Thanks, all.
jim stone wrote:
Are you going for a faculty job?
My wife (who finished her dissertation a few years before) and I both teach here:
http://www.byuh.edu/ Folks were very concerned that I finish -- no tenure without it -- and so it's a good thing all around to be done (not to mention being free to do other academic projects I've wanted to do but which I've had to put off). The whole process was made more complicated when the original chair of the dissertation (a fine gentleman from Wales
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D.Z._Phillips ) died unexpectedly of a heart attack. He'd helped guide the first two thirds of this. Fortunately, the fellow who took over as chair was on the same page, philosophically speaking, and things went rather smoothly considering.
WARNING: Here's the abstract. It may put you to sleep. Still, it gives a
very general idea of what my dissertation is about. The fun is actually in the details and abstracts rarely give you those.
Abstract of the Dissertation
This dissertation explores Kierkegaard’s concept and practice of religious authorship. Focusing primarily on Kierkegaard’s late authorship, with special attention to
The Point of View and
Kierkegaard’s Journals and Papers, it reviews Kierkegaard’s development of religious authorship, shows how religious authorship may have similarities to philosophical authorship and wherein the two differ, and elucidates aspects unique to religious authorship.
Setting religious authorship over-against a Wittgensteinian view of philosophy, Chapter Two examines the relation between philosophical authorship and religious authorship and draws distinctions between a religious interest and a philosophical interest in philosophy of religion and where the two may share common ground, even though they have different motives.
Chapter Three discuss the possible threat philosophy can bring to faith. Kierkegaard asserts that the answer to a perceived philosophical threat to faith is first to understand how faith and doubt are actually encountered in a religious life. Though doubt may arise from a philosophical investigation, it does not follow that it necessarily must and Kierkegaard illuminates the character of doubt and the religious way of responding to doubt.
Chapter Four explores the use of philosophical apologetics in religious authorship. Kierkegaard generally saw a philosophical defense of Christianity as a mistake. Nevertheless, Kierkegaard is an advocate of Christianity but in a qualified way. Kierkegaard’s philosophical advocacy largely consists of helping one come to see the point of Christianity and then leaving one to judge.
Chapter Five argues that religious authorship has a persuasive end and must go beyond clarity (though clarity is a key part). With a foundation in Aristotle’s conception of the rhetorical appeals of ethos, pathos and logos, it explores the complexities of rhetoric and persuasion for the religious author. Kierkegaard argues for indirect communication, but also makes room for persuasive, rhetorical aspects beyond philosophical clarity.
Chapter Six discusses the mixture of certainty and uncertainty in Kierkegaard’s religious authorship. There is naturally something of certainty that goes with religious authorship but also, in communicating the religious to others, an uncertainty. This condition allows the religious author to write with conviction, while retaining a humility that should welcome criticism and correction.
Thanks again, all, for your well-wishes.
