The vital status of patients who are a part of controlled donation after circulatory death (cDCD) is widely debated in bioethical literature. Opponents to currently applied cDCD protocols argue that they violate the dead donor rule, while proponents of the protocols advocate compatibility. In this article, we argue that both parties often misinterpret the moral implications of the dead donor rule. The rule as such does not require an assessment of a donor’s vital status, we contend, but rather an assessment (...) of whether procurement of organs in cDCD cause the death of the donor or not. We then argue that commonly practiced cDCD protocols do not violate the dead donor rule, since the donation does not trigger or cause the death of the donors. (shrink)

In The Lily in the Field and the Bird of the Air (1849), Kierkegaard presents a succinct critique of Romantic aesthetics, in line with contemporary critiques of ecocriticism and ecophilosophy, e.g. by Timothy Morton. Whereas Romantic poets see nature as a mirror of their inner thoughts and pathos, thereby divinising themselves and their creativity, Kierkegaard emphasises the authority of the Creator and the exteriority of nature. He identifies the consequences of such Romantic self-infatuation on all levels of discourse: aesthetics, ethics, (...) epistemology and ontology, and seeks to formulate an alternative. I argue that the discourses thus represent an alternative philosophy of nature, revealing an immediate joy for the gift of being-there. Being human thus means being dependent on and embedded in nature. This makes Kierkegaard a highly relevant interlocutor for contemporary ecophilosophy and ecocriticism, as revealed by Knausgård’s novel Morgenstjernen (2020). (shrink)

In this phenomenological reading of Luther, Marius Timmann Mjaaland shows that theological discourse is never philosophically neutral and always politically loaded. Raising questions concerning the conditions of modern philosophy, religion, and political ideas, Marius Timmann Mjaaland follows a dark thread of thought back to its origin in Martin Luther. Thorough analyses of the genealogy of secularization, the political role of the apocalypse, the topology of the self, and the destruction of metaphysics demonstrate the continuous relevance of this highly subtle thinker.

What is death: a process or a specific declaration? Is it a biological continuum of events or a decision based on medical, ethical, and legal criteria? In our view, it is both, and there are philos...

SUMMARYI have identified and briefly analyzed three examples of sacrificial logic in the intersection of politics and religion. My analysis, which is based on the texts of Girard, Kierkegaard, and Levinas, concerns the heroic self-sacrifice of soldiers, the religiously motivated sacrifice of the suicide bombers, and the everyday sacrifice of the unborn in the silent rites of the clinic – all three characterized by cultural unease and ambivalence.These examples may indicate why the European Society for Philosophy of Religion had chosen (...) “Sacrifice” as topic for its conference in Oslo in August 2008: the questions have profound significance and wide bearing, thus opening up the field of philosophical discourse far beyond the traditional perspectives of Jewish-Christian thought. (shrink)

There are certain things that can be explained and certain things that cannot be explained. This book is about the latter. It is a book about death: how death interrupts and influences the reflection on the self. It is a book about God: a detailed and critical discussion on how Kierkegaard and Derrida apply the concept of God in their philosophical reflections. The most ground-breaking analysis concerns the famous passage on the self in The Sickness unto Death, where the author (...) combines logical, rhetorical and dialectical means to establish a new perspective on Kierkegaard's thinking in general. The Cartesian doubt then constitutes a common trait for his detailed and rigorous analysis of Derrida and Kierkegaard on death, madness, faith, and rationality - showing how they both seek to break up the Hegelian Aufhebung from within, but still remain dependent on Hegel. After Kierkegaard and Derrida, the certainty and total uncertainty of death - and of God as infinite other - gives the self a basic, though non-foundational, responsibility. The significance of this responsibility, of this other, of this death, requires sustained and thorough consideration. Where others mark a conclusion, this book therefore marks a point of departure: reflecting on oneself at the graveside of a dead man - thus introducing an Autopsia. (shrink)

Morality and immorality is a complex issue in Martin Luther's thought and the complexity increases the more he unfolds the topic. In the course of his controversy with Erasmus, he meets a well founded criticism of his own moralization. In the first three sections of this article I discuss their respective positions and the consequences of a moral vs. an immoral interpretation of Scripture. In the last three sections I proceed to inquire whether immorality or rather a-morality may play a (...) more basic and principal role for the interpretation of scriptures in general. The distinction between Scripture as a particular text corpus and the scripturality of the scriptures thereby becomes critical. I suggest that the latter plays a crucial role in Luther's radical criticism and destruction of the moral subsumption of theology, with consequences for a current reassessment of the sola scriptura. (shrink)

It is impossible not to discuss the question of time, at least for the philosophy of religion. However, to discuss the question of time is equally impossible, as the various perspectives presented in this volume show. Then what is time? Time is not, and yet everything is within time. Time is, but neither substance nor pure form. Being a dimension of all Being, not even God could or would withdraw from time. The authors of the contributions to this volume discuss (...) the unavoidability of time and its paradoxes, not the least with the purpose of giving time, as a recurring topic for the philosophy of religion. Contributors: Joseph Ballan, Jonna Bornemark, Oystein Brekke, Rebecca Comay, Iben Damgaard, Arne Gron, Jan-Olav Henriksen, Marius Timmann Mjaaland, Carsten Pallesen, Ulrik Houlind Rasmussen, Werner Stegmaier, Philipp Stoellger, Claudia Welz. (shrink)

Kierkegaard became a key figure in postmodern philosophy by questioning the very conditions of modernity. Still, the term “deconstruction” seems to reflect his key concerns more precisely, in particular his insistence on a paradox at the heart of Hegel's system, which allows the texts to be deconstructed from within. Some philosophers were concerned with his notion of repetition, uncovering cross‐references between philosophy, literature, and religion. Sacrifice, secrecy, and subjectivity are bones of contention between Levinas and Derrida, but the latter argues (...) that Kierkegaard can hardly be called an advocate of egoism. On the contrary, he is concerned with subjectivity in general, sometimes implying a sacrifice of ethics for the sake of ethical responsibility. Finally, Kierkegaard's notion of writing, suspension of ethics, and repetition gives hope for a future gift, beyond calculation. Whereas Nietzsche concludes that God is dead, the postmoderns see in Kierkegaard the promise of an Other to come. (shrink)

The classical controversy between Carl Schmitt and Eric Peterson goes directly to the heart of the matter: What is ‘political theology’ about? Is it a descriptive or normative endeavour, oriented towards history or political influence on contemporary issues? This article explores these questions with reference to Protestant theology, in particular the writings of Martin Luther. Protestant theology has often emphasised the basic difference between the spiritual and political spheres, but I question the validity of this distinction with respect to Luther’s (...) theology. When Luther enters the political scene, an apocalyptic understanding of friend and enemy tends to dominate his thinking. Furthermore, I discuss whether this is compatible with his metaphysical understanding of the ‘hidden God’ in his majesty, and hence, whether a metaphysical violence is deeply embedded in Luther’s theology, possibly even his understanding of ‘justification by faith’. Finally, I suggest a reconsideration of Luther’s political theology based on the questions raised by Schmitt and Peterson. (shrink)

A philosophical inquiry into politics, embodiment and religion takes us straight to some of contemporary culture's most notorious issues: suicide bombing, the veiled and the exposed body, and present-day biopolitics. Interpretations of the body have always been contested, both in the history of philosophy and in the history of religions. On the one hand, the body has been perceived as a prison, binding the soul to transience, darkness, and confusion. Yet on the other hand, it has itself been controlled and (...) disciplined by reason and will, law and culture. The ten contributors to The Body Unbound suggest that inquiries into the nature of human embodiment must take into account both context and history in order to scrutinize them and to uncover resources for unbinding a body which has been doubly bound. (shrink)

ZusammenfassungIn der Heidelberger Disputation (1518) lehnt Luther die aristotelische Anthropologie und den scholastischen Gottesbegriff ab. Stattdessen behauptet er die Einheit der Verborgenheit Gottes am Kreuz und der paradoxalen Liebe Gottes zu den Menschen. Nicht nur in diesem Fall, sondern dauerhaft und durchgehend scheint die polemische und zugespitzte Form der Disputation die evangelische Theologie geprägt zu haben – im Guten wie im Schlechten. Ich gehe daher der Frage nach, wie die Sprachformen der Disputation und des Dialogs dieses Denken diskursiv formatiert haben. (...) Die sokratische Wahrheitssuche einerseits und die scholastische Polemik andererseits haben m. E. diese Denkform tiefgehend beeinflusst. Mit seiner Schrifthermeneutik spitzt aber Luther die theologische Wahrheitsbehauptung noch einmal zu. Theodor Dieter lehnt aber Luthers Disjunktion zwischen Selbstliebe und Kreuzesliebe als weder schlüssig noch besonders überzeugend ab. Gegen Dieter schlage ich vor, dieses Denken anders zu interpretieren, und zwar vom Paradox her. Dadurch komme ich zu einer neuen Antwort auf die alte Frage nach dem Schibboleth, dem Grundprinzip und der Erkennbarkeit einer „evangelischen“ Sprache. (shrink)