Wednesday, January 6, 2010

The God-dess

Western religion and philosophy of religion have been dominated by men. Obviously. But what is less obvious is that that should make any philosophical difference. Philosophy is supposedly governed by reason, and reason is supposedly universal, unbiased, standpoint-neutral. It shouldn’t matter who is reasoning; reason itself leads to its results. So it shouldn’t matter philosophically that philosophy has been dominated by men.

But it does matter, Cambridge philosopher Sarah Coakley (b. 1951) argues. If the feminist philosophy developed in recent decades were taken seriously, it could have far-reaching implications for the philosophy of religion.

Consider, for example, the concept of the self. Great emphasis has been placed on the individual’s utter autonomy, his ability freely to determine his actions. This emphasis derives from traditional responses to the problem of evil: God permits the evils perpetrated by individuals because that is the necessary price for granting them the greater good of free will. But feminist philosophers notice something interesting about this conception of the “autonomous self”: rather than being historically and gender neutral, a product of pure reasoning, it in fact traces directly to the visions of autonomy promoted by the 18th century Enlightenment--and reflects an ideal available and suitable only to males. For only males were “independent” and “autonomous,” capable of earning their own living, susceptible to the education which allows one to make genuinely autonomous choices, and so on. Women were dependents, financially, politically, intellectually, and otherwise.

That paradigm notion of the “free individual” turns out to be that of a man!

And the very conception of God also reflects this bias. From the earliest Greek philosophers the deity was conceived to be eternally unchanging, an unmoved mover with unlimited power and autonomy: that is, a magnified version of the male ideal just described. Moreover the attributes philosophers have for centuries attributed to God, such as power, wisdom, immutability, moral purity, and so on, are attributes traditionally stereotypical of men, while the attributes they’ve assigned to human beings so inferior to God, such as weakness, ignorance, inconstancy, and sinfulness, are those traditionally stereotypical of women.

It’s clear: we must reject the idea that the philosophy of religion has been “universal” and “neutral” in its pursuits--for how convenient that their very conception of the “transcendent” and “genderless” God in fact was that of a man!

It’s also clear: if God has ultimately been conceived as male, then maleness itself must be conceived to be divine.

As feminist philosophy slowly begins to make inroads into philosophy of religion we might expect to see shifts of emphasis and new ideas and arguments. We might begin to see less emphasis on this masculine notion of individual autonomy, the “unconditioned” self who dominates and controls his environment, and more openness to the perhaps feminine notion of a self involved in mutual dependence and relationship with others and her environment. So too we might begin to see changes in the masculine conception of God as autonomous, all-powerful, and all-dominant, outside of time and history yet controlling of it, and more openness to the perhaps feminine idea of a nurturing and loving God, one who is within the world, to whom we may be more than mere “subjects” and with whom we may be in active relationship.

We may not go so far as to insist that God just is a woman. But we can at least hope that philosophers of religion become aware of the male perspective and bias which ever so subtly influences their allegedly neutral, universal, “rational” reflections.


Source: Sarah Coakley, “Feminism,” in Philip L. Quinn and Charles Taliaferro, eds., A Companion to Philosophy of Religion (Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishers, 1999).

16 comments:

  1. From a Christian's point of view the question of God's relation to men and God's relation to women has been sorted out in Genesis chapter 1: v 26-28.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Thank you so much for writing this. I read every word like (I don't know) chocolate or something delicious.
    Bravo!

    ReplyDelete
  3. ^^~~輕輕鬆鬆的逛部落格,多謝有您的分享哦~~~........................................

    ReplyDelete
  4. 若對自己誠實,日積月累,就無法對別人不忠了。........................................

    ReplyDelete
  5. 援交女豆豆出租情人視訊sogo論壇視訊辣妹桃園兼職援交辣妹視訊一對一視訊520sex日本視訊小魔女自拍av1688影音娛樂網辣手美眉甜心寶貝直播貼片免費色咪咪視訊網pc交友視訊美女ggoo免費視訊情色網咆哮小老鼠高雄援交夢中情人情趣用品sex888免費看影片波霸美女寫真sex888免費看影片視訊新竹援交留言0401成人聊天室甜心寶貝貼影片援交友留言桃園sogo 論壇080情人網視訊泳裝秀拓網交友色美眉免費看視訊免費色咪咪影片網 兼職援交聊天室ilover99a片天堂卡通aa片台灣情色網無碼avdvd色色網sexy diamond sex888入口高雄視訊辣妹自拍免費a片亞洲東洋影片hilive本土自拍天堂西門慶成人論壇 費 aaa 片試看dudu sex免費影片avdvd一夜情色妹妹免費情慾影片觀賞qq美美色網影片av免費影片日本 a 片自拍偷拍網站情色小說jp成人a 片日本avdvd女優xxx383美女寫真日本avdvd小魔女免費影城無碼avdvd無碼卡通情色情色論壇甜心寶貝貼片區Show-live視訊聊天室 情色免費A片情色偷拍免費A片一本道 a片 東京熱avdvd影片色美眉台中援交aa 片試看aaa 片試看情人輔助品成人網站做愛自拍偷拍免費試看av免費成人電影dudu sex免費 aa 片試看臺灣情色網線上免費a長片0204免費a片試看a片免費試看a片天堂台灣論壇成人a漫畫免費視訊聊天ing免費視訊美女aaa影片下載城卡通aa片免費看成人影片分享視訊聊天評比104免費成人情色文學小說

    ReplyDelete