Header

UZH-Logo

Maintenance Infos

Was hat Max Weber mit Kātib Čelebi zu tun? Ein Annäherungsversuch an Gottfried Hagen


Zemmin, Florian (2014). Was hat Max Weber mit Kātib Čelebi zu tun? Ein Annäherungsversuch an Gottfried Hagen. Asiatische Studien / Études Asiatiques, 68(2):549-556.

Abstract

This article responds to Gottfried Hagen's extensive review (see Der Islam 2/2013) of my book Islamische Verantwortungsethik im 17. Jahrhundert. Ein weberianisches Verständnis der Handlungsvorstellungen Kātib Čelebis (1609–1657). Whilst I benefitted greatly from some of Hagen's critical remarks and historical elucidations, his review not only misstates crucial passages of my book but also largely disregards its main objective, which is to develop a systematic model for understanding Kātib Čelebi's ethical stance. Besides reiterating crucial arguments ignored and rectifying central aspects misrepresented in Hagen's review, I here ask how the more fundamental misunderstandings – exceeding differences in theoretical positions or empirical observations – between the au-thor's intentions and the reviewer's reception may be explained. Gottfried Hagen's historiographical perspective on Kātib Čelebi diverges from my sociological take on the same subject matter to the extent that both perspectives are struggling to enter into dialogue. Such dialogue, however, remains highly desirable so as to complement a historical reconstruction of Kātib Čelebi's life and times with a systematic, theoretically grounded understanding of his views.

Abstract

This article responds to Gottfried Hagen's extensive review (see Der Islam 2/2013) of my book Islamische Verantwortungsethik im 17. Jahrhundert. Ein weberianisches Verständnis der Handlungsvorstellungen Kātib Čelebis (1609–1657). Whilst I benefitted greatly from some of Hagen's critical remarks and historical elucidations, his review not only misstates crucial passages of my book but also largely disregards its main objective, which is to develop a systematic model for understanding Kātib Čelebi's ethical stance. Besides reiterating crucial arguments ignored and rectifying central aspects misrepresented in Hagen's review, I here ask how the more fundamental misunderstandings – exceeding differences in theoretical positions or empirical observations – between the au-thor's intentions and the reviewer's reception may be explained. Gottfried Hagen's historiographical perspective on Kātib Čelebi diverges from my sociological take on the same subject matter to the extent that both perspectives are struggling to enter into dialogue. Such dialogue, however, remains highly desirable so as to complement a historical reconstruction of Kātib Čelebi's life and times with a systematic, theoretically grounded understanding of his views.

Statistics

Citations

Dimensions.ai Metrics

Altmetrics

Downloads

38 downloads since deposited on 03 Oct 2014
7 downloads since 12 months
Detailed statistics

Additional indexing

Item Type:Journal Article, refereed, original work
Communities & Collections:Journals > Asiatische Studien / Études Asiatiques > Archive > 68 (2014) > 2
Dewey Decimal Classification:950 History of Asia
Language:German
Date:2014
Deposited On:03 Oct 2014 13:05
Last Modified:30 Jul 2020 14:36
Publisher:De Gruyter
ISSN:0004-4717
OA Status:Green
Free access at:Publisher DOI. An embargo period may apply.
Publisher DOI:https://doi.org/10.1515/asia-2014-0034

Download

Green Open Access

Download PDF  'Was hat Max Weber mit Kātib Čelebi zu tun? Ein Annäherungsversuch an Gottfried Hagen'.
Preview
Filetype: PDF
Size: 171kB
View at publisher