• About
  • Policies
  • What is openaccess
  • Library
  • Contact
Advanced search
      View Item 
      •   BUIR Home
      • Scholarly Publications
      • Faculty of Economics, Administrative And Social Sciences
      • Department of Political Science and Public Administration
      • View Item
      •   BUIR Home
      • Scholarly Publications
      • Faculty of Economics, Administrative And Social Sciences
      • Department of Political Science and Public Administration
      • View Item
      JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

      A systematic theory of tradition

      Thumbnail
      View / Download
      214.5 Kb
      Author
      Alexander, J.
      Date
      2016
      Source Title
      Journal of the Philosophy of History
      Print ISSN
      1872-261X
      Publisher
      Brill Academic Publishers
      Volume
      10
      Issue
      1
      Pages
      1 - 28
      Language
      English
      Type
      Article
      Item Usage Stats
      124
      views
      123
      downloads
      Abstract
      We still lack a systematic or complete theory of tradition. By referring to the works of many major figures of the last century - Arendt, Boyer, Eisenstadt, Eliot, Gadamer, Goody, Hobsbawm, Kermode, Leavis, MacIntyre, Oakeshott, Pieper, Pocock, Popper, Prickett, Shils and others - I show that a theory of tradition must include insights taken not only from the study of sociology and anthropology, but also from the study of literature and religion (and, it goes without saying here, the study of philosophy and history). The proliferation of separate academic subjects does not make it any less necessary for us to attempt to say in general what we are talking about when we talk about tradition. In this article I distinguish three elements which are found in traditions. I call these continuity, canon, and core. The argument is that traditions can be distinguished in terms of whether there is a core in addition to canon and continuity, a canon in addition to continuity, or only mere continuity. Together these form a theory of tradition which enables us to see what is necessary to all traditions and also what it is which distinguishes different types of tradition from each other. © 2016 Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, The Netherlands.
      Keywords
      Anthropology
      Literature
      Religion
      Theory
      Tradition
      Permalink
      http://hdl.handle.net/11693/38278
      Published Version (Please cite this version)
      https://doi.org/10.1163/18722636-12341313
      Collections
      • Department of Political Science and Public Administration 564
      Show full item record

      Browse

      All of BUIRCommunities & CollectionsTitlesAuthorsAdvisorsBy Issue DateKeywordsTypeDepartmentsThis CollectionTitlesAuthorsAdvisorsBy Issue DateKeywordsTypeDepartments

      My Account

      Login

      Statistics

      View Usage StatisticsView Google Analytics Statistics

      Bilkent University

      If you have trouble accessing this page and need to request an alternate format, contact the site administrator. Phone: (312) 290 1771
      Copyright © Bilkent University - Library IT

      Contact Us | Send Feedback | Off-Campus Access | Admin | Privacy