What do you think?
Rate this book
ژیژک و الهیات
آدام کوتسکو در کتاب حاضر کوشیده چرخش الهیاتی ژیژک را تبیین کند. به عبارت دیگر، کوتسکو درصدد آن است که نشان دهد چرا ژیژک در صورتبندی قرائت بدیع خود از ماتریالیسم دیالکتیکی ملزم بوده به سنت الهیات یهودی مسیحی روی آورد. پس کوتسکو علاوه بر ارائه شرحی موجز از بنیانهای نظری اندیشه ژیژک در سنت روانکاوی لکانی در دو فصل نخست کتاب خط و ربط ارجاعات ژیژک را با ایدههایی همچون شریعت/قانون، عشق مسیحی، رخداد – مسیح و روحالقدس و کسانی چون پولس رسول و ایوب و نیز دشوارههای نظری ماتریالیسم دیالکتیکی ویژه او نشان میدهد. مؤلف کتاب که خود در سنت آکادمیک الهیات جدید بالیده، کوشیده نسبت قرائت ژیژک را با الهیات مسیحی و اندیشهٔ متألهان مسیحی معاصر، از دیتریش بونهافر و پل تیلیش گرفته تا تامس آلتیزر و جان، میلبنک واکاوی کند.
283 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 2008
4 people are currently reading
220 people want to read
About the author
Adam Kotsko
29 books75 followers
Adam Kotsko
(b. 1980) is an American writer on theology, philosophy and popular culture, also known for his contributions to the blogosphere. His printed works include Why We Love Sociopaths (2012), Awkwardness (2010), and the authoritative Žižek and Theology (2008). Kotsko joined the faculty of Shimer College in Chicago in 2011, teaching the humanities component of Shimer's Great Books curriculum. Kotsko earned his BA at Olivet Nazarene University, and his MA and Ph.D. at the Chicago Theological Seminary. (from Shimer College Wiki)
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 8 of 8 reviews
i-want-money
October 11, 2013An interview with Kotsko ::
"An interview over Zizek"
https://itself.wordpress.com/2013/10/...
"Žižek understands the Christian experience in terms of the death of God. For him, Christianity is the most radical form of atheism insofar as even God himself becomes an unbeliever in Christ’s cry of dereliction on the cross. This differs from other forms of atheism or skepticism, because Žižek believes that most people who deny a particular God still believe in something else that fills the same role. A scientist, for instance, will generally believe in something like the laws of nature, or a Communist might believe in the laws of historical necessity. Only the Christian experience of a God who doesn’t believe in himself provides the guarantee that we won’t be able to sneak in a new idol to take the old God’s place."
"An interview over Zizek"
https://itself.wordpress.com/2013/10/...
"Žižek understands the Christian experience in terms of the death of God. For him, Christianity is the most radical form of atheism insofar as even God himself becomes an unbeliever in Christ’s cry of dereliction on the cross. This differs from other forms of atheism or skepticism, because Žižek believes that most people who deny a particular God still believe in something else that fills the same role. A scientist, for instance, will generally believe in something like the laws of nature, or a Communist might believe in the laws of historical necessity. Only the Christian experience of a God who doesn’t believe in himself provides the guarantee that we won’t be able to sneak in a new idol to take the old God’s place."
December 31, 2016
An absolutely brilliant book. Maybe one has to have wrestled with Žižek for a while to appreciate how truly great it is. No doubt there are gaps in Kotsko's explanation but none is nearly as great as something Žižek would have left behind without Kotsko.
That said, I still don't quite understand why Žižek's theological turn was necessary, which is a point Kotsko does not tire of repeating. Kotsko says that the theological turn coincided with and was triggered by his reading of Badiou and what struck him in Badiou was "truth". Yet, Kotsko portrays Žižek's relationship to Badiou's book on the Apostle Paul in negative terms. Kotsko summarizes by juxtaposing Badiou's "theology of glory" with Žižek's "theology of the cross".
Kotsko seems to suggest Badiou is too much of a system-builder and invests the system with too much truth or at least credibility while for Žižek the radical subjectivity of the Cartesian doubt is the ultimate truth. I doubt very much that is the correct way of portraying Badiou, whose magnum opus Being and Event is modelled after Cartesian meditations and animated by Cartesian doubt. The systems that Badiou may build are permeated by nothingness, which is the same ultimate horizon that Žižek uses as his baseline. For Badiou, fullness is, simply put, empty.
Maybe my inability to follow Kotsko here accounts for my losing the thread. However, Kotsko does so many things right as to make that bit almost negligible. Kotsko's book is a good summary of Žižek's theological turn and, since the theological turn is presented as something that was necessary for Žižek's philosophy, it is also a good summary of his thought in general. It is nice to see that Žižek's trajectory resembles mine so much, which made the book so perfectly relatable for me.
That said, I still don't quite understand why Žižek's theological turn was necessary, which is a point Kotsko does not tire of repeating. Kotsko says that the theological turn coincided with and was triggered by his reading of Badiou and what struck him in Badiou was "truth". Yet, Kotsko portrays Žižek's relationship to Badiou's book on the Apostle Paul in negative terms. Kotsko summarizes by juxtaposing Badiou's "theology of glory" with Žižek's "theology of the cross".
Kotsko seems to suggest Badiou is too much of a system-builder and invests the system with too much truth or at least credibility while for Žižek the radical subjectivity of the Cartesian doubt is the ultimate truth. I doubt very much that is the correct way of portraying Badiou, whose magnum opus Being and Event is modelled after Cartesian meditations and animated by Cartesian doubt. The systems that Badiou may build are permeated by nothingness, which is the same ultimate horizon that Žižek uses as his baseline. For Badiou, fullness is, simply put, empty.
Maybe my inability to follow Kotsko here accounts for my losing the thread. However, Kotsko does so many things right as to make that bit almost negligible. Kotsko's book is a good summary of Žižek's theological turn and, since the theological turn is presented as something that was necessary for Žižek's philosophy, it is also a good summary of his thought in general. It is nice to see that Žižek's trajectory resembles mine so much, which made the book so perfectly relatable for me.
July 15, 2012
Adam Kotsko does a thorough job of analyzing Zizek's psychoanalytic process and his critique of theology and the Christian experience. Kotsko successfully brings Zizek under the theological scope and reveals the ways in which Zizek has stimulated theology. In the end we find that Zizek, within the realm of Christianity can be thought provoking, however, according to Kotsko, Zizek "is not Christian enough..." Meaning, the dialectical materialism that Zizek invokes all throughout his work does nothing more than merely scratch the surfaces of the theological agenda. That doesn't mean Zizek has nothing to offer in this dialectic materialistic exchange. For we find out that this dialectical materialism isn't one that seeks to render itself a reductionist, no, on the contrary, within this exchange there should arise levels where "deadlocks" evolve to a more successful level of engagement. In retrospect I highly recommend this book, for the simple reason that theologians should be more aware of psychoanalysts, for in their critique(s) they provide tools for theologians to better understand the world they engage with. Good theology seeks to bridge the gaps, by listening and understanding what the other is saying, only then can theology assess and reveal what God has hidden in our midst.
March 12, 2019
Basic knowledge of continental philosophy and especially Critical theory is needed to grasp this book. Doubtless, a helpful resource which engages Zizek’s Christianity for those willing radicalize their hyper Protestant and anti-traditional theology. Yet for traditional Protestants, Catholics, and Orthodox readers Zizek represents a heretic to be avoided.
January 1, 2009
despite its focus on theology, this is an excellent introduction to the whole body of Zizek's thought. The book really clears up Zizek's usage of Lacanian terms. Kotsko's discussion on Zizek's views on perversion and hysteria really helped me see the subject in a new light. More importantly, Kotsko places Zizek in contemporary theological debates and helps the uninformed place these issues in context. This book is highly recommended for beginners to Zizek.
August 23, 2013
Well Kotsko does a great job doing justice to the movement in Zizek's thought but his theological engagement with Zizek's work is limited. He devotes a whole section to Altizer when he could have done so much more with Bonhoeffer. As a guide to Zizek's thought this book is one of the best that I've ever come across and that makes up for all the shortcomings.
January 15, 2009
An excellent overview of Zizek's engagement with Christian theology, Mr. Kotsko provides the reader with a clear and coherent version of Zizek's understanding of Christianity and its relationship to Lacanian psychoanalysis, Marxism, and Hegel.
July 9, 2012
This is a really great introduction to Žižek's thought from a theological perspective. Kotsko is a sharp mind and a great writer, bringing together the great many diverse threads of Žižek's philosophical tapestry in only 150 short pages. Highly recommended.
Displaying 1 - 8 of 8 reviews