英国社会学论文代写 矛盾的起源

Keywords:英国社会学论文代写 矛盾的起源

斯图尔特·霍尔在他的文章中写道，“认识到不同的社会矛盾有着不同的起源;推动历史进程向前发展的矛盾并不总是在同一地点出现，也不总是具有相同的历史效果。[15] (Stuart Hall 92)另一种解释是，为什么一个人会表现出一种敬畏的态度，这是由研究部落和民间文化以及印度基督教艺术形式的印度艺术家Jyoti Sahi提出的。萨希说:“顺便说一句，谦卑来自土壤(腐殖质)，它的特征是一种朴实的常识。”(Sugirtharajah 91)因此，将达利特臣民的器官置于卑贱之中，有助于理解曾经客观化的，A.P. Nirmal对宗教传统的分析。Nirmal指出“占主导地位的宗教传统剥夺了达利特祈祷的权利。因此罗摩只是杀了香不加，并执行了一种宗教行为……对达利特来说，罗摩是一个杀手——神。(Sugirtharajah 35)另一方面，在基督教的框架中，也正是这种宗教虔诚引发了宗教间财产的可能性。这种次等主体的多样性可以追溯到，例如，在拉杰·纳德拉的《撒玛利亚女人的杂交》中，他将多种宗教财产置于背景中。这样的解读帮助我将达利特主体定位为一个非单一的主体，它将位于不同景观的轴线上。因此，我想说明的是，基督教的达利特主体通过这首歌表明了他/她/他们的作用，而不是以一种纯粹的悲怆或愤怒的方式，而这种悲怆或愤怒往往被隐藏在基督教和世俗的话语中。这是一种将自己的主体性置于多个相互作用、相互融合的点上的多重方式，而这些点是不能通过一个单一的解释框架来囊括的。正如Joseph Prabhakar Dayam在他的《Gonthemma Gorika: rethe Divine Feminine Dalit Christian Theo/alogy, the non-Christian theological traditions，“……对传统犹太教-基督教神学语言构成挑战，该语言认为上帝的‘完全差异性’是神圣的本质。”(克拉克，皮科克140)，我的任务是写一篇关于重新定义达利特主体语言的笔记。与佐伊Sherinian达利特的分析主题,像大多数达利特的话语,谁是被动的话题可以从上帝或自我总是抗议,我分析位于主体通过多种交互模式,通常作为话语互动的自我,在其他时候,痛苦的代理。因此，到目前为止，我已经打破了我自己的观念，即把基督教徒的达利特置于一个单一的模式中，并在另一个场合进一步探讨这个问题。
英国社会学论文代写 矛盾的起源
Stuart Hall, states in his piece that “the recognition that there are different social contradictions with different origins; that the contradictions which drive the historical process forward do not always appear in the same place, and will not always have the same historical effect.”[15] (Stuart Hall 92) Another interpretation of why the person acts in a way of reverence is by Jyoti Sahi, an Indian artist who works on tribal and folk cultures, and Indian Christian art forms. Sahi states that “Humility, by the way, comes from the earth (humus) and is characterized by a kind of earthy common sense.” (Sugirtharajah 91) Therefore, locating the organs of a Dalit subject in abjection helps understand the once-objectified through, A.P. Nirmal’s statement analysis of religious tradition. A.P. Nirmal states that “The dominant religious tradition denied to the Dalits the right to pray. Rama therefore simply killed Shambuka and performed a religious act … For Dalits, Rama is a killer-God.” (Sugirtharajah 35) On another note, it is also such a religiosity in the realm of the Christian framework that sets off the possibilities for interreligious belongings. Such multiplicity of the subaltern subject that can be traced, for instance, in Raj Nadella’s reading of hybridity of the Samaritan woman in contextualizing multiple religious belongings. Such readings helped me situate the Dalit subject as a non-singular subject that will be situated in an axis across different landscapes.Thus, I set out to show that the Christian Dalit subject has asserted his/her/their agency, through the song, not in a manner of pure pathos or anger that is often cloaked in the discourses, both Christian and Secular. This is a multiple-way of situating one’s own subjectivity within multiple points of interactions and convergences which cannot be subsumed through a single interpretive framework. As Joseph Prabhakar Dayam notes in his Gonthemma Gorka: Reimagining the Divine Feminine Dalit Christian Theo/analogy, the non-Christian theological traditions that “… poses a challenge to the traditional Judeo-Christian theological language that conceives the ‘wholly otherness’ of God as the essential nature of the divine.” (Clarke, Peacock 140), my agenda was to write a note on resituating the language in which Dalit Subject is framed. And unlike Zoe Sherinian’s analysis of the Dalit Subject, like most of the Dalit discourse, who is the passive subject who learns from God or the Self that always protests, my analysis has situated the subject through multiple modes of interaction, most often as the interactive Self in a discourse and at other times, the suffering agent. Thereby, I have disrupted my own conceptions so far, of a singular mode of situating the Christian Dalit and probe this further for another occasion.      
本段内容来自网络 并不是我们的写手作品 请勿直接剽窃，查重100%，造成后果与本站无关。如需定制论文请记得联系我们。