خلاصة:
The present article is concern with importance of God in feminist writings, critics of feminist theologians and philosophers to concept of God in the context of monotheistic religions and their alternative solution about God and human in feminist thinkers writings such as Mary daly,Irigaray,Jantzen and Anderson for this problem.then their thought and solutions are discussed and the critics of persons like Hollywood, Anderson, Taliaferro, Byrne, Hauke and coakley will be considered and finally mottahary and allame javadi amoli's point of views as representatives of Islamic standpoints about divine attributes and place of womanhood in religion will be highlighted.
ملخص الجهاز:
A great deal of effort is made by these thinkers to disrupt the dualism of God and the world and the hierarchy resulting from it, which in three of the thinkers under consideration leads to a kind of subject-centered immanent theology, and in Anderson, God is accepted as a structure of human reason and rational longing for justice, which once again provides the ground for attention to neglected themes such as embodiment, immanence, the Other, and desire.
Disrupting the dual divisions of philosophy and reaching subjectivity are the goals of feminist theology and philosophy of religion in order to confront patriarchal culture and thought, and each feminist thinker has dealt with it according to their own intellectual context, which will be discussed in this writing, the views of Mary Daly, Luce Irigaray, Grace Jantzen, and Pamela Anderson regarding the relationship between God and humanity will be examined.
Pamela Anderson (2002) explains in the article “Feminist Theology as Philosophy of Religion” that contemporary philosophers who are looking for feminist views on religious belief and practice may completely deny it due to its entanglement with patriarchy, because the problem is not just a masculine God, but there are many problems in concepts such as truth, goodness, and justice.
She explains that myth, positively, is a tool through which practical reason organizes its use of the concepts of its divinity for men and women; while conceding that she knows nothing of the objective characteristic of the transcendental realm, she reaffirms that for embodied beings there is no point of view from nowhere and that human knowledge is possible in an indefinite area with the sensible and that completely correct representations of reality cannot be obtained.
(
, 
, 
)
