Thesis (Ph.D.)--Hong Kong Baptist University, 2005. / Thesis submitted to the Dept. of Religion and Philosophy. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 183-201).

Ce travail visera à analyser la pensée politique du théologien et politologue américain Reinhold Niebuhr (1892-1971), et plus particulièrement la façon dont le Pragmatisme a pu influencer son oeuvre. Critique à l’égard de l’idéalisme libéral de John Dewey (1859-1952), et plus spécifiquement à l’encontre de l’optimisme dont faisait preuve le pragmatisme politique vis-à-vis de la nature de l’homme, Niebuhr n’arriva pourtant pas à échapper à l’influence du pragmatisme, d’où le sujet de ce travail de recherche : les influences du Pragmatisme politique, celui de John Dewey plus particulièrement, sur l’oeuvre de Reinhold Niebuhr et sur son réalisme chrétien. Cette thèse rassemblera les grandes oeuvres des deux penseurs pour comparer la pensée politique de chacun. Selon Niebuhr, la pensée de Dewey n’était qu’une continuation de l’idéalisme des Lumières ; Dewey restait figé dans un optimisme injustifié à propos de la vision globalement bonne de la nature humaine. Néanmoins, malgré cette critique, Niebuhr fut influencé par ce dernier. L’objectif de cette thèse est de souligner ces influences sur le travail de Niebuhr afin de montrer que la pensée niebuhrienne est un prolongement de la pensée pragmatiste de Dewey, démontré par le Pragmatisme chrétien, et que Niebuhr fait partie du courant de pensée libérale malgré lui. Au mépris des différences fondamentales entre les deux hommes, nous allons donc tenter de démontrer que Niebuhr s’inscrit dans une tradition intellectuelle typiquement américaine, le Pragmatisme étant considéré comme le seul mouvement philosophique authentiquement américain, afin de parvenir à une plus grande connaissance de ces deux penseurs majeurs, mais, aussi, du paysage politique américain. / This work aims to analyze the political thought of the American theologian and political scientist Reinhold Niebuhr (1892-1971). More specifically, it will analyze the way in which Pragmatism was able to influence Niebuhr’s writings. Critical towards the liberal idealism of John Dewey (1859-1952), Niebuhr’s Christian realism was a counter against the optimism that political Pragmatism demonstrated in regards to the nature of man. Despite these criticisms, Niebuhr was unable to escape Pragmatism’s influence. This influence is the reason for this research: how political Pragmatism, specifically that of John Dewey was able to have an impact on Reinhold Niebuhr’s works and his Christian realism. This thesis will study the major works of these two thinkers in order to compare the political thought of each thinker. Younger than Dewey, Niebuhr had for a long time considered Dewey’s thought as nothing more than an idealized and outdated continuation of Enlightenment optimism which was incapable of accurately analyzing the contemporary world. Nevertheless, Niebuhr was influenced by Dewey. This thesis’s goal is to highlight the influences of Pragmatism in Niebuhr’s works in order to show that Niebuhrian thought is a continuation of Dewey’s pragmatic thought, specifically through the notions of Christian Pragmatism and therefore, fits within an overall framework of American Liberalism. In spite of the fundamental differences in thought, we are going to attempt to show that Niebuhr was a part of the typically American intellectual tradition, that is to say, Pragmatism; considered to be a uniquely American philosophical movement. It will be analyzed in order to achieve a greater understanding of these important thinkers, but also, of America’s political landscape.

Reinhold Niebuhr remains at the center of a national conversation about America's role in the world, and commentators with divergent political and religious positions look to his 1952 work, The Irony of American History, in support of their views. In this study, Scott R. Erwin argues that an appreciation of Niebuhr's theological vision is necessary for understanding the full measure of Irony and his perspective on life more broadly. Such a study is important because many individuals reading Irony today fail to acknowledge the central role that his Christian beliefs played in his writings. Niebuhr described his theological vision as being 'in the battle and above it,' and, it was this perspective that led Niebuhr, in Irony, to assert that America must both take 'morally hazardous action' in combating the aggression of the Soviet Union and engage in critical self-evaluation to prevent the country from assuming the most odious traits of its Cold War foe. Niebuhr developed his theological vision over the course of the 1930s and 1940s through engagement with Christian doctrine, as most readily seen in his academic works such as The Nature and Destiny of Man, and engagement with current events, as seen in his many journalistic writings during this period. By focusing primarily on Niebuhr's writings between 1931 and 1951, Erwin traces the development of his Christian interpretation of human nature and history, establishes how it informed his theological vision, and reveals how that theological vision underlay his writings on current affairs.

Thesis (DTh)--Stellenbosch University, 2011. / ENGLISH ABSTRACT: This thesis is a critical study of the work of John Rawls, political philosopher, and Reinhold Niebuhr, theologian. The work of these two scholars is brought into dialogue with theological thought to work towards a Christian notion of justice which seeks more than justice as fairness but realises the impossibility of perfect love in this world. Rawls’s two principles of justice form the basis of the discussion, with liberty placed prior to equality, and permissible inequalities only allowed when the weakest benefit. He excludes religion and moral reasoning from justice, essentially any thick theory of the good, in favour of the right; any conception of the good must be in agreement with the right and a thin theory of the good is necessary to guide people in the right direction. In his later works he accepts that people will mostly be guided by some moral or religious thought. Niebuhr believed that a prophetic religion combines an utmost seriousness about history with a transcendent norm. Hope, faith and love form the foundation of a call to a continual struggle for justice and equality. The boundaries in which justice is sought are being continually extended as global cooperation and dependence increase. Perfect justice would be a state of solidarity with no conflict of interests. Because people are a combination of vitality and reason, the social coherence of life can never be based on pure rationality. Our truth is never the truth; we are always subjective and prejudiced. There can be no universal rational standards of justice or neutrality in social struggle. Love is the primary law of nature and a fundamental requirement of social existence. We are called to involvement in society by the very nature of our justification by faith. Equality as the pinnacle of the ideal of justice points towards love as the final norm of justice; for equal justice is the realization of community under the conditions of sin. Justice as imperfect love aims for an equality which is increasingly inclusive and continuously creates space for people to live in harmony. In the final chapter, Rawls and Niebuhr are brought into critical discussion with other theologians. The Christian preference for the poor, an inherent part of theological justice begins the discussion. The importance of moral reasoning for justice comes into conflict with Rawls’s idea that there should be no thick theory of the good influencing justice. Human dignity is an important facet of justice. The inalienable dignity owed to every human being, created in the image of God, is an essential part of theology and can enrich secular theories of justice. Justice necessitates community. People learn how to behave in a way which is just, moral and ethical from their associations in communities. The church community can provide an important place where dialogue and learning can take place. The boundaries of justice are ever-increasing. Globalisation presents challenges to where and how justice is implemented and we become increasingly aware of how our actions affect other people. The responsibility of the struggle for justice is everincreasing. The eschatological hope and the specific way of life which can be offered by the church complete the Christian notion of justice. / AFRIKAANSE OPSOMMING: Hierdie tesis is ’n kritiese studie van die werk van die politieke filosoof John Rawls en die teoloog Reinhold Niebuhr. Hierdie denkers se werk word met teologiese nadenke in gesprek gebring om sodoende ’n Christelike idee van geregtigheid te vorm wat meer as billikheid wil wees, en wat terselfdertyd die onmoontlikheid van perfekte liefde in dié wêreld erken. Rawls se twee beginsels van geregtigheid vorm die basis van die argument, deurdat vryheid voor gelykheid geplaas word en met die enigste toelaatbare ongelykhede dié wat tot die swakstes se voordeel is. Hy maak nie gebruik van godsdienstige of morele arugmente om geregtigheid te begrond of vul nie – enige begrip van die goeie moet in ooreenstemming met die regte wees en slegs ’n dun teorie van die goeie is nodig om mense in die regte rigting te lei. Hy aanvaar in sy latere werk dat die meeste mense tog deur morele denke of godsdiens gelei sal word. Niebuhr glo dat ’n profetiese godsdiens ’n diepe erns met die geskiedenis met ’n transendente norm kombineer. Hoop, geloof en liefde vorm die grondslag van ’n oproep tot ’n voortdurende stryd om geregtigheid en gelykheid. Die beperkinge waarbinne geregtigheid gesoek word, word voortdurend uitgebrei soos globale samewerking en afhanklikheid verhoog. Volmaakte geregtigheid sou ’n toestand van solidariteit met geen konflik van belange wees. Omdat mense 'n kombinasie van vitaliteit en rede is, kan die sosiale kohesie van die lewe nooit op suiwer rasionaliteit gebaseer word nie. Óns waarheid is nooit dié waarheid nie en ons is altyd subjektief en bevooroordeeld. Daar kan geen universele rasionele standaarde van geregtigheid of neutraliteit in die sosiale stryd wees nie. Liefde is die primêre wet van die natuur en ’n fundamentele vereiste vir sosiale bestaan. Ons word geroep tot betrokkenheid in die samelewing op grond van die regverdigmaking deur geloof. Gelykheid as die toppunt van geregtigheid verwys na liefde as die finale norm van geregtigheid, want gelyke geregtigheid is die verwesenliking van die gemeenskap onder die voorwaardes van die sonde. Geregtigheid as onvolmaakte liefde het gelykheid wat toenemend inklusief is en voortdurend ruimte skep waar mense in harmonie kan lewe ten doel. In die laaste hoofstuk van hierdie studie word Rawls en Niebuhr in kritiese gesprek met ander teoloë gebring. Die bespreking begin met die Christelike voorrang vir die armes, ’n basiese element van teologiese geregtigheid. Die belang van morele redenering vir geregtigheid kom in konflik met Rawls se idee dat enige dik teorie van die goeie geregtigheid nie behoort te beïnvloed nie. Menswaardigheid is 'n belangrike faset van geregtigheid. Elke mens – as beeld van God – se onvervreembare waardigheid, vorm ’n noodsaaklike deel van die teologie en kan sekulêre teorieë van geregtigheid verryk. Geregtigheid vereis gemeenskap. Mense kan in gemeenskappe leer hoe om op te tree op 'n manier wat regverdig, moreel en eties is. Die kerk as gemeenskap kan 'n belangrike plek wees waar dialoog en opvoeding kan plaasvind. Die omvang van geregtigheid neem steeds toe. Globalisering bied uitdagings oor waar en hoe geregtigheid geïmplementeer behoort te word en ons raak meer bewus van hoe ons aksies ander mense beïnvloed. Die verantwoordelikheid vir die stryd om geregtigheid neem ook steeds toe. Die eskatologiese hoop en die manier van lewe wat die kerk kan aanbied voltooi die Christelike idee van geregtigheid.

Thesis advisor: Lisa S. Cahill / This dissertation makes a case for renewed attention to the notion of collective agency and responsibility in Christian ethics. The overarching argument is that the kinds of moral claims we frequently make on social groups cannot be adequately reduced to individual or structural terms, and that a rightly construed sense of collective agency can help fill this conceptual gap. This view is in keeping with important elements of Christian reflection on the nature of social interaction and social life, and the main goal of the dissertation is the development of a model for understanding some groups as collective moral agents. After a survey of treatments of the problem of collective agency and responsibility in the Bible and Christian theology in the introduction, the dissertation turns to the work of two major figures in twentieth century Christian ethics, Jacques Maritain and Reinhold Niebuhr, to provide the central elements of this view of collective agency. Namely, these figures supply contrasting but mutually correcting accounts of individual intersubjectivity, structural non-reducibility, and collective intentionality in social groups. Perspectives from the social sciences and from analytic philosophy help clarify the issues at hand and adjudicate the differences between Maritain and Niebuhr. The dissertation ends with a theological synthesis of the forgoing discussion, proposing a view of the potential for collective moral agency that takes account of the capacity for both friendship and coercion in human intersubjectivity, for both community and conflict in social organization, and for both intentional creativity and impersonal functionality in the interaction of individual and structural elements of social life. / Thesis (PhD) — Boston College, 2014. / Submitted to: Boston College. Graduate School of Arts and Sciences. / Discipline: Theology.

The question of the nature and meaning of history has become increasingly important in contemporary thought. In theological circles, it has become the central theme of discussion. Thereare a number of reasons why this is so. The events of the times in which we live have brought about a definite rejection of any knowledge-equals-progress idea of history as well as a call for interpretation of the profound social crises which we confront. The widespread influence of existentialism, with its emphasis on relativism and subjectivism, has brought into question not only the nature of history, in terms of present reality, but also the validit of the historians' pursuits. Beginning from the point of Christian ethics and giving considerable attention to the nature of man, [Reinhold] Niebuhr develops his concept of history quite differently from [Rudolf] Bultmann. It will be the task of this paper to examine the idea of history in the thought of each of these men and then, through a critique and comparison, evaluate each in terms of their strengths and weaknesses as well as their similarities and differences.

Thesis (Ph. D. in Religion)--Vanderbilt University, March 2004. / Title from PDF title screen. Includes bibliographical references.

This thesis comprises a re-evaluation of the feminist theological critique, as given by Valerie Saiving, Judith Plaskow, Daphne Hampson and Susan Nelson Dunfee, of Reinhold Niebuhr's doctrine of sin. The re-evaluation proceeds from a contextual interpretation of Niebuhr's theology in general and a contextual reading of his doctrine of sin in particular. My argument is that Niebuhr is deliberately and consistently a contextual theologian. I locate his contextual methodology in the open-ended approach of Christian realism. / The feminist critique is based on the assumption that Niebuhr universally defines the primary sin as pride. It is argued that pride is in fact a distinctly male characteristic, and, while quite plausibly the primary sin for men, is clearly not the primary sin for women. Niebuhr is guilty, that is, of confusing male reality with human reality in the doctrine. Saiving and Plaskow then develop a definition of women's sin which they correspond with Niebuhr's sin of sensuality. This type of sin, rather than being self-aggrandizing, is characterized by inordinate and destructive self-effacement. Their subsidiary argument is that Niebuhr erroneously treats sensuality, which should be equal but opposite to pride, as a secondary form of sin. / My argument in this thesis is that the critique rests on a mistaken assumption about the universality of Niebuhr's claim. His concerns were with the powerful. The contextual claim that pride is the primary form of sin in those who are empowered is being mistaken for a claim that pride is the primary sin for all people, regardless of gender or context. My subsidiary argument is that the correlation of women's sin with Niebuhr's understanding of sensuality is mistaken. What the feminists refer to as women's sin is in fact not sin at all for Niebuhr but evidence of injustice. (Abstract shortened by UMI.)

Thesis (Ph.D.)--Duquesne University, 2009. / Title from document title page. Abstract included in electronic submission form. Includes bibliographical references (p. 284-322) and index.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Chicago Divinity School, March 1999. / Includes bibliographical references. Also available on the Internet.