Search

The article presents the author's reply to commentaries on her article "The Turn to Affect: A Critique." It explains that the objective of paper is to show that the theorists in her study share erroneous assumptions about the relation among the affect system, intention and cognition. It also explains that her criticisms on the incoherencies of affect theory are no intended to undervalue art and aesthetic experience.

This paper presents an examination of some of the ways in which social criticism can be developed on the basis of the analysis of everyday life in modern societies. An attempt is made to combine the results of phenomenological (Schutz), ethnomethodological (Garfinkel), and dialectical (Kosik) approaches to the everyday world as the world-taken-for-granted, with the study, founded on semiological theory, of social images and the ideological elements implicit in them. At the centre of the discussion lies the mechanism of thematization by which the subjects assign predicates to persons, objects and events in a given social context. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article responds to the diversity of approaches in the five papers presented at the Matthew Section of the Society of Biblical Literature, held in Boston (Massachusetts), 21-25 November 2008. This response focuses on an overarching question: what does it mean to read Matthew in a global context? It considers two key areas. The first is location and voice/language and the second, the hermeneutics and methodologies employed and how these enabled John Y.H. Yieh (Virginia Theological Seminary), Andries van Aarde (University of Pretoria), Dorothy Jean Weaver (Eastern Mennonite Seminary), Laura Anderson (Graduate Theological Union, Berkeley) and Lidija Novakovic (Baylor University, Waco) to read Matthew within a global context. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]