Andre Heinze – författare

André Heinze war von 2002 bis zu seinem frühen Tod im März 2013 Professor für Neues Testament an der Theologischen Hochschule Elstal. Er hat in seiner 11-jährigen Tätigkeit als Hochschulprofessor für Neues Testament zahlreiche Studierende geprägt. Zugleich war er ihnen ein Vorbild dafür, dass wissenschaftliche Exegese und persönliche Spiritualität einander ergänzen und voneinander profitieren. Sowohl in seinen Vorlesungen als auch Predigten und Vorträgen hat er immer wieder vorgeführt, dass gerade die Verbindung von Exegese und Spiritualität ihr Gespräch miteinander zu einer tiefen, klaren und lebensrelevanten Theologie führt.Der vorliegende Sammelband würdigt André Heinze, indem er die wichtigsten Aufsätze und Referate aus den Bereichen Exegese und Theologie mit besonderen geistlichen Texten verbindet. Dazu gehören auch theologische Reflektionen über seine schwere Krebserkrankung sowie teilweise noch unveröffentlichte Beiträge.[Exegesis – Spirituality – Theology. Contributions to a Theology in the Here and Now]André Heinze has been from 2002 up to his early death in March 2013 professor of New Testament at the Theological Seminary at Elstal. Both in his lectures and his sermons and speeches he has shown time and again that the dialogue between exegesis and spirituality can lead up to a deep, clear and relevant theology.The present volume pays homage to André Heinze by linking his most important contributions from the fields of exegesis and theology with special spiritual texts. It includes also theological reflections on his severe cancer disease and partly unpublished articles.

Seminar paper from the year 2006 in the subject Politics - Topic: European Union, grade: 1,7, University of Mannheim (Fakultat fur Sozialwissenschaften), course: Europaische Demokratien im Vergleich, language: English, abstract: This paper shows that it is quite unlikely that voters are able to express their true preferences sufficiently. In the first part I assume a voter who is aware of his own true preferences. However, the electoral system offers an incentive to vote strategically. In such a situation the voter is aware that he doesn`t express what he favours most, but what he thinks he can support without wasting his vote. I will show that it is possible to limit the incentive for voting strategically either by the choice of the electoral system or by the abolishment of polls. The second part shows first that it is quite unlikely that a voter is able to identify his true preferences, either because of Hume`s problem of Induction or because of complexity. Complexity is enhanced when Media comes into the game, because voters have to consider both the argument and those who created the argument. Therefore it is necessary to show, that Media has an incentive to collude. If one assumes Media to collude it doesn`t explain why voters` preferences are shaped. Preferences are shaped either due to media`s creation of mutual beliefs or by persuasion. Persuasion refers to complexity, because it is rather difficult to consider additionally the interests of those who created a certain media product. However, votes are expressed and aggregated. But whose or what preferences are that?