Die Erde ist eine Scheibe, um die sich die Sonne dreht
Authors
Department
Theologische Fakultät
Collections
Loading...
Abstract
Im Verlauf der Diskussion um die Kanonizität des Alten Testaments, die durch einen Aufsatz aus der Feder von Notger Slenczka provoziert wurde, hat einer seiner Kollegen, Christoph Markschies, die Diskussion über diese Frage abgelehnt mit der Begründung, die Diskussion über die Kanonizität des AT gleiche der Diskussion der Frage, ob die Erde nicht doch eine Scheibe sei. Der vorliegende Text geht zurück auf einen Vortrag über 'theologische Gesprächskultur'. In der Linie von Sokrates bis Petrus Abaelard versucht der Verfasser zu zeigen, dass das europäische Verständnis von Wissenschaft begründet ist in der Bereitschaft, auch die scheinbar unerschütterlichen Überzeugungen und Gewissheiten in Frage zu stellen. Das ist begründet in der Einsicht, dass alle unsere Erkenntnisse, auch die allerselbstverständlichsten, Täuschung sein können (griechisch 'doxa – Schein' im Gegensatz zur 'aletheia – Wahrheit' [so Sokrates nach Platon]).
Im letzten Abschnitt des Textes wird gezeigt, dass die Überzeugung, dass die Erde eine Scheibe ist, um die die Sonne und die anderen Planeten kreisen (auch nach Copernicus) wahr in dem Sinne, dass Menschen unvermeidlich an eine Perspektive gebunden sind, die durch ihren Leib markiert ist, eine Perspektive, aus der unvermeidlich die Sonne auf- und untergeht (und nicht die Erde sich dreht) und Nord und Ost feste Richtungen sind, die nicht ineinander übergehen (was der Fall ist, wenn man die Kugelgestalt der Erde in Rechnung stellt). Das Zugeständnis, dass in gewisser Hinsicht (!) die Erde eine Scheibe ist, impliziert die Anerkennung, dass wir an eine Leib-Perspektive gebunden sind und für uns als endliche Wesen der Weg zur Wahrheit die Infragestellung und Diskussion aller Wahrheitsansprüche ist, auch derer, die wir für selbstverständlich halten – wie Sokrates nicht zu wissen beansprucht, sondern sich dadurch ausgezeichnet weiss, dass er nicht weiss, sondern in Frage stellt.
During a debate on the canonicity of the Old Testament provoked by a paper from Notger Slenczka, one of his colleagues, Christoph Markschies, refused to engage in a dispute on this subject that, according to him, had been firmly settled quite some time ago. He compared the discussion on the canonicity of the Old Testament to a debate on whether or not, after all, the earth really is flat. The paper presented here originates from a talk on the ‘culture of dialogue in theology'. In following a path from Socrates to Peter Abelard, it is argued that the European concept of science is rooted in the readiness to challenge even the most widely accepted convictions and certitudes. This approach follows from the insight that all of our truth-claims, even the most deeply rooted ones, could somehow be deceptive appearances. - At the conclusion of the paper, it will be shown that the conviction that the earth is flat and the sun and the planets are revolving around the earth can be considered true in the sense that human beings are tied to a perspective that is defined by their body – a perspective from which the sun rises and sets and North and West are fixed directions and are not merging into each other as they actually do if one takes into consideration the spherical shape of the earth. Thus, to admit that, in a way, the earth is flat, means to acknowledge that we are tied to a body-perspective, as the inhabitants of the cave in Plato's parable are tied to their seats and by that to a perspective. For finite beings, inevitably, the world of human life (Lebenswelt) contradicts their scientific insights and vice versa: even a scientist experiences 'sunrise' and 'sunset'. Thus, any genuine path toward truth requires that one challenge and question even the most basic truth claims on a given subject matter, and especially those that are taken for granted.
During a debate on the canonicity of the Old Testament provoked by a paper from Notger Slenczka, one of his colleagues, Christoph Markschies, refused to engage in a dispute on this subject that, according to him, had been firmly settled quite some time ago. He compared the discussion on the canonicity of the Old Testament to a debate on whether or not, after all, the earth really is flat. The paper presented here originates from a talk on the ‘culture of dialogue in theology'. In following a path from Socrates to Peter Abelard, it is argued that the European concept of science is rooted in the readiness to challenge even the most widely accepted convictions and certitudes. This approach follows from the insight that all of our truth-claims, even the most deeply rooted ones, could somehow be deceptive appearances. - At the conclusion of the paper, it will be shown that the conviction that the earth is flat and the sun and the planets are revolving around the earth can be considered true in the sense that human beings are tied to a perspective that is defined by their body – a perspective from which the sun rises and sets and North and West are fixed directions and are not merging into each other as they actually do if one takes into consideration the spherical shape of the earth. Thus, to admit that, in a way, the earth is flat, means to acknowledge that we are tied to a body-perspective, as the inhabitants of the cave in Plato's parable are tied to their seats and by that to a perspective. For finite beings, inevitably, the world of human life (Lebenswelt) contradicts their scientific insights and vice versa: even a scientist experiences 'sunrise' and 'sunset'. Thus, any genuine path toward truth requires that one challenge and question even the most basic truth claims on a given subject matter, and especially those that are taken for granted.
Description
Keywords
Wissenschaft, Gesprächskultur, Kritik, Kopernikus, Culture of discourse, Copernicus, critique, science
Dewey Decimal Classification
230 Christentum
Citation
Slenczka, Notger.(2018). Die Erde ist eine Scheibe, um die sich die Sonne dreht. 10.18452/19139