Research@StAndrews
 
The University of St Andrews

Research@StAndrews:FullText >
Divinity (School of) >
Divinity >
Divinity Theses >

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/10023/398
This item has been viewed 29 times in the last year. View Statistics

Files in This Item:

File Description SizeFormat
JaniceLDearyPhDThesis.pdf2.42 MBAdobe PDFView/Open
Title: "A picture held us captive" : investigations towards an iconoclastic praxeology
Authors: Deary, Janice L.
Supervisors: Partridge, Michael Francis
Keywords: Iconoclastic discourse and practice
Post-metaphysical continental philosophy and theology
Issue Date: 2007
Abstract: Iconoclastic discourse, as a critique of ‘idols’ of various kinds, has been appropriated by a range of different thinkers and traditions – often not always explicitly religious – throughout history. One of the more recent targets of iconoclasm is metaphysics, understood as a way of doing philosophy that appeals to an ideal or transcendent ground that is used to offer a totalising explanation of ‘reality’. For some reason, the issue of ‘metaphysical idolatry’ has become entangled with the problem of ‘writing’, or ‘representation’ more generally, which is pictured in some rather strange ways by a range of thinkers and theorists – including philosophers and theologians such as Jacques Derrida, Jean-Luc Marion, and Catherine Pickstock – in order to either challenge, or to be held accountable for, the ‘idolatry’ of metaphysical thought. It seems, however, that these strange pictures of writing compound rather than solve the problem of metaphysics, and it is towards pictures such as these that we direct our own iconoclastic critique. What many critics of metaphysics have failed to comprehend, we argue, is that metaphysics is a certain type of philosophical practice, and it must therefore be judged from this perspective. Idolatry itself has, since biblical times, been understood as a form of sinful practice, and unless we understand iconoclastic problems in a praxeological way, we risk basing our critical arguments on delusional assumptions. We turn to the work of thinkers as diverse as Marx, Wittgenstein, Heidegger, Merleau-Ponty, Ryle, Bourdieu, Ingold, and others, who have challenged metaphysics, and the strange pictures that metaphysical thought has inspired, through the adoption of what we call a praxeological approach. It is from this perspective, we argue, that we can make iconoclastic judgements, and justify these judgements, in a way that avoids the speculative conundrums of some other more problematic approaches.
URI: http://hdl.handle.net/10023/398
Type: Thesis
Publisher: University of St Andrews
Appears in Collections:Divinity Theses



This item is protected by original copyright

This item is licensed under a Creative Commons License
Creative Commons

Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.

 

DSpace Software Copyright © 2002-2012  Duraspace - Feedback
For help contact: Digital-Repository@st-andrews.ac.uk | Copyright for this page belongs to St Andrews University Library | Terms and Conditions (Cookies)