排序方式: 共有4条查询结果,搜索用时 15 毫秒
1
1.
ZOE KNOX 《The Journal of religious history》2011,35(2):157-180
From their humble origins as small, loose‐knit groups of Bible students in Pennsylvania in the 1870s, Charles Taze Russell and his followers laid the foundations of a highly visible, and frequently controversial, worldwide religious organisation known since 1931 as the Jehovah's Witnesses. Despite the Witnesses' broad historical role in defining and shaping understandings of religious tolerance, freedom of conscience, and civil liberties around the world, historians have paid very little attention to the Witnesses, with the notable exception of their treatment in Nazi Germany and the United States and Canada in wartime. The paucity of historical knowledge is all the more surprising given their visibility and notoriety. This article aims to initiate discussion of this under‐researched history by addressing what has been written, by whom, and for what purpose. It represents the first effort to evaluate the English‐language historical literature on the Jehovah's Witnesses and the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society. 相似文献
2.
ROBERT KNOX DENTAN 《Reviews in Anthropology》2013,42(1):41-67
Focusing on four recent books about violence gives a reader an idea of what current anthropological wisdom is and what it tends to omit (peace, domestic violence). Since most studies deal not with direct observation of violence but with representations of it, questions of representation loom large in terms of how anthropologists represent violence in these books and elsewhere in the literature, and what possibilities of representation might round out readers' understanding. 相似文献
3.
KNOX PEDEN 《History and theory》2019,58(3):327-341
This essay argues that Donald Davidson's work in philosophy sheds light on debates about truth, meaning, and context in historical interpretation. Drawing on distinctions between Davidson's project and that of his mentor, W. V. O. Quine, I aim to show that certain ambiguities that have arisen in the methodological reflections of Quentin Skinner and Frank Ankersmit, to take representatives of contrastive approaches to intellectual history, are clarified once we reckon with Davidson's ideas. This discussion leads to a case for the broader pertinence of Davidson's work to historical writing, which insists that his focus on the centrality of truth to disagreement bears salutary consequences for thinking about what constitutes compelling historical scholarship. 相似文献
4.
1