-narratival stuff. Never have been able to, not from anyone. It’s just way beyond impossibility, for one. For another, it’s a flat repudiation of the life blood of so many indigenous cultures. You’ve got to be a real high-falutin prick to really maintain it in any sort of real way. Communities of people make sense of the world narrativaly. Always have. Always will.

  8. Brad Johnson Says:
    Wednesday, March 25, 2009 at 12:18 am

    I don’t know what you’re talking about, re: the anti-narratival stuff. I wasn’t aware any of the paper was against narrative. If anything, I insist on its inevitability.

    This does not mean I’m not a prick, though.

  9. Old - Doug Johnson Says:
    Wednesday, March 25, 2009 at 5:04 am

    What I’m talking about is the fact that I completely missed a half of a paragraph in the middle of that section! Mea culpa! I stopped reading briefly because of an interruption and picked back up in the wrong place. I guess it’s a bit like having a scratch in a dvd, missing the cuckoo clock speech, and wondering what the big deal was about The Third Man. Only there’s no netflix for me to blame. And that part of the paper isn’t quite as critical to the whole project of the piece. Of course, I think of what you are calling for entirely differently with the addition of that half a paragraph. Apologies from this illiterate prick.

  10. Brad Johnson Says:
    Wednesday, March 25, 2009 at 9:23 am

    I suppose one could be upset that I don’t privilege narrative enough, or that I what I give narrative w/ one hand I take away with the other (though I prefer to see it the other way around). Indeed for some, and this is where I thought your attack was going to come from, this may be more insidious than simply being wholly and forthrightly anti-narrative. I had my defense planned and everything!!

    At any rate, glad that got cleared up.


Comments are closed.

«

»
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,373 other followers