This work is concerned with healing practices that are created within a participatory framework in pastoral theology. It works in post-colonial and postapartheid times in South Africa following on from the Truth and Reconciliation Commission. The thesis looks to forms of participation with both victims and perpetrators of apartheid. It seeks to challenge singular identities of victims and perpetrators, whites and blacks, which are bound up in juridical practices that are embedded within binary forms of identity. It exposes some of the problems associated with the splitting of a subject from an object of enquiry. The research concerns a journey with a group of Mothers who lost their sons and husbands to the violence of the apartheid state. It is also a journey with some of the perpetrators who were responsible for the elimination of these men. It seeks to deconstruct identity in order to find alternate descriptions of people, both the victims and perpetrators that are not constructed within a binary oppositional form. This is worked with ideas from the social construction movement particularly ideas relating to relational responsibility. The research attempts to create a safe enough context for accountability, vulnerability and healing to take place within a participatory frame of pastoral care. It works with post-modern theology and some of the philosophy of Derrida, Foucault and Levinas. / Philosophy, Practical and Systematic Theology / D.Th.(Practical Theology with specialisation in Pastoral Therapy)

Les principaux livres de Ouaknin ont constitué un matériau de choix me permettant de poser deux questions par hypothèse liées l’une à l’autre :<p> <p>\ / Doctorat en philosophie et lettres, Orientation philosophie / info:eu-repo/semantics/nonPublished

本文嘗試以和平問題與暴力問題為焦點，重新理解列維納斯道德形上學之梗概，並解決其政治蘊義所造成的疑難。列維納斯的哲學基本上是一種和平哲學，其所論之和平乃被界定為對暴力的非暴力抵抗，並在其前期作品中具體展現為倫理學對政治學的抵抗。但此一抵抗關係隨著列維納斯的思想進程而逐漸呈現出一種兩歧性，從而引發其思想是否前後不一致的批判，亦產生對和平之純粹性的質疑。筆者的努力即在於說明此一疑難的成因並構想一調和方案。筆者主張，應將列維納斯的思想進程視為一條闡發其倫理學之政治蘊義的思路，但這條從倫理學走到政治學的和平之路，須途經社會學的迂迴方才可能，而如此一種中介性的社會學之建構，惟在列維納斯的他勒目詮釋中獲得。因此，本文綜觀列維納斯的哲學作品與宗教作品，先是闡述責任倫理學的和平蘊義，再從其宗教詮釋學對以色列社群的刻畫得到那基於倫理學之社會學的基本模式，最後參照解構主義的批判，在對質疑政治學與回答社會學的構想中，統括列維納斯的倫理思想與政治思想。 / Peace, as the non-violence resistance to violence, is one of the main topics of Levinas's philosophy. In this dissertation, I attempt to summarize Levinas's moral metaphysics and reflect its political implications by investigating the relation of peace and violence. The relation which in Levinas's early works could be seen as an opposition between ethics and politics has some ambiguity in his later works that emerges in a dialectical way: ethics both opposes and demands politics. My opinion is that this problem can be solved by referring to his religious works, especially his interpretations of the Talmud. In brief, the path of argument is from ethics to politics through sociology. First, I describe the basic principles of Levinas's ethical metaphysics by illustrating the typology of the other and the genealogy of the same, i.e. the phenomenology of the face of the other and the transformation from the same in itself to the same for the other. Second, I find the basic political model in terms of the hermeneutics of Talmud, especially the texts about the people of Israel. Final, I try to appeal to the postmodern thoughts in order to reconcile the risk of violence in Levinas's religious works, and integrate Levinas's ethical thoughts and political thoughts by constructing the politics of questioning and the sociology of response.

Living Disability: Ways Forward from Decontextual Models of Disability consists of six articles that provide both theoretical and pragmatic commentaries on decontextual approaches to vulnerability and disability. In What Contemporary Models of Disability Miss: The Case for a Phenomenological Hermeneutic Analysis I argue many commonly accepted models for understanding disability use a vertical method in which disability is defined as a category into which people are slotted based on whether or not they fit its definitional criteria. This method inevitably homogenizes the experiences of disabled people. A hermeneutic investigation of commonly accepted models for understanding disability will provide an epistemological tool to critique and to augment contemporary models of disability. In A Phenomenological Hermeneutic Resolution to the Principlist- Narrative Bioethics Debate Narrative, I note narrative approaches to bioethics and principlist approaches to bioethics have often been presented in fundamental opposition to each other. I argue that a phenomenological hermeneutic approach to the debate finds a compromise between both positions that maintains what is valuable in each of them. Justifying an Adequate Response to the Vulnerable Other examines the possibility of endorsing the position that I, as a moral agent, ought to do my best to respond adequately to the other’s vulnerability. I contend that, insofar as I value my personal identity, it is consistent to work toward responding adequately to the vulnerability of the other both ontologically and ethically. Who Can Make a Yes?: Disability, Gender, Sexual Consent and ‘Yes Means Yes’ examines the ‘yes means yes’ model of sexual consent, and the political and ethical commitments that underpin this model, noting three fundamental Ph.D. Thesis – C. Kavanagh; McMaster University - Philosophy v disadvantages. This position unfairly polices the sexual expression of participants, particularly vulnerable participants such as disabled people, it demands an unreasonably high standard for defining sexual interaction as consensual, and allows perpetrators of sexual violence to define consent. In Craving Sameness, Accepting Difference: The Possibility of Solidarity and Social Justice I note realist accounts typically define solidarity on the basis of a static feature of human nature. We stand in solidarity with some other person, or group of people, because we share important features in common. In opposition to such realist accounts, Richard Rorty defines solidarity as a practical tool, within which there is always an ‘us’, with whom we stand in solidarity, and a ‘them’, with whom we are contrasted. I argue that by understanding Rorty’s pragmatic solidarity in terms of the relational view of solidarity offered by Alexis Shotwell, it is possible to conceptualise solidarity in a manner that allows for extending the boundaries of the community with whom we stand in solidarity. In Translating Non-Human Actors I examine Bruno Latour’s position that nonhuman things can be made to leave interpretable statements, and have a place in democracy. With the right types of mediators, the scientist can translate for non-humans, and those voices will allow for nonhuman political representation. I wish to suggest that, like scientists, people with disabilities are particularly capable of building networks that facilitate translation between humans and non-humans. / Thesis / Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) / Living Disability: Ways Forward from Decontextual Models of Disability consists of six separate articles that provide both theoretical and pragmatic commentaries on decontextual approaches to vulnerability and disability. The first three articles examine contemporary approaches to understanding vulnerability and disability, and explore what a contextual theoretical approach, one that puts the experiences of people with disabilities at the centre, might look like. The second three articles provide a bioethical examination of practical ethical questions associated with the treatment of people with disabilities when it comes to social and political positions on disability and sexuality, solidarity with people with disabilities, and the relationship between people with disabilities and objects.