Jason Alvis – författare

Continental philosophers of religion have been engaging with theological issues, concepts and questions for several decades, blurring the borders between the domains of philosophy and theology. Yet when Emmanuel Falque proclaims that both theologians and philosophers need not be afraid of crossing the Rubicon – the point of no return – between these often artificially separated disciplines, he scandalised both camps. Despite the scholarly reservations, the theological turn in French phenomenology has decisively happened. The challenge is now to interpret what this given fact of creative encounters between philosophy and theology means for these disciplines.In this collection, written by both theologians and philosophers, the question “Must we cross the Rubicon?” is central. However, rather than simply opposing or subscribing to Falque’s position, the individual chapters of this book interrogate and critically reflect on the relationship between theology and philosophy, offering novel perspectives and redrawing the outlines of their borderlands.

Continental philosophers of religion have been engaging with theological issues, concepts and questions for several decades, blurring the borders between the domains of philosophy and theology. Yet when Emmanuel Falque proclaims that both theologians and philosophers need not be afraid of crossing the Rubicon – the point of no return – between these often artificially separated disciplines, he scandalised both camps. Despite the scholarly reservations, the theological turn in French phenomenology has decisively happened. The challenge is now to interpret what this given fact of creative encounters between philosophy and theology means for these disciplines.In this collection, written by both theologians and philosophers, the question “Must we cross the Rubicon?” is central. However, rather than simply opposing or subscribing to Falque’s position, the individual chapters of this book interrogate and critically reflect on the relationship between theology and philosophy, offering novel perspectives and redrawing the outlines of their borderlands.

This book examines the various encounters between Jean-Luc Marion and Jacques Derrida on “the gift,” considers their many differences on “desire,” and demonstrates how these topics hold the keys to some of phenomenology’s most pressing structural questions, especially regarding “deconstructive” approaches within the field.  The book claims that the topic of desire is a central lynchpin to understanding the two thinkers’ conflict over the gift, for the gift is reducible to the “desire to give,” which initiates a turn to the topic of “generosity.”  To what degree might loving also imply giving? How far might it be suggested that love is reducible to desire and intentionality? It is demonstrated how Derrida (the generative “father” of deconstruction) rejects the possibility of any potential relation between the gift and desire on the account that desire is bound to calculative repetition, economical appropriation, and subject-centered interests that hinder deconstruction.  Whereas Marion (a representative of the phenomenological tradition) demands a unique union between the gift and desire, which are both represented in his “reduction to givenness” and “erotic reduction.” The book is the first extensive attempt to contextualize the stark differences between Marion and Derrida within the phenomenological legacy (Husserl, Heidegger, Kant), supplies readers with in-depth accounts of the topics of the gift, love, and desire, and demonstrates another means through which the appearing of phenomena might be understood, namely, according to the generosity of things.

This book examines the various encounters between Jean-Luc Marion and Jacques Derrida on “the gift,” considers their many differences on “desire,” and demonstrates how these topics hold the keys to some of phenomenology’s most pressing structural questions, especially regarding “deconstructive” approaches within the field.  The book claims that the topic of desire is a central lynchpin to understanding the two thinkers’ conflict over the gift, for the gift is reducible to the “desire to give,” which initiates a turn to the topic of “generosity.”  To what degree might loving also imply giving? How far might it be suggested that love is reducible to desire and intentionality? It is demonstrated how Derrida (the generative “father” of deconstruction) rejects the possibility of any potential relation between the gift and desire on the account that desire is bound to calculative repetition, economical appropriation, and subject-centered interests that hinder deconstruction.  Whereas Marion (a representative of the phenomenological tradition) demands a unique union between the gift and desire, which are both represented in his “reduction to givenness” and “erotic reduction.”

The book is the first extensive attempt to contextualize the stark differences between Marion and Derrida within the phenomenological legacy (Husserl, Heidegger, Kant), supplies readers with in-depth accounts of the topics of the gift, love, and desire, and demonstrates another means through which the appearing of phenomena might be understood, namely, according to the generosity of things.