2 midterm (Anthropological and Sociological Approaches)

Question 1

what is in stage 2

Answer 1

social sciences
history

classical and contemporary forms of social-scientific and historical analysis

Question 2

Important bridge from philosophy and theology to what

Answer 2

social science

Question 3

who was part fo the bridge from philosophy and theology to social sciences

Answer 3

Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel (1770-1831)
• Ludwig Feuerbach (1804-1872)
• Karl Marx (1818-1883)

Question 4

Important bridge from philosophy and theology to social science was what

Answer 4

Continental (German) Philosophy

Question 5

General theme of Continental (German) Philosophy was what

Answer 5

from transcendence to immanence

Question 6

what does “from transcendence to immanence” mean

Answer 6

i.e., from speculative and emancipatory knowledge that applies to ultimate reality (transcendence) to descriptive and explanatory knowledge that applies to objects and agents in the world (immanence)

basically; stuff related to either a transient being that is known out of reality, or tuff in the world
the shift from thinking about things “out there”, to things in the world (in history, nature)

Question 7

what Is immanence

Answer 7

immanent: existing or operating within; inherent: the protection of liberties is immanent in constitutional arguments (that was an example)

(of god) permanently pervading and sustaining the universe. Often contrasted with transcendent

Question 8

From transcendence to what

Answer 8

immanence

Question 9

Before Immanuel Kant, Knowledge of religion tended to be what

Answer 9

of a practical (orthopraxy), esoteric, or exoteric nature, both bottom-up and top-down varieties

Question 10

With Kant (and others) the preoccupation became one of what

Answer 10

assigning ‘knowledge’ a definite, usually empirical sphere. Discourse surrounding religion came to be seen as practical and speculative, not verifiable or demonstrative. Knowledge was a product of pure theoretical reason (science and mathematics) and pure practical reason (autonomous rational reflection on morality

basically; knowledge is about the empirical world, religion applies more to the philosophical side
religion helps us to make sense of it in the larger context

religion comes to be seen as practical and speculative; in that is cannot be empirically proved 9you need faith or rationality)
knowledge for people like kant was pure practical reason

Question 11

Kant is important for who

Answer 11

Hegal, he responds to Kant

Question 12

hagel Is important for what

Answer 12

the ways people saw religion and the framework in which individuals started to think about things pertaining to the spiritual levels and human beings
for, froier and marx, hagel was central for them to be able to do what they did

Question 13

After Kant, Religion was pulled back into the sphere of what

Answer 13

knowledge

Question 14

After Kant, Religion was pulled back into the sphere of knowledge by who

Answer 14

figures as G.W.F. Hegel.

Question 15

with kant you get the sense that the world Is what

Answer 15

divided into clear cut things, where you can distinguish things using knowledge
religion provided important precepts; for kant, when he critiqued religion it want so he could undermine it, he wanted to make room for it, but by trying t o do this he excluded it from knowledge (faith in particular

Question 16

Hegel critiqued Kant’s division of what

Answer 16

knowledge into separate spheres of thinking, theoretical and practical

Question 17

Objects of religion (for Kant) were what

Answer 17

unknowable, as were the soul, freedom, and immortality

Question 18

Objects of religion (for Kant) were unknowable, as were the soul, freedom, and immortality. These kinds of things, ‘postulated’ by Kant as necessary to what

Answer 18

morality, couldn’t be known in the sense in which objects of the senses or concepts of math could be known.

Question 19

Effectively, Kant did what

Answer 19

barricaded faith from knowledge as he tried to make room for it (faith).

Question 20

Hegel rejected Kant’s philosophy as what

Answer 20

paltry and self-indulgent, excluding from knowledge the very things human beings want to know: God, i.e., the infinite, everything, knowledge of all of reality, not parts of it

Question 21

who said “[I]n placing the Divine Being beyond our cognition and the pale of all human things, we gain the convenient license of indulging in our own fancies. We are freed from the necessity of referring our knowledge to the True and Divine.”

Answer 21

Hegel

Question 22

in a summary, what does hega say

Answer 22

rejects kant, says it is human vanity when people in religion take about god, the totality and infinity, they want a knowledge of all of reality and not just some of it (which is what kant did: with math and physics) and when wants says we cannot know things with God (as it is transcendent), legal wants to pull god back in, god become the symbol for everything (history, humanity, economics, politics), got was his way of marketing the knowledge for everything… for legal god was the culmination of all self-knowledge

Question 23

what is meant by totality

Answer 23

everything is defined in relation to everything else
teachers need students; without students there would be no teachers… this is how everything happens in the world
no students with out parents, n parents without children, parents depend on their parents… everything is connected to eachother! Each little thing is a little part of “god” or totality
so god is everything and everything is connected and such

Question 24

For Hegel, in wanting knowledge of everything, i.e., all of reality, we don’t want the limited perspective of an individual or community on this or that aspect of reality, relative or absolute. We want knowledge of reality…

Answer 24

from the perspective of the Absolute, the infinite

basically this was important for hegal, because
this is a way fo saying when you include god as a totalitarian of all things, you look at it from the viewpoint of absolute and not speculative
Hegal said we wanted to knowledge of God’s perspective
you turn to history , and this becomes the plane for the self knowledge of god

history is the proof of God’s self knowledge of God’s self

god is the metaphysical being (not necessarily the one we all think of ( christian)

Question 25

The perspective of the Absolute is achieved how

Answer 25

by turning to history, everything that happens in history. History is the sum total of related social forces and concepts that appear on the world stage. These social forces and concepts, limited manifestations of the Absolute, are in competition aiming to establish the truth about the order of things from their particular perspectives. Because of this, their individual claims are contested. This negative correlation of thesis and antithesis yields a subsequent development that aims to unify these negatively correlated claims. This synthesis of perspectives becomes a new thesis engendering, in turn, an antithesis, and so on

Question 26

According to Hegel, this relationship of social forces is called what

Answer 26

dialectical process

Question 27

According to Hegel, this relationship of social forces (dialectical process) is what

Answer 27

the basic structure of reality, the means by which the Absolute reveals itself and comes to self-knowledge

Question 28

what is the dialectic

Answer 28

basic structure of the previous cards
can be applied to any subject matter

a series of social forces that display this kind go contention in history and life where people are advocating certain things and contesting things theatre advocated and there are contestations of contestations and on and on and on
with legal, when you do politics he isn’t saying you are doing religion, but when you ask the question “how does it all hang together and what is the meaning of everything?” religion brings the answer

Question 29

The dialectic is about a movement from what to what

Answer 29

The dialectic is about a movement from alienation to reconciliation

Question 30

The dialectic is about a movement from alienation to reconciliation whereby we do what

Answer 30

transcend a rift that constitutes the natural order.

Question 31

This rift consists in what

Answer 31

social, cultural, political, religious discontinuity whose estranged state of being is overcome by grasping the necessary unity of all things

Question 32

Religion and philosophy (in that order) are important means of attaining what

Answer 32

this unity of consciousness, this reconciliation of our collective self with Absolute Geist or Spirit

Question 33

for legal, what is the central place where all meaning comes together

Answer 33

humans

Question 34

With Hegel we understand God when we understand what

Answer 34

relaity

Question 35

With Hegel we understand God when we understand reality. We understand that the transcendent is actually what

Answer 35

immanent in world process

Question 36

With Hegel we understand God when we understand reality. We understand that the transcendent is actually immanent in world process. When we understand world process/reality, we understand what

Answer 36

God– in a word

Question 37

With Hegel we understand God when we understand reality. We understand that the transcendent is actually immanent in world process. When we understand world process/reality, we understand God—in a word, we understand ourselves as God’s ultimate what

Answer 37

self expression

Question 38

With Hegel we understand God when we understand reality. We understand that the transcendent is actually immanent in world process. When we understand world process/reality, we understand God—in a word, we understand ourselves as God’s ultimate self-expression.
• This was the basic component in the West that provided for what

Answer 38

the understanding that to understand the divine is to understand the human, i.e., the initial process from transcendence to immanence

Question 39

who enters after hegal

Answer 39

Ludwig Feuerbach

Question 40

Where Hegel wanted to guard the Absolute as Absolute, God as God, in finite self-knowledge (OMG!), Feuerbach wanted to do what

Answer 40

make the

Absolute and finite identical: God = Humanity

Question 41

When we understand God, we understand what (Feuerbach)

Answer 41

Humanity

Question 42

When we understand God, we understand Humanity. God is simply a projection of humanity onto “the screen of heaven”, i.e., God or the Infinite is nothing but what (Feuerbach)

Answer 42

that which humans value about themselves (e.g., power, kindness, moral purity, and intelligence).

Question 43

what is Feuerbach basically saying

Answer 43

when we talk about the absolute being (the traits) we describe ourselves; what we value of the human experience— it is all of those things taken to the highest degree! Detaching it from humans and saying it exists in something so much bigger is not correct to this guy, we project onto the heavens what we value in ourselves

Question 44

With Feuerbach we get the what

Answer 44

With Feuerbach we get the “criticism of religion”

Question 45

With Feuerbach we get the “criticism of religion” so prevalent in the 19th century of explaining religion as something other than what

Answer 45

religious

basically; explaining religion as something other than religion
when you want to understand religion you have to go behind religious expressions; what motivates these expressions, what causes people to be religious
these expressions do not give answers or explanations
very different way at looking at religion from stage 1

Question 46

Feuerbach still saw this as a what

Answer 46

philosophical preoccupation

Question 47

Feuerbach still saw this as a philosophical preoccupation: interpreting religion “anthropologically”… meaning what

Answer 47

translating all reference to transcendence in immanentist, human terms

basically; he wants to have a kind of conciliatory understanding of the relationship of religion to humanity
wants to translate everything that religion has or offers in humanistic naturalist terms

Question 48

Marx marks a shift in focus in what

Answer 48

“the criticism of religion” from philosophy to society, from ideological speculation to historical materialism

Question 49

Marx agrees with who

Answer 49

Feuerbach

Question 50

Marx agrees with Feuerbach: “The basis of irreligious criticism is:… what

Answer 50

Marx agrees with Feuerbach: “The basis of irreligious criticism is: Man makes religion, religion does not make man” (Marx, Critique of Hegel’s Philosophy of Law). This is basic to most atheisms.

Question 51

Marx’s disagreement with Feuerbach is what

Answer 51

in treating Humanity as an abstract, universal, philosophical concept: “But man is no abstract being encamped outside the world. Man is the world of man, the state, society.” (ibid.)

Question 52

what is the connection between freuerbach and marx

Answer 52

crucial point of contention with regard to Freuerbach and marx
Freuer is just as abstract as legal when taking about humanity
why? these are abstractions, they are ideas and conceptions
for marx, it has nothing to do with out concrete, everyday experience
you don’t have this kind of universalized idea of humanity— you have the hustle and bustle of society and many different forces; the things that constitute society is where it is

Question 53

Marx’s ias is that theology and philosophy are product of what

Answer 53

“inverted conciousness”, that is, reality for them is constituted by ideas, not as it actually is: by material and social forces

Question 54

main idea of Freuerbach

Answer 54

religion confuses the idea of God with Human reality (=alienation). True knowledge consistes in placinf
Humanity in the place of God (=reconciliation)

Question 55

main idea of marx

Answer 55

religion legitimates a class struggle between the rling vlass and the working vlass by being resigned to an otherwordly syaye of affairs (=alientation). True knowledge concists on a changed state of affaits, overthrowing the capitalist economic system that sues religion to reinforce the capitalist status quo (=reconiciliation)
Hence: “the philosohers have only interpreted the ord in various wats, the pointm however is to change....

Question 56

this background explains what (all of this)

Answer 56

why early sociology and anthro felt that a scientific explinatin of religion should focus on: The human, not the devine— in some cases; the human as “divine”
The imporane of materica (“emperical”) explinations of religion, not speculation (I.e. philosophy and theology) This backgroynf also explains why earl sociology and antho adopted a pejorative attitude toward religion (“the criticism of religion”)