DOCSLIB.ORG

Can Theosis Save “Human Dignity”? Chapters in Theological Anthropology East and West

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Can Theosis Save “Human Dignity”? Chapters in Theological Anthropology East and West Journal of Eastern Christian Studies 71(3-4), 177-248. doi: 10.2143/JECS.71.3.3286899 © 2019 by Journal of Eastern Christian Studies. All rights reserved. CAN THEOSIS SAVE “HUMAN DIGNITY”? CHAPTERS IN THEOLOGICAL ANTHROPOLOGY EAST AND WEST ALFONS BRÜNING THE CONtEXt: TURNING tO tHE FatHERS abOUt HUMaN DIGNItY This special issue of the Journal of Eastern Christian Studies gathers a series of articles devoted to the theological anthropology of the Eastern Christian Orthodox tradition. Speaking of “theological anthropology” implies that the main theme, and the focus of the articles included in the volume, is of a theoretical and partly normative character. The guiding perspective of the contributions, at the same time, is in their connection with another normative anthropological term widely discussed in our days, that of human dignity. This connection provides the interdisci- plinary character of the volume. It engages patristic studies, theology, but also philosophy, theory of law and social and political sciences. There is a common focus. It might be said that the considerations in this volume start from the fact, inherent in our language, that frequently and in various con- texts the expression “human being” is a nomen dignitatis, i.e. a term endowed with a normative meaning.1 Human dignity, basically in its function as a cornerstone for the modern concept of human rights, in modern times has become a problematic term for many of the aforementioned disciplines. Debates have always centered around the question of a both appropriate and consensual theoretical foundation and definition of the term, be it in a theological or secular philosophical perspective. The problem is far from being solved. In what follows, therefore, the guiding question is, what can the theological tradition of the Christian East possibly contribute to this debate about the definition and the actual content of 1 To hint at this semantic implication appears to be a certain commonplace in theological treatises, cf. Gerd Haffner, s. v. ‘Mensch. I. Philosophisch’, in Lexikon für Theologie und Kirche, vol. 7 (Freiburg, 1998/2006), col. 104-107, here col. 104: Johannes Fischer, ‘Human Dignity and Human Rights,’ Zeitschrift für Evangelische Ethik, 58 (2014), pp. 40-50, here p. 40. 178 ALFONS BRÜNING “something like human dignity”?2 For several reasons, possible answers cannot but engage the contribution of the Christian East. As we are about to see, nor- mative anthropology actually has always done so; there is not so much a need to rediscover the particular heritage of the ancient Fathers as to reconsider the role it has played in different epochs of intellectual history. Recently, West- ern theologians also have spoken again about the need to evaluate the Hebrew, Greek and Patristic heritage to the advantage of a better understanding of human dignity as one of the main challenges still to be met in our times.3 Eastern Christianity in more recent decades, and especially after the downfall of the former Iron Curtain, appeared on the scene as a relatively new par- ticipant in the ongoing debates about the actual meaning and content of “human dignity”. The Eastern Christians have a specific tradition to refer to, including the role of Patristic sources. Yet, Orthodoxy is an ambivalent participant in such debates about human dignity, being at the same time Christian and non-Western. It is a voice that enriches but cannot always be harmoniously integrated into the complex melodies of an already existing concert. Nevertheless, there is reason to presume that the Christian East actually does have important things to say and to contribute, given the current state of the debate. Taking this as a hypothesis, the purpose of this introduction is to give an outline of the main themes of this current debate, to hint at those points where an appropriation of the Eastern tradition could meet productively with trends developed otherwise, and even help to generate some progress in ongoing discussions. To integrate the voice of the Christian East is not merely an act of good-will out of a need for diplomatic compromise, somehow dic- tated by recent geo-political developments – the need to somehow harmonize the concept of human dignity and rights with another, now non-Western, often exotic and sometimes bulky participant by means of compromise and concessions. Rather it deserves to be demonstrated, in whatever hasty sketches, 2 The articles in this volume originated as paper presented at a conference devoted to the issue of “Human Dignity and Patristic Tradition”, held at Nijmegen University, The Netherlands, in October 2014, with participants from the Netherlands, Germany, Romania and Russia, and with different confessional backgrounds. Some other contributions to the meeting have been published elsewhere. 3 Robert P. Kraynak, ‘Defending Human Dignity: the Challenge of Our Times,’ introduc- tory chapter in In Defense of Human Dignity: Essays for Our Times, eds. Robert P. Kraynak and Glenn Tinder (Notre Dame, 2003), p. 1. CaN THEOSIS SaVE “HUMaN DIGNItY”? 179 that there actually are concrete points and themes in what had elsewhere been called “human rights talk” which can clearly profit from an integration of the Eastern Christian heritage – despite all difficulties such an operation would bring with it. The following outline does not, of course, exhaust the subject, but might indicate reference points for further research. As a Christian denomination, Eastern Orthodoxy, like Western Christian- ity, grounds its understanding of the human being on the Biblical reference according to which all human beings are created “after God’s image and likeness” (Gen 1:26). However, the conclusions drawn from this have often seemed different from, or even opposite to, Western concepts of the human, especially when it comes to the subsequent emergence of a human rights debate among Orthodox theologians. In this respect theological anthropol- ogy appears to be one of the most controversial issues. A stereotype still prevailing is that the West had developed the ideal of all human beings being equal, with dignity and rights belonging to every single individual, whereas the Christian East denounced the shortcomings of concepts of the isolated individual and its rights. In response, Orthodoxy had developed concepts of personhood, which – in, for the time being, rather generalizing terms – overtly refuse to see the human being as an isolated individual but as being defined or even substantially constituted by his or her relations to both God and neighbor, and as being part of a community, from where would flow his or her dignity as well as his or her duties. Personhood, therefore, became some- thing like the classical label for Orthodox theological anthropology, including claims of superiority in relation to Western individualism. This also affects the debates concerning human dignity. Orthodox personalism is incomprehensible without reference to the Fathers. For the Orthodox the Patristic heritage had always been the main theological source of inspiration. This view had been reinforced in connec- tion with the famous “neo-patristic renaissance” of the 20th century, initiated first and foremost by Russian theologians such as Georgii Florovskii and Vladimir Losskii. In particular, the Church Fathers’ teachings on the Trinity and on Christology, next to the notion of “deification” (theosis) of the human being, prominently informed Orthodox concepts of personhood.4 Adopting 4 For a summary cf. e.g. Nonna Verna Harrison, ‘The Human Person as Image and Likeness of God,’ in The Cambridge Companion to Orthodox Christian Theology, eds. Mary 180 ALFONS BRÜNING the Patristic heritage, however, has not led to homogenous and commonly shared concepts of man, but actually generated a variety of results concerning an understanding of the human person among contemporary Orthodox thinkers. Also from outside there are apparently contradictory notions: The Orthodox understanding of the human person, based on Patristic references, has been characterized by some observers as a major obstacle with respect to human dignity and rights, whereas other experts have been inclined to see this same heritage as prevalently in favor of the latter.5 Some theologians during the second half of the 20th century positioned themselves expressly in disso- ciation from Western thinking and from – allegedly also purely Western – discourses on human dignity and rights. Others came up with a personalist anthropology that, if adopted, would possibly require restrictions and cor- rections within the established catalogue of human rights, but they did not see themselves in complete opposition. More recent are attempts to reconcile Orthodox personalist thinking with human rights discourses and to embrace personalist concepts precisely in support of human dignity and rights.6 Part of the problem, moreover, is that the Patristic heritage that is being engaged in modern Orthodox conceptions of personhood is in itself hardly homogenous. Stating this implies a critical view of the famous “neo-patristic renaissance”, which appears to have seen the peak of its influence. Florovskii in particular pleaded for a renovation of Orthodox theology in the name of what he identified as “the spirit of the fathers”. But the very supposition that B. Cunningham and Elisabeth Theokritoff (Cambridge, 2008), pp. 78-92; Andrew Louth, Introducing Eastern Orthodox Theology (Downers Grove, IL, 2013), pp. 89-91. 5 Two examples: Very skeptical concerning a productive role of Orthodox theology with regard to human dignity is Adamantia Pollis, ‘Eastern Orthodoxy and Human Rights,’ Human Rights Quarterly, 15 (1993), pp. 339-356. Pollis in particular refers to Orthodox concepts of the person as opposed to individualism, rather dissolving the single human being into larger communities as the church, and therefore hardly fitting into the estab- lished human rights agenda (cf. ibid., 341-345); mainly positive, in contrast, is Emmanuel Clapsis, ‘Human Rights and the Orthodox Church in a Global World,’ Θεολογια, 2 (2016), pp. 113-129. 6 For a comparative overview and evaluation, cf.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Guide of Studies 2013-2014 (Pdf)
    School of Economics and Political Sciences Faculty of Turkish Studies and Modern Asian Studies Guide of Studies Academic Year 2013 - 2014 Guide of Studies 2013-2014 | Faculty of Turkish Studies and Modern Asian Studies Translated into English by Effie Mouka and Anthony Deriziotis Edited by Ioannis E. Saridakis Original text layout: D. Charlaftis. Cover design: D. Koutroumba © 2013 Faculty of Turkish Studies and Modern Asian Studies 2 Guide of Studies 2013-2014 | Faculty of Turkish Studies and Modern Asian Studies Contents Faculty Profile...............................................................................................................................................7 Administration...............................................................................................................................................8 Temporary General Assembly..................................................................................................................8 Chair..........................................................................................................................................................8 Deputy Chair.............................................................................................................................................8 Members of the Temporary General Assembly........................................................................................8 Secretariat.................................................................................................................................................8
    [Show full text]
  • Homer, Aeschylus, Sophocles, Euripides, Aristophanes
    Apart from the already named: Homer, Aeschylus, Sophocles, Euripides, Aristophanes, (Αἰσχύλος, Σοφοκλῆς, Εὐριπίδης, Ἀριστοφάνης), Pindar (Πίνδαρος), Sappho (Σαπφώ), Pheidias (Φειδίας), The Parthenon (ὁ Παρθενών), Horace, Virgil, Ovid, Cicero, Juvenal, The Bible (οἱ ἑβδομήκοντα), Hagia Sophia (Ἁγία Σοφία), Byzantine iconography (Βυζαντινὴ εἰκονογραφία), Boccaccio, Dante, Cathédrale Notre-Dame de Chartres, Basilica Papale di San Pietro in Vaticano, Michelangelo, Da Vinci, Raphael, Titian, Cervantes, Chaucer, Shakespeare, Milton, El Greco (Δομένικος Θεοτοκόπουλος), Diego Velázquez, Rembrandt, Kölner Dom, Hieronymus Bosch, Bach, Mozart, Beethoven, Wagner, Verdi, Handel, Rossini, Schubert, Goethe, Dostoyevsky, Tolstoy, Chekhov, Balzac, de Maupassant, Baudelaire, Monet, Cavafy, Pirandello, T. S. Eliot, César Vallejo, Camus,... Yasujiro Ozu, John Ford, Jean Renoir, Kenji Mizoguchi,... Picasso, Stravinsky,... ἦτοι, τὸν Ὅμηρον, τοὺς Τέσσαρας Γίγαντας τοῦ Θεάτρου, τὴν Ῥωμηοcύνην (ὡς ἐξελληνισμένην Χριστιανοσύνην), τὸν Διγενὴν Ἀκρίτην καὶ τὰ Δημοτικὰ Τραγούδια, τὴν Ἄννα Κομνηνῆν, τὸν Σολωμόν, τὸν Κάλβον, τὸν Παπαδιαμάντην, τὸν Βασίλη Λογοθετίδη, τὸν Στέλιο Καζαντζίδη, τὴν Βίκυ (Μοσχολιοῦ) καὶ τὴν Ἀλίκη (Βουγιουκλάκη),... Βέμπο, Γούναρη, Τεμπέλη (Στρᾶτο Παγιουμτζῆ), Μᾶρκο (Βαμβακάρη), Τσιτσάνη, (Ὀρέστη) Μακρῆ, (Ἀλέκο) Σακελλάριο καὶ (Γιῶργο) Τζαβέλλα,... τὸν ca sĩ Duy Khánh, τὴν Λευκάδαν, εἰς ὅλους τοὺς πολεμιστὰς καὶ ἥρωας τοῦ ἑλληνισμοῦ, ἀπὸ τὸν Μιλτιάδην, τὸν Λεωνίδαν καὶ τὸν Θεμιστοκλὴν ὥς τὸν Ἡράκλειον, Παλαιολόγον ΙΑ΄ καὶ τὸν Γέρον (τοῦ Μωριᾶ, Θόδωρον Κολοκοτρώνην), κοντολογίς, εἰς τὴν Μεγάλην Ἱερὰν Ἡμῶν Διαχρονικὴν Ἑλληνικὴν Ἐκκλησίαν,... τὴν Γεωργία Μηττάκη μὲ τὸν Νίκο Καρακώστα... and of course the significant thinkers, observers,...: the great classical historians (Herodotus, Xenophon, Polybius, Sallust, Livy, Tacitus, Appian, Priscus et. al.), the Sophists, Socrates and Plato, the Cyrenaics, the Stoics, La Rochefoucauld, Montesquieu, La Mettrie, Hume, Helvétius, Adam Smith, Adam Ferguson, Kant, Tocqueville, Nietzsche, Pareto, Simmel, Durkheim, Schumpeter, E.
    [Show full text]
  • The Thucydidean Legacy of Systemic Geopolitical Analysis and Structural Realism”
    International Journal of Humanities and Social Science Invention (IJHSSI) ISSN (Online): 2319 – 7722, ISSN (Print): 2319 – 7714 www.ijhssi.org ||Volume 8 Issue 10 Ser. II || October 2019 || PP 45-50 “The Thucydidean Legacy of Systemic Geopolitical Analysis and Structural Realism” Ioannis Th. Mazis1, Markos I. Troulis2 and Xanthippi Domatioti3 Corresponding Author: Ioannis Th. Mazis ABSTRACT: Which are the modern roots of the theories of Systemic Geopolitical Analysis and Structural Realism? Which are the epistemological and methodological bases that a conflict is profound? Being descriptive theories, both Systemic Geopolitical Analysis and Structural Realism have been constructed on the basis of axial hypotheses tested through historical practical case studies. They represent complementary approaches, based on the common Thucydidean legacy of description and analysis emphasizing ontology. In the modern framework of scientific debate, there are also common roots, while the commonalities are more between them in comparison with other theoretical approaches even included in the same scientific field. Under this lens, the current paper endeavours to decode all those reasons making the two theoretical approaches two – even not identical – twins of Thucydides. Keywords: Epistemology, IR theory, Systemic Geopolitical Analysis, Thucydides, Ontology, Structural Realism, Imre Lakatos -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date of Submission: 25-10-2019
    [Show full text]
  • La Torre Del Virrey 16
    Información de los autores y los textos Sein und Zeit: en busca del ser Sein und Zeit: Pursuit of Being ‘Sein und Zeit: Pursuit of Being’ aparece publicado en Iris Murdoch, Philosopher. A Collection of Essays, editado por -XVWLQ%URDFNHV 2[IRUG8QLYHUVLW\3UHVV2, pp. 93-109). Agradecemos al profesor Broackes, al profesor John Bayley (viudo y albacea editorial de Iris Murdoch), al profe- VRU3HWHU&RQUDGL ELyJUDIRGH0XUGRFK \D2[IRUG8QLYHU- VLW\3UHVVHOSHUPLVRSDUDWUDGXFLUHVWHWH[WRDOHVSDxRO\VX H[WUDRUGLQDULDJHQWLOH]D&RPRH[SOLFDHOSURIHVRU%URDFNHV HQVXQRWDHGLWRULDO SS GHOWH[WRRULJLQDOVHFRQ- VHUYDQGRVYHUVLRQHVXQDPHFDQRJUD¿DGDHQHO$UFKLYRGH Iris Murdoch en la Universidad de Kingston y otra manu- scrita en la Biblioteca de la Universidad de Iowa. El interés de Murdoch por Heidegger se remonta, como informa Peter Conradi, a la década de los años cuarenta del siglo XX. Fue Gilbert Ryle quien le proporcionó a la autora un ejemplar de Sein und Zeit$¿QDOHVGH0XUGRFKSHQVyHQUHXQLU distintos materiales de lectura, sobre los cuales había estado trabajando al menos desde la década anterior, en un libro so- EUH+HLGHJJHUTXHKDEUtDTXHULGRGHGLFDUDO¿OyVRIR6WDQOH\ Rosen. Por diversas razones y debido a la enfermedad de Al- zheimer que se le diagnosticó en 1997, el proyectó quedó inacabado. El fragmento que se ha publicado y traducido es Resumen Podríamos decir que es descabellado descartar la el más coherente de cuantos formaban parte del proyecto. En posibilidad de que Platón sabía lo que hacía al presentárse- la traducción hemos asumido todas las correcciones y modi- nos esotéricamente como un contador de mitos. Contaba con ¿FDFLRQHVHGLWRULDOHVGHOSURIHVRU%URDFNHV³(OWH[WRTXH el precedente de Homero y le discutió, pese a admirarlo, la ofecemos —escribe— es un compromiso.
    [Show full text]
  • The Problem of Modern Greek Identity
    The Problem of Modern Greek Identity The Problem of Modern Greek Identity: From the Ecumene to the Nation-State Edited by Georgios Steiris, Sotiris Mitralexis and Georgios Arabatzis The Problem of Modern Greek Identity: From the Ecumene to the Nation-State Edited by Georgios Steiris, Sotiris Mitralexis and Georgios Arabatzis This book first published 2016 Cambridge Scholars Publishing Lady Stephenson Library, Newcastle upon Tyne, NE6 2PA, UK British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library Copyright © 2016 by Georgios Steiris, Sotiris Mitralexis, Georgios Arabatzis and contributors All rights for this book reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the prior permission of the copyright owner. ISBN (10): 1-4438-8987-3 ISBN (13): 978-1-4438-8987-2 TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction ............................................................................................... vii Chapter One ................................................................................................. 1 Images of Modern Hellenism: Historical Dilemmas and Orientations Kostas Koutsourelis Chapter Two .............................................................................................. 13 Orthodoxy and the West: Preliminary Remarks on Hellenic Self-Identity’s Past Christos Yannaras Chapter Three ...........................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Marx and Greek Antiquity
    PANAGIOTIS KONDYLIS MARX AND GREEK ANTIQUITY Two studies Translated by C. F., ©, November – December, 2018, from the German: Kondylis, Panajotis, Marx und die Griechische Antike. Zwei Studien, Manutius Verlag, Heidelberg, 1987; and from the Greek: Κονδύλης Παναγιώτης, Ὁ Μὰρξ καὶ ἡ ἀρχαία Ἑλλάδα (= Marx and ancient Greece), Στιγμή, Ἀθῆναι, 1984 (2001 α΄ ἀνατύπωση). 1 Contained in this small volume (tome), enriched with references and notes, is the text of a speech which was given (took place) on 3rd February 1984 at the Ἑταιρεία Σπουδῶν Νεοελληνικοῦ Πολιτισμοῦ καὶ Γενικῆς Παιδείας τῆς Σχολῆς Μωραΐτη (= Society (Corporation, Company, Firm) for Studies of Modern Greek Culture (Modern Greek Cultural Studies) and General Paideia (Education) of the Moraitis School) [[This note on the page before the (table of) contents only appears in the Greek edition, and NOT in the German edition – translator’s note]]. [[The Translation of the Greek text commences on p. 68 below]] 2 [[ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF THE GERMAN TEXT (Study One of the German-language book is not included in the Greek-language booklet at all and includes far greater detail about Hegel, The Young Hegelians, Bruno Bauer, Ludwig Feuerbach, Fichte, Stirner, Marx himself, et al., etc., and, Study Two of the German Text is largely the same as the whole of the Greek text – though there are some differences which are not (entirely or at all) insignificant, and hence I have translated both the German-language and Greek-language book(let)s separately.)]] Table of Contents I. Marx’s dissertation and the starting point of his intellectual(-spiritual) development 5 II.
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction to the Philosopher and Power by Panagiotis Kondylis
    Introduction to The Philosopher and Power by Panagiotis Kondylis [Translated by C.F., ©, April 2018, from Kondylis Panajotis, „Einleitung“ [[= “Introduction (or Preface)”]], in Panajotis Kondylis (Hg.), Der Philosoph und die Macht. Eine Anthologie [[= The Philosopher and Power. An anthology]], xenomoi Verlag, Berlin, 2016, S. 7-39, first published in Panajotis Kondylis (Hg.), Der Philosoph und die Macht (Anthologie), Hamburg: Junius, 1992, 259 S. („Einleitung“ S. 9-36), and also from Kondylis’s Greek version: Κονδύλης Παναγιώτης, «Οἱ Φιλόσοφοι καὶ ἡ ἰσχὺς» [[= “Philosophers and Power”]] in Παναγιώτης Κονδύλης (ἐπιμ.), Ἡ ἡδονή, ἡ ἰσχύς, ἡ οὐτοπία [[= Pleasure, power, utopia]], Ἐκδ. Στιγμή, Ἀθήνα, 1992, σσ. 49-103. The German book contains excerpts from the writings of all the philosophers referred to in Kondylis’s “Introduction” – eliminating the need for footnotes – whilst also making for a unique volume, which should be published in English in toto!] Power [[Macht, ἰσχὺς]] was under a positive sign, i.e. had a positive omen or was spoken about positively, only by a few, of course notorious philosophes maudits [[= accursed or cursed philosophers]], who declared it to be the main theme or topic, and the central category of thought. The greater part of philosophers of course could not really help, loudly or softly, talking about power, however their attention was, in the process, turned not so much towards power itself in its ontological, anthropological and social-historical dimension, but rather towards finding strategies of its exorcism,
    [Show full text]
  • Revista Eletrônica Do IBPI - REVEL
    1 2 Revista Eletrônica do IBPI - REVEL O IBPI – Instituto Brasileiro de Propriedade Intelectual não se responsabiliza pelos conteúdos, bem como pelas opiniões emitidas nos artigos publicados nesta revista. A responsabilidade é dos próprios autores. Você pode reproduzir o conteúdo desta revista para fins não comerciais e desde que dê crédito aos autores originais. Plataforma de publicação digital: www.ibpibrasil.org ISSN – 2176-5057 Editorial Direção acadêmica – Karin Grau-Kuntz Direção Internacional – Gert Würtenberger Edição deste número – Marcus Lessa Layout Capa: Roberto Grau-Kuntz Conselho Editorial Allan Rocha de Souza Bruno Lewicki Denis Borges Barbosa Enzo Baiocchi Guilherme Carboni Newton Silveira Pedro Paranaguá Roberto Reis Victor Albuquerque 3 Sumário Apresentação Marcus Lessa 5 Doutrina . Sobre a oposição entre o pensamento jusnaturalista e histórico na primeira metade do século XIX, exemplificada na Propriedade Intelectual Jens Eisfeld 8 . Derecho de Patentes y Salud Pública: Impacto de los Tratados de Libre Comercio Ana María Pacón 38 . Notas em defesa da licença compulsória: da fundamentação à eficácia Gabriel Francisco Leonardos Raul Murad Ribeiro de Castro 75 . Fiscalizar é preciso; intervenção não é preciso Daniel Campello Queiroz 102 . O Instituto da Transação e a solução de potenciais conflitos a envolver sinais distintivos Paulo Figueiredo 112 . O direito autoral e a noção de autoria Eduardo Tibau de Vasconcellos Dias 118 4 . As hipóteses de incidência patentária do art. 10 do CPI/96 Denis Borges Barbosa 143 Atualidades . The Legally Protected Functions of Trademarks According to the Case Law of the European Court of Justice Gert Würtenberger 168 . Who Owns the Rights to Photographic Reproductions of Historical Sites? Gert Würtenberger 178 Comentários .
    [Show full text]
  • Friedrich Schlegel's Early Romantic Notion of Religion in Relation to Two
    ASKO NIVALA Friedrich Schlegel’s early Romantic notion of religion in relation to two presuppositions of the Enlightenment erman early Romanticism was an intellectual Romantics are portrayed as its reactionary enemies. movement that originated in the era between the According to a prevailing prejudice, Romanticism Ggreat French Revolution of 1789 and the beginning was an age of exaggerated emotions, authoritarian of the Napoleonic Wars in 1803. Usually, it is defined dogmatism and mystical superstition. However, our in contrast to the Enlightenment. The Enlightenment notion of the Enlightenment has changed over re- is presented as the age of reason, criticism and scien- cent decades. Contemporary research acknowledges tific naturalism, while the Romantics are portrayed as that the supporters of the Enlightenment were not its reactionary enemies. According to a still customary abstract, calculating thinkers who only believed in prejudice, Romanticism was the age of exaggerated the universal validity of (Occidental) reason.1 Thus, emotions, authoritarian dogmatism and mystical su- while our understanding of the Enlightenment has perstition. However, our notion of the Enlightenment been revised, we need to reconsider the earliest phase has undergone changes in recent decades. Because of Romanticism in order to better understand the the traditional antagonism between Aufklärung and significance of both epochs. Because the traditional Frühromantik has become questionable, the Romantic antagonism between the Enlightenment and early revival of religion needs reconsideration. In this paper, I propose an argument why the Romantics did not fall Romanticism has become questionable, the Roman- into reactionary irrationalism. My discussion focuses tic revival of religion needs further reconsideration. on one person, Friedrich Schlegel (1772–1829).
    [Show full text]
  • Revista De Estudios Culturales L’Eliana, Número 16, 2014/2 Director Antonio Lastra
    la torre delV irrey revista de estudios culturales l’Eliana, número 16, 2014/2 Director Antonio Lastra PANAGIOTIS KONDYLIS Historia de los Conceptos y política IRIS MURDOCH Sein und Zeit Índice / Summary Número 16, 2014/2 ESTUDIOS CULTURALES · CULTURAL STUDIES IRIS MURDOCH, Sein und Zeit: en busca del ser · Sein und Zeit: Pursuit of Being ........................................5 MASSIMO LA TORRE, Futuro y metamorfosis de la democracia · Futuro e metamorfosi della democrazia ...................................................................................................15 PANAGIOTIS KONDYLIS: HISTORIA DE LOS CONCEPTOS Y POLÍTICA PANAJOTIS KONDYLIS: BEGRIFFSGESCHICHTE UND DAS POLITISCHE MARIN TERPSTRA, La búsqueda escéptica de la verdad contra la decisión normativa: entrevista con Panagiotis Kondylis · Skeptische Wahrheitssuche gegen normative Entscheidung (Fragen von Marin Terpstra) .............................................................................................23 PANAGIOTIS KONDYLIS, Melancolía y polémica · Melancholie und Polemik ..............................................31 PANAGIOTIS KONDYLIS, Técnica, informática y cultura · Technik, Informatik und Kultur ..........................37 REINHART KOSELLECK, La contribución de Kondylis a Conceptos históricos fundamentales · Kondylis’ Beiträge zu den geschichtlichen Grundbegriffen“ .........................................47 FALK HORST, Posiciones fundamentales en la obra de Panagiotis Kondylis Einige Grundpositionen im Werk von Panajotis Kondylis ........................................................................53
    [Show full text]
  • The “Naturalism” of Descartes and the Naturalism of “Cartesians”
    Humaniora. Czasopismo Internetowe Nr 4 (28)/2019, ss. 51–61 ZBIGNIEW DROZDOWICZ Adam Mickiewicz University Department of the Study of Religion and Comparative Research e-mail: [email protected] ORCID: 0000-0001-9409-9029 The “naturalism” of Descartes and the naturalism of “Cartesians” Abstract. My deliberations seek to demonstrate that Descartes’s philosophy is program- matically anti-naturalistic, while its being presented and interpreted as one of the possible forms of naturalism evinces misunderstanding of its basic principles. For this reason, Descartes’s “naturalism” is referred to using quotation marks. Admittedly, his philosophy does advance such postulations and assertions which lend themselves to interpretation in naturalistic categories, but only when they are abstracted from the broader entirety of the Cartesian philosophical system. The text provides only two such examples, though more could be found in the seventeenth-century though. In each case, they constituted a depar- ture from the very foundations of that system. Keywords: naturalism, Cartesianism, interpretive misunderstandings ne of the controversial issues relating to Descartes’s philosophy are its associ- Oations with naturalism. Although the authors of the Third and Fifth Objections to his Meditations on First Philosophy—who already set out from naturalistic positions—argued that the author of the latter erred chiefly by not having adhered to the naturalistic principles, there was no shortage of those who were convinced that the tenets were indeed embraced and implemented, at least in the most crucial respects. It is my belief that such a perception and presentation of said principles constitutes a departure from the position adopted by the philosopher.
    [Show full text]
  • Obserwacja Rzeczywistości a Tworzenie Teorii W Myśli Panajotisa Kondylisa*
    http://dx.doi.org/10.12775/szhf.2015.032 Falk Horst Freundeskreis Panajotis Kondylis e.V, Heidelberg [email protected] Konstantin Verykios Lefkas (Grecja) [email protected] Lech Zieliński Uniwersytet Mikołaja Kopernika, Toruń [email protected] Obserwacja rzeczywistości a tworzenie teorii w myśli Panajotisa Kondylisa* 1. Wprowadzenie Jesienią 1998 roku w Atenach, tuż po śmierci Panajotisa Kondylisa, Rein- hard Koselleck w swojej mowie na cześć zmarłego, w której nawiązał do ar- * Panajotis Kondylis (1943–1998) (Παναγιώτης Κονδύλης) urodził się 17 sierpnia 1943 roku w Olimpii w Grecji. Dorastał w Atenach, gdzie studiował filologię klasyczną i filozofię (1963– –1967). Już jako student tłumaczył na język grecki teksty wielkich europejskich autorów histo- rii myśli. Działalność tę kontynuował również po studiach. Dwa lata po odbyciu służby wojs- kowej (1967–1969) wyjechał do Niemiec, gdzie studiował na uniwersytetach w Heidelbergu 79 FALK HorST, KonStantIN VERYKIOS, LECH ZIELińsKI tykułów Kondylisa opracowanych do leksykonu Geschichtliche Grundbegriffe. Historisches Lexikon zur politisch-sozialen Sprache in Deutschland1 (Leksykon historyczny języka polityczno-społecznego Niemiec), wyraził następującą myśl: [...] Panajotis Kondylis żył 55 lat (1943–1998). Jego intensywne życie było wy- starczająco długie, by obdarować nas, którzy go przeżyliśmy, swoją twórczo- ścią, z której będziemy jeszcze długo czerpać, niezależnie od tego, czy przyj- miemy pozycję krytyczną czy aprobującą. Jego twórczość w każdym wypadku zmusza do dalszego myślenia. Zarazem jego życie było także zbyt krótkie, by mógł on ukończyć swoje dzieło2 (przeł. L. Z). Dziś można powiedzieć, że sąd Kosellcka o twórczości Kondylisa pozo- staje nadal aktualny. W myśli tego filozofa można bowiem znaleźć zarówno trafną prognozę współczesnego rozwoju świata i nadciągających konfliktów, których dziś niestety jesteśmy świadkami3, jak i trafne oceny i ujęcia dale- i Frankfurcie nad Menem.
    [Show full text]