Systematic theology as a rationally justified public discourse about God / / Michael Agerbo Mørch.

• Superior document: Religion, Theologie und Naturwissenschaft
• VerfasserIn: Agerbo Mørch, Michael,
• Place / Publishing House: Göttingen, Germany : : Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht,, [2023]; ©2023
• Year of Publication: 2023
• Edition: 1st ed.
• Language: English
• Series: Religion, Theologie und Naturwissenschaft. .
• Physical Description: 1 online resource (416 pages)

Table of Contents

Intro -- Title Page -- Copyright -- Acknowledgements -- Table of Contents -- Part One: Introduction and Background for the Book -- Chapter One: Introduction -- 1.1 Background for the Book -- 1.2 The Research Problem -- 1.2.1 Terminology -- 1.3 Material -- 1.4 Method -- 1.4.1 Outline -- 1.5 Aim and Relevance of the Book -- Chapter Two: A Selected Overview of The Historical Background -- 2.1 Introduction -- 2.2 Debates in the 20th Century -- 2.2.1 The Barth-Scholz Debate -- 2.2.2 The German Debate in the 60s through the 80s -- 2.2.3 Lund versus Uppsala -- 2.2.4 Chicago vs. Yale -- 2.3 Conclusion -- Part Two: A Scalar Understanding of Systematic Theology -- Chapter Three: A Definition of Scientific Systematic Theology -- 3.1 Introduction -- 3.2 Level One (Systematic Theology 1) -- 3.3 Level Two (Systematic Theology 2) -- 3.4 Level Three (Systematic Theology 3) -- 3.4.1 Niels Henrik Gregersen's Understanding of Systematic Theology 3 -- 3.4.2 Systematic Theology 3 as Normative Ontology -- 3.4.3 Why Systematic Theology 3 May be Scientific and Systematic Theology 1 and 2 Only Derivatively So -- 3.4.4 The Sources of Systematic Theology 3 -- 3.4.4.1 Thought Experiments as a Source for Systematic Theology 3 -- 3.4.4.2 The Natural Sciences -- 3.4.4.3 The Bible and Tradition -- 3.4.5 On the Possibility of a Synchronic Constitution of Systematic Theology -- 3.4.5.1 Lorenz Puntel's Structural-Systematic Approach to a Theory of Being and God -- 3.4.6 The Concept of "Truth Candidate" -- 3.4.7 A Short Introduction to Rescher's Coherence Theory of Truth -- 3.4.8 How to Compare Ontologies. A Puntelian Approach -- 3.4.9 Conclusion -- Part Three: Objections to Systematic Theology as Scientific -- Introduction -- Chapter Four: Objection 1-Testability -- 4.1 Introduction -- 4.2 Premise 1 -- 4.2.1 Definition of Testability.

4.2.2 Testing Single Propositions: Confirmation Theory -- 4.2.2.1 The Defence of Testing Single Propositions -- 4.2.2.2 The Critique of Testing Single Propositions -- 4.2.3 Excursus: Inferences - The Steps from Tests to Conclusions -- 4.2.3.1 Induction -- 4.2.3.2 Inference to the Best Explanation -- 4.2.3.3 Conclusion to Excursus About Inferences -- 4.2.4 Testing Whole Theories: Coherence Theory -- 4.2.5 Conclusion on Premise 1 -- 4.3 Premise 2 -- 4.3.1 Introduction -- 4.3.2 Examination of Coherence I -- 4.3.3 Wolfhart Pannenberg -- 4.3.4 Alister McGrath -- 4.3.5 Nancey Murphy -- 4.3.5.1 Christianity's Crises -- 4.3.5.2 Naturalism's Solution -- 4.3.5.3 Naturalism's Crises -- 4.3.5.4 Christianity's Solution -- 4.3.6 Examination of Coherence II -- 4.3.7 Conclusion on Premise 2 -- 4.4 Conclusion -- Chapter Five: Objection 2-Falsifiability -- 5.1 Introduction -- 5.2 Premise 1 -- 5.2.1 What is Falsification? -- 5.2.2 Karl Popper -- 5.2.3 Thomas Kuhn -- 5.2.4 Imre Lakatos -- 5.2.5 Paul Feyerabend -- 5.2.6 Larry Laudan -- 5.2.7 Falsification at Work 1: The Hypothetico-Deductive Method -- 5.2.7.1 The Deductive-Nomological Model -- 5.2.7.2 The Hypothetico-Deductive Method -- 5.2.8 Falsification at Work 2: Comparing Degrees of Coherence -- 5.2.8.1 Falsification as Comparison of Degrees of Coherence between Ontologies -- 5.2.8.2 Systematization -- 5.2.8.3 Theoretical Framework -- 5.2.8.4 Scientific Theories must be Falsifiable but not Actually Falsified -- 5.2.9 Conclusion on Premise 1 -- 5.3 Premise 2 -- 5.3.1 Examples of Uses of Falsification -- 5.3.2 The Concept of Eschatological Verification -- 5.3.3 Excursus: Falsification at the Level of Systematic Theology 2 -- 5.3.4 Recent Attempts at Rendering Ontologies Comparable -- 5.3.5 Conclusion on Premise 2 -- 5.4 Conclusion -- Chapter Six: Objection 3-Intersubjectivity -- 6.1 Introduction -- 6.2 Premise 1.

6.2.1 What is Intersubjectivity? -- 6.2.1.1 Two Major Positions -- 6.2.1.2 What Does Intersubjectivity Presuppose? -- 6.2.2 What is the Best Understanding of the Criterion of Intersubjectivity in Research? -- 6.2.2.1 Methods, Presuppositions, Data, and Results must be Publicly Accessible -- 6.2.2.2 Methods, Data, and Results must be Independent from the Researcher -- 6.2.2.3 The Importance of Criticism for Intersubjectivity -- 6.2.3 What is Gained from Intersubjectivity? -- 6.2.4 Difficulties for a Clear Concept of Intersubjectivity -- 6.2.4.1 Cognitive Biases in Relation to Intersubjective Criticism -- 6.2.4.2 Interpretive Communities and Paradigmatic Thinking as Possible Problems for Intersubjective Criticism -- 6.2.4.3 The Epistemology of Testimony -- 6.2.4.4 Epistemology and Ontology are Related Holistically -- 6.2.5 Conclusion on Premise 1 -- 6.3. Premise 2 -- 6.3.1 Stating the Problem -- 6.3.2 Models for Intersubjectivity in Systematic Theology -- 6.3.2.1 Demarcated Intersubjectivity -- 6.3.2.2 Paradigmatic Intersubjectivity -- 6.3.2.3 Critical Intersubjectivity -- 6.3.3 Complexities in systematic theology in Relation to Intersubjectivity -- 6.3.4 Insecurities in systematic theology in Relation to Intersubjectivity -- 6.3.4.1. Ontology Deals with Comprehensiveness, Which Often Creates Insecurity -- 6.3.4.2 Accepted Insecurities in an Ontological Theory -- 6.3.5 Conclusion on Premise 2 -- 6.4 Conclusion -- Chapter Seven: Objection 4-Normativity -- 7.1 Introduction -- 7.2 Premise 1 -- 7.2.1 What is Normativity? -- 7.2.1.1 Short Working Definition of Normativity -- 7.2.1.2 Major Positions -- 7.2.1.3 The Inevitability of Normativity -- 7.2.2 What is Normativity Given the Presuppositions of this Book? -- 7.2.2.1 Normativity and Truth -- 7.2.2.2 Normativity and CUDOS -- 7.2.2.3 Normativity and Revision -- 7.2.3 Conclusion of Premise 1.

7.3 Premise 2 -- 7.3.1 Stating the Problem of Strong Normativity in Three Claims -- 7.3.1.1 Strong Normativity Becomes a Problem when it Rests on Questionable Foundations -- 7.3.1.2 Strong Normativity Becomes a Problem When There is a Claim of Truth concerning Supernatural Entities -- 7.3.1.3 Strong Normativity Becomes a Problem When it is Based on Limited Data -- 7.3.2 Models of normativity for Systematic Theology -- 7.3.2.1 As in Religious Studies -- 7.3.2.2 Orthodoxy -- 7.3.2.3 No Normativity-All Theology Is Contextual -- 7.3.3 Strong Normativity in Relation to Coherence in Systematic Theology -- 7.3.4 Conclusion concerning Premise 2 -- 7.4 Conclusion -- Chapter Eight: Objection 5-Distinct Discipline with Distinct Research -- 8.1 Introduction -- 8.2 Premise 1 -- 8.2.1 What is Distinct Research? -- 8.2.2 Why is the Criterion of Distinct Research Important? -- 8.2.3 Conclusion on Premise 1 -- 8.3 Premise 2 -- 8.3.1 What is the General Problem? -- 8.3.2 Supposed Problems for systematic theology as Distinct Research -- 8.3.2.1 Systematic Theology Cannot Identify its Object of Study -- 8.3.2.2 Systematic Theology Cannot Identify its Methods Because of the First Problem -- 8.3.2.3 Systematic Theology Cannot Explain, Only Describe (Systematic Theology 1) -- 8.3.2.4 Systematic Theology Builds on a Weak Foundation of Evidence -- 8.3.3 What Are the Distinctive Marks of Systematic Theology 3? -- 8.3.3.1 Contra Religious Studies -- 8.3.3.2 Contra Philosophy -- 8.3.4 Conclusion on Premise 2 -- 8.4 Conclusion -- Part Four: Conclusion -- Chapter Nine -- 9.1 Summary of the Findings -- 9.2 Conclusion -- 9.3 Theses of the Book -- Bibliography -- Index -- Index of Person -- Index of Subjects -- Body.