Search results

You are looking at 1 - 7 of 7 items for :

  • "phenomenology" x
  • Manchester Religious Studies x
Clear All
Irish-American fables of resistance

1991: 160–​1) In addition to faith and integration into a community, the Church provided systems and a phenomenology that gave substance to Gordon’s world, ‘a poetry of accumulation’ that would serve as a starting and testing point for her life as an adult. Two important aspects of her cultural upbringing that Gordon highlights are the global and the local, and their interplay: so to be a Catholic, or even to have been one, is to feel a certain access to a world wider than the vision allowed by the lens of one’s own birth.You grew up believing that the parish is the

in Tracing the cultural legacy of Irish Catholicism
Abstract only

of dialectical thinking, the essential alteration of reality. And we also come to understand the role of our own consciousness in constituting this reality inasmuch as the text must be read to have its meaning enacted. (19) Butler is talking about the text of Hegel’s Phenomenology, but as we have seen, exactly the same could be said of Irigaray’s Elemental Passions. It is as far from the rigid binary opposition of Anglo–American philosophical logic as could be imagined. The creativity necessary for mutual relationship requires plurivocity and movement, willingness

in Forever fluid

into a fearful gulf; and the (repressed) fear of difference can result in violence directed towards the ‘other’. Once again it is through Hegel that this logic has its largest impact upon modern continental thought. In Hegel’s Phenomenology (1977), the distinction and then the conjunction between the same and the not–same, the one and the other, is the motor that drives developing consciousness in its journey to Absolute Spirit. If there is a single vignette in Hegel’s Rigid binaries and masculinistic logic writing that has had a greater impact on subsequent thought

in Forever fluid
Abstract only
Encountering Irigaray

philosophical aspects to her work – phenomenology first and foremost – but also psychoanalytic theory, dialectics and ethics. These elements are never employed, however, in a manner that is consistent with their traditional usage. The following quotation is an illustration of her combination of certain of these approaches with specific reference to the work of Hegel: Using phenomenology without dialectic would risk nevertheless a reconstruction of a solipsistic world, including a feminine world unconcerned with the masculine world or which accepts remaining parallel to the

in Divine love
Irigaray and Hegel

pronouncements on Antigone (as in Chanter 1995: 115). She discerns that the figure of Antigone in the literature is an equivocal one, and that most interpretations have been slanted by a ‘masculine’ viewpoint (1993b: 121). Her initial interrogations involve a sophisticated mimetic double play of the Hegelian rendition of Antigone in Phenomenology of Spirit (Hegel 1977). In disclosing Hegel’s biased assumptions, Irigaray reveals his ‘amazing vicious circle’ (Irigaray 1985a: 223) of quasi-logical manoeuvres that both exclude women and render them powerless, if they attempt to

in Divine love
Abstract only

Stripping of the Altars: Traditional Religion in England c.1400–c.1580, 2nd edn (New Haven and London, 2005). 7 Gérard Genette, Paratexts: Thresholds of Interpretation (orig. Seuils, Paris 1987), tr. Jane E. Lewin (Cambridge, 1997). Such an examination is in tune with the recent emphasis on ‘new philology’ and especially the significance of manuscript reception in the study of religious phenomenology (as in Eamon Duffy, Marking the Hours: English People and Their Prayers 1240–1570 (New Haven and London, 2006)). 8 John Bale, Illustrium maioris Britanniae, scriptorum

in Approaching the Bible in medieval England
Abstract only
Emmanuel Levinas and Irigaray

Phenomenology of Perception, ‘The Body in its Sexual Being’), and the feminine body, or the feminine, is not equivocation (as Lévinas suggests in Totality and Infinity). (28; translation emended) Irigaray indicts Levinas for thinking only of himself and not of the other, who is woman. ‘This description of pleasure given by Levinas is unacceptable to the extent that it presents man as the sole subject exercising his desire and his appetite upon the woman who is deprived of subjectivity except to seduce him’ (1991b: 115). In contrast to Irigaray’s celebration of a disciplined

in Divine love