may not work in all linguistic matters concerning‘give’and‘receive’;^47
however, it will adequately illuminate the claims I want to make.
Cases 4–6 provide some new conceptual insights to the so-called
as-qualification, discussed by Bedorf, Hoffmann, and many others.
More generally, they highlight the nature of the content of recogni-
tion (Rdef in section 1.5). The identification between two objects
of giving also illuminates the nature of gift transfer performed in
recognition as well as the difference between recognizing persons and
acknowledging facts.
Let us assume, for a start, that the sentence‘God gives us to
ourselves’pertains to the God of Schleiermacher and Jüngel (sections
1.1, 3.3) who performs an act of religious recognition. We also assume
that recognition can be adequately described as an act of linguistic
giving so that the content of recognition concerns the formulation of
proper religious identity bestowed in the act of recognition. As case 4
is complementary to case 1, some influence of a higher power can also
be assumed. Given this, is it plausible to define recognition as a
ditransitive event in which a person receives himself or herself?
This definition does not sound proper as a general description of
recognition. For instance, in political and social forms of recognition,
a person is recognized‘as something’. On such occasions, the content
of recognition is obviously more specific than merely‘as himself’.
However, case 4 shows remarkable similarities withreligiousrec-
ognition, as it has been spelled out in the three historical paradigms of
our study. The second paradigm, the promise of self-preservation, can
be regarded as an instance of the person’s‘receiving herself’through
the network of social bonding. This bonding can be interpreted as an
event through which the individual is equipped with the gifts that
make her what she is supposed to be. In section 4.4, we will discuss
one such event (Ficino) in more detail. The third paradigm of exist-
ential attachment can also be interpreted in similar manner in that
through linking oneself with the higher reality, a person receives
new things that allow a new self-understanding. In some ways, this
interpretation can even be applied to thefirst paradigm of conversion.
Some care is needed in arguing in favour of such similarities. As the
person in most of these cases is the subject and the recognizer rather
than the recognizee, her act should be described in terms of giving
(^47) Newman 1996, 49–51.
Recognition in Religion 229