Heidegger’s understanding of the relation between his ontological concept of ‘being-guilty’ and Luther’s theological concept of ‘sin’

In his 1927 lecture ‘Phenomenology and Theology’, Heidegger claims that philosophy is the formally indicative ontological co-direction [Mitleitung] of basic theological concepts. For this claim, he proposes the example of his ontological concept of guilt (i.e. ‘being-guilty’ [Schuldigsein]) as a for...

Description complète

Enregistré dans:  
Détails bibliographiques
Auteur principal: Hung, Yu-Yuan (Auteur)
Type de support: Électronique Article
Langue:Anglais
Vérifier la disponibilité: HBZ Gateway
Journals Online & Print:
En cours de chargement...
Fernleihe:Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste
Publié: Taylor & Francis [2020]
Dans: International journal of philosophy and theology
Année: 2020, Volume: 81, Numéro: 2, Pages: 120-135
Sujets / Chaînes de mots-clés standardisés:B Heidegger, Martin 1889-1976 / Luther, Martin 1483-1546 / Obligation juridique / Péché
RelBib Classification:KAG Réforme; humanisme; Renaissance
NBE Anthropologie
TK Époque contemporaine
VA Philosophie
Sujets non-standardisés:B Heidegger
B Formal indication
B Sin
B Faith
B Guilt
B Luther
Accès en ligne: Volltext (Verlag)
Description
Résumé:In his 1927 lecture ‘Phenomenology and Theology’, Heidegger claims that philosophy is the formally indicative ontological co-direction [Mitleitung] of basic theological concepts. For this claim, he proposes the example of his ontological concept of guilt (i.e. ‘being-guilty’ [Schuldigsein]) as a formal indication [formale Anzeige] which functions as a co-direction for the theological concept of sin. This paper examines how ‘being-guilty’ and ‘sin’ can be related in this way. First, I introduce Heidegger’s notion of formal indication. Next, I explore the ontological meaning of ‘being-guilty’ in Being and Time. Then, I investigate the theological issue of sin with reference to Heidegger’s reading of Luther. Finally, I argue for the cogency of Heidegger’s claim by demonstrating the way in which ‘being-guilty’ can formally indicate and co-direct the meaning of ‘sin’.
ISSN:2169-2335
Contient:Enthalten in: International journal of philosophy and theology
Persistent identifiers:DOI: 10.1080/21692327.2020.1728567