Difference between revisions of "Terry Eagleton"

From Conservapedia
Jump to: navigation, search
(Add some context)
m (clean up refs and trim longer quotes)
Line 1: Line 1:
 
'''Terry Eagleton''' is a British literary theorist, author, professor, and critic. He is currently teaching English and creative writing at Lancaster and [[Notre Dame University]], and has previously taught at [[Oxford University]].<ref>[http://www.contemporarywriters.com/authors/?p=authC2D9C28A1123b1D819TsK1844CB4 uni bio]</ref>
 
'''Terry Eagleton''' is a British literary theorist, author, professor, and critic. He is currently teaching English and creative writing at Lancaster and [[Notre Dame University]], and has previously taught at [[Oxford University]].<ref>[http://www.contemporarywriters.com/authors/?p=authC2D9C28A1123b1D819TsK1844CB4 uni bio]</ref>
  
While writing from a Maxist perspective in his early work, some of Eagleton's more recent books have dealt with theological themes from a Catholic perspective, and he has been a longtime critic of [[Postmodernism]], for example in the book ''On Evil'' (2010) and ''The Illusions of Postmodernism'' (2006).  
+
While writing from a Maxist perspective in his early work, some of Eagleton's more recent books have dealt with theological themes from a Catholic perspective, and he has been a longtime critic of [[Postmodernism]], for example in ''On Evil'' (2010) and ''The Illusions of Postmodernism'' (2006).  
  
During four days of talks at [[Yale University]]'s Terry Lectures in April 2008, he spoke of a fictitious person, '''Ditchkins''', which is derived from the merger of the two last names [[Christopher Hitchens|Hitchens]] and [[Richard Dawkins|Dawkins]] (Etymology: '''''D'''''aw'''''kins''''' + H'''''itch'''''e'''''ns'''''). In these lectures Eagleton often caricaturizes the two famed writers and outspoken [[atheist]]s,  routinely drawing [[Christopher Hitchens]] and [[Richard Dawkins]] as one single, formidable debate opponent who lamentably commits various [[logical fallacy|logical fallacies]].  
+
During four days of talks at [[Yale University]]'s Terry Lectures in April 2008, he spoke satirically of a fictitious person, '''Ditchkins''', which is derived from the merger of the two last names [[Christopher Hitchens|Hitchens]] and [[Richard Dawkins|Dawkins]] (Etymology: '''''D'''''aw'''''kins''''' + H'''''itch'''''e'''''ns'''''),  routinely drawing the two men as one single, formidable debate opponent who lamentably commits various [[logical fallacy|logical fallacies]].<ref>"...someone like Richard Dawkins or Christopher Hitchens, a couplet I will henceforth reduce to the solitary signifier Ditchkins..." (April 1, 2008 ''Christianity Fair and Foul'')</ref>
 
<blockquote>
 
<blockquote>
*"...someone like Richard Dawkins or Christopher Hitchens, a couplet I will henceforth reduce to the solitary signifier Ditchkins..." (April 1, 2008 ''Christianity Fair and Foul'')
 
  
*"It would, I think, do no harm to Ditchkins comically intemperate politic against religion, indeed it would reinforce it, to approach the subject as the liberal rationalist that he is rather to subject us as he does to the kind of  indiscriminate condemnation which is neither liberal nor rational. It would be greatly to the benefit of Ditchkins' moral integrity and intellectual honesty, I think, to intersperse his mildly monomaniac diatribes on the topic—we’re speaking here of monotheism versus monomania, if you like—with the odd glancing allusion, I mean even if he relegated it to some shy footnote nestling beneath his text.<ref>Continuation of talk in order to understand quote's entire context: <small> To say, you know, the work in alleviating human suffering which Christianity and other faiths have carried out for centuries among the wretched of the earth or its efforts in the cause of global peace or the readiness that some religious types have shown to lay down their lives for others. All those clergy who have given their lives as martyrs not least in Latin America in the struggle against U.S. supported autocracies. Acknowledging all this would not necessarily mean for Ditchkins sustaining  a fatal wound in the ideology.  Many western liberals are, as I've said before, careful to distinguish their criticisms of so-called Islamism from criticisms of Islam itself. They're really [not] so scrupulous however when  it comes to home-based faiths like religion. It seems not to be the case that liberalism begins at home.  I live in Ireland and the Irish have been shamefully abused and exploited by the Roman Catholic Church in many tediously familiar ways. I won't go through them, but the way the Irish are perhaps the least aware of the way they have been exploited  by the Catholic Church  is the fact that they have not really been offered given a version of  the gospels which took in even the slightest effort to reject for even half decent civilized person so like a lot of people they have been able to buy their atheism or agnosticism on the cheap. And this is a form of deprivation against which one ought properly I think to protest even if it’s a more subtle and less important form of deprivation  than being locked up life by psychopathically sadistic nuns for having born a child out of wedlock  justifiably bad odor in Ireland today  that people sometimes cross the street when they catch sight of a Catholic priest approaching. In the old days it used to be a landlord. Yet the cruelties and stupidities, which the Irish church has perpetrated don't prevent me from recalling how without it generations of my own ancestors in Ireland would have gone unschooled, un-nursed , un-consoled, and unburied.  One of my own forebears in late 19th century Ireland—father Mark Eagleton—got into hot water with his Bishop for denouncing the local landlord from the pulpit but I supposed Dawkins wouldn't take kindly to the case required political caricature characteristics can be genetically transmitted permissible but this does seem to be somewhat of an example of it.</ref> (April 3, 2008 ''The Limits of Liberalism''<ref>video timestamp range 41 minutes 00 seconds to  45 minutes 45 50 seconds</ref>)
+
*"It would, I think, do no harm to Ditchkins comically intemperate politic against religion, indeed it would reinforce it, to approach the subject as the liberal rationalist that he is rather to subject us as he does to the kind of  indiscriminate condemnation which is neither liberal nor rational. It would be greatly to the benefit of Ditchkins' moral integrity and intellectual honesty, I think, to intersperse his mildly monomaniac diatribes on the topic—we’re speaking here of monotheism versus monomania, if you like—with the odd glancing allusion, I mean even if he relegated it to some shy footnote nestling beneath his text.<ref>April 3, 2008: "The Limits of Liberalism" video, timestamp range 41 minutes 00 seconds to  45 minutes 45 50 seconds.</ref>)
  
*"Another familiar mistake by the Ditchkins of this world" (April 8, 2008 ''Faith and Reason'')
+
*"Another familiar mistake by the Ditchkins of this world" <ref>April 8, 2008: "Faith and Reason"</ref>
  
*"[[Moral relativism]] is an attempt to defuse conflict among other things. And so among other things, I think is, [[multi-culturalism]]. Multi-culturalism is extraordinarily coy of calling other people's beliefs errant nonsense, or unmitigated garbage. There are huge amounts of garbage around the place that we need to name for what it is.  One of the most admirable aspects of [[Christopher Hitchens|Chris Hitchens]]'s ''[[God is not great]]''—a superbly stylish and well-argued book—is that Hitchens believes religion is disgusting and has absolutely no qualms about saying so. I mean he may be right or wrong about that, but he's properly unafraid to announce it and to take the consequences of it, including getting snagged off by me, his old comrade. [*Eagleton smiles*]" (April 10, 2008 ''Culture and Barbarism''<ref> video timestamp range 29 minutes 45 seconds to 30 minutes 49 seconds</ref>)<ref>[http://www.yale.edu/terrylecture/eagleton.html "Faith and Fundamentalism: Is Belief in Richard Dawkins Necessary for Salvation?", April 1, 3, 8, 10, 2008] </ref>
+
*"[[Moral relativism]] is an attempt to defuse conflict among other things. And so among other things, I think is, [[multiculturalism]]. Multiculturalism is extraordinarily coy of calling other people's beliefs errant nonsense, or unmitigated garbage. There are huge amounts of garbage around the place that we need to name for what it is.  One of the most admirable aspects of [[Christopher Hitchens|Chris Hitchens]]'s ''God is Not Great''—a superbly stylish and well-argued book—is that Hitchens believes religion is disgusting and has absolutely no qualms about saying so. I mean he may be right or wrong about that, but he's properly unafraid to announce it and to take the consequences of it, including getting snagged off by me, his old comrade. [*Eagleton smiles*]" <ref>April 10, 2008: "Culture and Barbarism" video, timestamp range 29 minutes 45 seconds to 30 minutes 49 seconds. [http://www.yale.edu/terrylecture/eagleton.html "Faith and Fundamentalism: Is Belief in Richard Dawkins Necessary for Salvation?" April 1, 3, 8, 10, 2008] </ref>
 
</blockquote>
 
</blockquote>
  

Revision as of 20:04, July 19, 2011

Terry Eagleton is a British literary theorist, author, professor, and critic. He is currently teaching English and creative writing at Lancaster and Notre Dame University, and has previously taught at Oxford University.[1]

While writing from a Maxist perspective in his early work, some of Eagleton's more recent books have dealt with theological themes from a Catholic perspective, and he has been a longtime critic of Postmodernism, for example in On Evil (2010) and The Illusions of Postmodernism (2006).

During four days of talks at Yale University's Terry Lectures in April 2008, he spoke satirically of a fictitious person, Ditchkins, which is derived from the merger of the two last names Hitchens and Dawkins (Etymology: Dawkins + Hitchens), routinely drawing the two men as one single, formidable debate opponent who lamentably commits various logical fallacies.[2]

  • "It would, I think, do no harm to Ditchkins comically intemperate politic against religion, indeed it would reinforce it, to approach the subject as the liberal rationalist that he is rather to subject us as he does to the kind of indiscriminate condemnation which is neither liberal nor rational. It would be greatly to the benefit of Ditchkins' moral integrity and intellectual honesty, I think, to intersperse his mildly monomaniac diatribes on the topic—we’re speaking here of monotheism versus monomania, if you like—with the odd glancing allusion, I mean even if he relegated it to some shy footnote nestling beneath his text.[3])
  • "Another familiar mistake by the Ditchkins of this world" [4]
  • "Moral relativism is an attempt to defuse conflict among other things. And so among other things, I think is, multiculturalism. Multiculturalism is extraordinarily coy of calling other people's beliefs errant nonsense, or unmitigated garbage. There are huge amounts of garbage around the place that we need to name for what it is. One of the most admirable aspects of Chris Hitchens's God is Not Great—a superbly stylish and well-argued book—is that Hitchens believes religion is disgusting and has absolutely no qualms about saying so. I mean he may be right or wrong about that, but he's properly unafraid to announce it and to take the consequences of it, including getting snagged off by me, his old comrade. [*Eagleton smiles*]" [5]

Notes

  1. uni bio
  2. "...someone like Richard Dawkins or Christopher Hitchens, a couplet I will henceforth reduce to the solitary signifier Ditchkins..." (April 1, 2008 Christianity Fair and Foul)
  3. April 3, 2008: "The Limits of Liberalism" video, timestamp range 41 minutes 00 seconds to 45 minutes 45 50 seconds.
  4. April 8, 2008: "Faith and Reason"
  5. April 10, 2008: "Culture and Barbarism" video, timestamp range 29 minutes 45 seconds to 30 minutes 49 seconds. "Faith and Fundamentalism: Is Belief in Richard Dawkins Necessary for Salvation?" April 1, 3, 8, 10, 2008