Zonder het zelf te beseffen verdedigen veel goedbedoelende progressieve seculieren allerlei waarden die van origine diep christelijk zijn. Zo gaat het onderscheid tussen kerk en staat rechtstreeks terug op uitspraken van Jezus zelf: "Geef aan de keizer wat de keizer toekomt en geef aan mijn Vader wat mijn Vader toekomt". Deze uitspraak deed hij in een paradigmatisch politieke context, namelijk die van de vraag of we wel of geen belasting aan de staat moeten betalen. Dat het christendom kerk en staat niet wil vermengen blijkt ook al uit het feit dat Jezus voortdurend leert dat het koninkrijk van zijn Vader niet van deze wereld is en niet mag worden verward met wereldse koninkrijken hier op aarde. Het gaat in het christendom niet om het willen overnemen van de politieke macht.
Verder laat Charles Taylor in zijn werk zien dat het christendom aan de basis staat van de innerlijkheid en vrijheid van het moderne subject. Kants subject heeft dan ook ten diepste een christelijke oorsprong. Gianni Vattimo wijst er daarnaast op dat het christendom uniek is in die zin dat zij de door God geïnspireerde caritas op de plaats heeft gezet van de waarheid. En Alain Badiou betoogt bijvoorbeeld in zijn studie 'Paulus' dat met het christendom voor het eerst een vorm van universalisme in de wereld kwam dat maximaal inclusief is. Het doorkruist alle specifieke situationele verschillen. Zo zegt Paulus: "Er zijn geen Joden of Grieken meer, slaven of vrijen, mannen of vrouwen – u bent allen één in Christus."
Veel waarden van genoemde goedbedoelende seculieren, zoals aandacht voor vrije individuele zelfexpressie, respect voor andere volken en culturen, zorg voor de behoeftigen en zwakken, vergevingsgezindheid, emancipatie en kosmopolitisme zijn hier op terug te voeren. De toevoeging 'goedbedoelend' is overigens niet onbelangrijk. Er zijn namelijk ook progressieve seculieren die het christendom beschimpen en dus niet goedbedoelend zijn. Zij verdedigen dit soort waarden niet werkelijk, maar slechts in naam.
Vaak beschimpen ze overigens niet eens het christendom zelf, maar iets wat ze ten onrechte voor het christendom aanzien. En dat is niet hetzelfde. Hun blik wordt zogezegd door ondoordachte vooroordelen en gebrek aan openheid en kennis vertroebeld. Maar ook dat staat reeds op gespannen voet met genoemde waarden.
Posts tonen met het label Alain Badiou. Alle posts tonen
Posts tonen met het label Alain Badiou. Alle posts tonen
maandag 12 september 2016
maandag 17 februari 2014
VU Seminar on Speculative Realism
This year I shall teach a VU course on Speculative Realism. Speculative Realism is a growing and fascinating movement within contemporary philosophy. The course has the form of a seminar. Below I provide a short outline of its contents. Those interested in attending can contact me for further information.
Post-Kantian critical philosophy has focused almost exclusively on discourse and consciousness as what constitutes reality. Reality appeared only as the correlate of language or thought. Yet, in recent years one can detect a new development within philosophical thought. By contrast with the focus of post-Kantian critical philosophy on discourse and consciousness, a number of philosophers within the existential and phenomenological tradition turned again towards reality in itself. This movement is known as Speculative Realism.
The adjective speculative might suggest a return to pre-Kantian dogmatic philosophy. This is however not the case. Speculative realist thinkers purport to think reality in itself again, without falling back to pre-critical unreflective thought.
Speculative realists share a strong resistance to post-Kantian philosophies of human finitude. They reject the Kantian idea that we only have access to the correlation or interplay between thinking and being, and never to one of them considered apart from the other.
Further, these thinkers want to overcome the Kantian presumption that our human access to reality is somehow privileged. The target of philosophical reflection is thus shifted away again from the thought-world correlate.
Apart from these commonalities, there are important differences between leading speculative realists. Core members within speculative realism are Quentin Meillassoux (defending speculative materialism), Graham Harman and Levy Bryant (defending object oriented ontology), and Tristan Garcia (defending a flat ontology).
The objective of the seminar is to gain clear insight into the various positions within speculative realism and to be able to critically assess and compare these views. We shall explore together a number of fundamental texts that are generally considered to be representative of speculative realist thought and which founded the school of speculative realism. Participants are expected to actively participate by contributing to the discussion and giving a talk.
Literature includes (but is not limited to) selected chapters from After Finitude: An Essay on the Necessity of Contingency by Quentin Meillassoux; 'The Current State of Speculative Realism’ in Speculations, ‘Meillassoux’s Virtual Future’ in Continent, and ‘The Road to Objects’ in Continent by Graham Harman; selected essays from The Speculative Turn: Continental Materialism and Realism edited by Levi Bryant, Nick Srnicek, and Graham Harman; and selected chapters from Form and Object: A Treatise on Things by Tristan Garcia.
Post-Kantian critical philosophy has focused almost exclusively on discourse and consciousness as what constitutes reality. Reality appeared only as the correlate of language or thought. Yet, in recent years one can detect a new development within philosophical thought. By contrast with the focus of post-Kantian critical philosophy on discourse and consciousness, a number of philosophers within the existential and phenomenological tradition turned again towards reality in itself. This movement is known as Speculative Realism.
The adjective speculative might suggest a return to pre-Kantian dogmatic philosophy. This is however not the case. Speculative realist thinkers purport to think reality in itself again, without falling back to pre-critical unreflective thought.
Speculative realists share a strong resistance to post-Kantian philosophies of human finitude. They reject the Kantian idea that we only have access to the correlation or interplay between thinking and being, and never to one of them considered apart from the other.
Further, these thinkers want to overcome the Kantian presumption that our human access to reality is somehow privileged. The target of philosophical reflection is thus shifted away again from the thought-world correlate.
Apart from these commonalities, there are important differences between leading speculative realists. Core members within speculative realism are Quentin Meillassoux (defending speculative materialism), Graham Harman and Levy Bryant (defending object oriented ontology), and Tristan Garcia (defending a flat ontology).
The objective of the seminar is to gain clear insight into the various positions within speculative realism and to be able to critically assess and compare these views. We shall explore together a number of fundamental texts that are generally considered to be representative of speculative realist thought and which founded the school of speculative realism. Participants are expected to actively participate by contributing to the discussion and giving a talk.
Literature includes (but is not limited to) selected chapters from After Finitude: An Essay on the Necessity of Contingency by Quentin Meillassoux; 'The Current State of Speculative Realism’ in Speculations, ‘Meillassoux’s Virtual Future’ in Continent, and ‘The Road to Objects’ in Continent by Graham Harman; selected essays from The Speculative Turn: Continental Materialism and Realism edited by Levi Bryant, Nick Srnicek, and Graham Harman; and selected chapters from Form and Object: A Treatise on Things by Tristan Garcia.
woensdag 22 mei 2013
Alain Badiou on faithfulness
Alain Badiou is a French philosopher who developed, especially in his Being and Event, a quite interesting conception of truth. Truth, according to Badiou, is inextricably connected with what he calls ‘the event’. For Badiou, an event is a rupture. It is an interruption in the normal state of affairs (or ‘the situation’ as he calls it). An event brings about an entire new constellation of reality to which we have to be faithful by means of further developing it. Although Badiou strives for a renewed kind of universalism in the public context, I take it that his notion of truth is especially relevant and fruitful if we limit its application to the personal context of aiming at a suitable worldview to guide us through life. Let me clarify.
At specific moments in our lives, perhaps just a few, things happen to us that have an irreversible impact on how we evaluate our lives and approach the world. These uncontrollable occurrences break in into our lives and leave an undeniable trail. These rare events are therefore best seen as unpredictable important turning points or ruptures that change the way we understand ourselves, our experiences and the world around us.
So, the specific worldview we adopt must at least properly cohere with these profound occurrences, or even better, must render them intelligible. We have to be faithful to the major events in our lives and we do this by adjusting our worldview to accommodate these events. Disruptive events in our lives reveal to us something new and irresistible. In such an event we are suddenly confronted with breathtaking undeniable truthfulness. Hence life events have a meaning and significance that we cannot else but honor and subsequently persistently adhere to by adopting a worldview that illuminates them. In this way the specific worldview we embrace deepens our personal understanding of our life in this world.
And this way of clarifying our personal lives, I would add, is surely a quite rational thing to do. To remain faithful to the revolutionary moments of truth in our lives, to allow these events to inform our worldview and our personal road through life, is a rational course of action. It is a rational act considered from the private context of our singular concrete lives.
At specific moments in our lives, perhaps just a few, things happen to us that have an irreversible impact on how we evaluate our lives and approach the world. These uncontrollable occurrences break in into our lives and leave an undeniable trail. These rare events are therefore best seen as unpredictable important turning points or ruptures that change the way we understand ourselves, our experiences and the world around us.
So, the specific worldview we adopt must at least properly cohere with these profound occurrences, or even better, must render them intelligible. We have to be faithful to the major events in our lives and we do this by adjusting our worldview to accommodate these events. Disruptive events in our lives reveal to us something new and irresistible. In such an event we are suddenly confronted with breathtaking undeniable truthfulness. Hence life events have a meaning and significance that we cannot else but honor and subsequently persistently adhere to by adopting a worldview that illuminates them. In this way the specific worldview we embrace deepens our personal understanding of our life in this world.
And this way of clarifying our personal lives, I would add, is surely a quite rational thing to do. To remain faithful to the revolutionary moments of truth in our lives, to allow these events to inform our worldview and our personal road through life, is a rational course of action. It is a rational act considered from the private context of our singular concrete lives.
Labels:
Alain Badiou,
event,
faithful,
truth,
worldview
Abonneren op:
Posts (Atom)
