This essay explores the concept of soul in the theology of Sarah Coakley. This is done by analyzing the ideas in Coakleys work descriptively. The notion of soul has been found to have a close connection to two of Coakleys main ideas, those of desire and asceticism. From these ideas I have tried to add a concept of soul to Coakleys theological work.  The notion of the soul has its basis in the material body and its desires. Coakley understands the desires of the body as both sexual desire and desire for God. In her theology desire can be understood as a metaphor for the soul´s longing for God. From the desires of the material body this essay have shown that one can design a concept of soul in Coakleys theology. I argue that you can understand Coakleys theology better theoretically by engaging a concept of soul instead of just focusing on contemplative prayer as a way of reaching God and do academic theology. With a concept of soul in Coakleys theology it can work regardless of confession or religious practice and it makes the academic theology possible without depending on contemplation.

No description available.

<p>Innebörden av begreppet tradition varierar mellan de stora kyrkorna. Denna uppsats beskriver traditionens betydelse och plats i den ortodoxa kyrkan. Traditionen har beskrivits både utifrån sin yttre och inre form. I traditionen står theosis, människans gudomliggörelse, i centrum både liturgiskt, i lära och i praxis. Fakta från litteraturen har främst hämtats från verk av de ortodoxa 1900-tals teologerna Kallistos Ware och John Meyendorff. Förutom litteraturstudier har en enkätundersökning med öppna svarsalternativ skickats ut till ortodoxa församlingsmedlemmar. Den fenomenografiska forskningsmetoden har tillämpats på enkätsvaren. Resultatet av dessa visar hur ortodoxa invandrare och svenska konvertiter uppfattar den ortodoxa kyrkan respektive den protestantiska. Utifrån svaren uppställdes olika kategorier som visar på likheter och variationer mellan gruppernas uppfattning om den ortodoxa traditionen. Slutsatsen av undersökningen blev att det finns en tydlig samstämmighet i uppfattningen om både den ortodoxa kyrkan och den protestantiska kyrkan oberoende av personernas uppväxt, utbildning och kulturella arv. Den enskildes uppfattning och kunskap inom detta område har troligen främst sin utgångspunkt i personliga erfarenheter.</p>

No description available.

Innebörden av begreppet tradition varierar mellan de stora kyrkorna. Denna uppsats beskriver traditionens betydelse och plats i den ortodoxa kyrkan. Traditionen har beskrivits både utifrån sin yttre och inre form. I traditionen står theosis, människans gudomliggörelse, i centrum både liturgiskt, i lära och i praxis. Fakta från litteraturen har främst hämtats från verk av de ortodoxa 1900-tals teologerna Kallistos Ware och John Meyendorff. Förutom litteraturstudier har en enkätundersökning med öppna svarsalternativ skickats ut till ortodoxa församlingsmedlemmar. Den fenomenografiska forskningsmetoden har tillämpats på enkätsvaren. Resultatet av dessa visar hur ortodoxa invandrare och svenska konvertiter uppfattar den ortodoxa kyrkan respektive den protestantiska. Utifrån svaren uppställdes olika kategorier som visar på likheter och variationer mellan gruppernas uppfattning om den ortodoxa traditionen. Slutsatsen av undersökningen blev att det finns en tydlig samstämmighet i uppfattningen om både den ortodoxa kyrkan och den protestantiska kyrkan oberoende av personernas uppväxt, utbildning och kulturella arv. Den enskildes uppfattning och kunskap inom detta område har troligen främst sin utgångspunkt i personliga erfarenheter.

<p>Abstract</p><p>This paper is about the philosophies created by Henry David Thoreau (1817-1862) and Friedrich Nietzsche (1844-1900). The purpose is to show the high degree of similarities between Thoreau’s and Nietzsche’s philosphy.</p><p>At first glance, it seems far-fetched to suggest an affinity between them; the differences in style and choice of subjects, have most certainly contributed to the fact that very few comparisons so far have been made. There is no evidence that one experienced any influence over the other, neither writer seems to have been aware of the other. Also their different areas of use during the 20th century, may have influenced the almost total lack of search for affinity. Thoreau’s philosphy has often been used by environmentalist movements, while Nietzsche has been connected to a wide range of various strivings, such as totalitarian regimes, individualistic artists and post-modern thinkers.</p><p>But if one disregard these facts, look beyond the differences, and break down their texts in search for their most fundamental opinions, one will see that Nietzsche and Thoreau shared a number of concerns. They were both ciritical to many aspects of the modern civilisation, espacially the way of life it encouraged. It was a life style, deep rooted in an obstructive tradition, that did not take the very essential conditions of life into consideration. This was both Thoreau’s and Nietzsche’s opinion, and their philosophies represent a willingness to re-establish a way of life that ignores all traditions hostile to life.</p><p>Both of them criticize the religion and its moral of work, the modern science, and many institutions of the modern society – the schools and the prisons for example. But they also praise things, things they claim to have a value in contrast to the modern way of life – the simple things. Both Thoreau and Nietzsche praise the solitude life style, the silent walking in the wilderness, the simple but healthy food, as well as some intellectual stimulus, especially good litterature and music. All these simple things contribute to Thoreau’s and Nietzsche’s opinion of life; it should be looked upon with the eyes of a child. Life should be like a play.</p><p>The title of this paper is Philosphers of the Rooster and the Morning. The title suggests the similarities I have found between Thoreau’s and Nietzsche’s philosophies. They both announce an awakening. For them, a new morning has broken, and this paper shows the similar circumstances they give credit for their awakening.</p>

Abstract This paper is about the philosophies created by Henry David Thoreau (1817-1862) and Friedrich Nietzsche (1844-1900). The purpose is to show the high degree of similarities between Thoreau’s and Nietzsche’s philosphy. At first glance, it seems far-fetched to suggest an affinity between them; the differences in style and choice of subjects, have most certainly contributed to the fact that very few comparisons so far have been made. There is no evidence that one experienced any influence over the other, neither writer seems to have been aware of the other. Also their different areas of use during the 20th century, may have influenced the almost total lack of search for affinity. Thoreau’s philosphy has often been used by environmentalist movements, while Nietzsche has been connected to a wide range of various strivings, such as totalitarian regimes, individualistic artists and post-modern thinkers. But if one disregard these facts, look beyond the differences, and break down their texts in search for their most fundamental opinions, one will see that Nietzsche and Thoreau shared a number of concerns. They were both ciritical to many aspects of the modern civilisation, espacially the way of life it encouraged. It was a life style, deep rooted in an obstructive tradition, that did not take the very essential conditions of life into consideration. This was both Thoreau’s and Nietzsche’s opinion, and their philosophies represent a willingness to re-establish a way of life that ignores all traditions hostile to life. Both of them criticize the religion and its moral of work, the modern science, and many institutions of the modern society – the schools and the prisons for example. But they also praise things, things they claim to have a value in contrast to the modern way of life – the simple things. Both Thoreau and Nietzsche praise the solitude life style, the silent walking in the wilderness, the simple but healthy food, as well as some intellectual stimulus, especially good litterature and music. All these simple things contribute to Thoreau’s and Nietzsche’s opinion of life; it should be looked upon with the eyes of a child. Life should be like a play. The title of this paper is Philosphers of the Rooster and the Morning. The title suggests the similarities I have found between Thoreau’s and Nietzsche’s philosophies. They both announce an awakening. For them, a new morning has broken, and this paper shows the similar circumstances they give credit for their awakening.