Martin Weatherston once might have wrote;
>
> I believe that somewhere Heidegger says something to the effect
> of "Philosophy is and remains essentially atheism." I cannot now find
> this passage. Does anyone recall where it is to be found? Thanks.
>
> Martin Weatherston,
Well, Iknow what phrase you might be referring to but can't find it (just
read it yesterday, actually) but htere is the following that might be of
use in complicating what follows:
"Only from teh truth of Being can the essence of the holy be thought. Only
>from the essence of holy is the essence ofthe divinity to be thought. Only
in the light of the essence of divinity can it be thought or said waht the
word 'God' is to signify .... Being
"In such nearness, if at all, a decision may be made as to whether and how
God and the gods withhold their presence and the night remains, whether iand
how the day of the holy dawns, whether and how in the upsurgence of the holy
an epiphany of God and the gods can begin anew. But the holy, which alone is
the essential sphere of divinity, which in turn alone affords a dimension
for the gods and God, comes to radiate only when Being itself beforehand and
after extensive preparation has been illuminated and is experienced in its
truth." Letter on Humanism, Krell translation p.230, p.218 [? -- so it is
referenced in the book in front of me]
Remember, however, that the God of whom Heidegger speaks, is the god of
philosophy -- the god of causa sui, which is a god that is implicated in
Being and beings, and that he also leaves open the possibility of some other
god, that is not spoken of in the sense of bieng, that can not be spoken
(for to speak of is to create an idol, in the sense that Jean-Luc Marion
speaks of Icons and Idols in _God_without_being_) -- something, that is,
that does not invite the gaze to infinity but rather fixes the gaze and
provides a screen beyond which that which can not be seen at the time of
seeing the idol (which is created by the gaze) can never be seen, but the
true approach is hrough the icon which (by inviting the gaze) suggests the
possibility of the excess. The death of god as proclaimed by Nietzsche is
the death of the metaphysical god, the moral god. Even Nietszche offers the
possibility (if not the necessity) of there being a god (or gods) who did
not die, and this isn't his multiple gods of choice made in the image of man
but the other god which has no investment in being and no place in being
spoken of.
What I would really like to find is the phrase whereby Heidegger claims that
if he were to write a theology he would not use Being but I can't seem ot
find it ... sorry ...
You might find it useful tolook at a book by Jean-Luc Marion,
_Dieu_sans_l'etre:_Hors-texte_. Paris: Librairie Artheme Fayard, 1982.
(God_without_Being:_hors-texte_. trans. Thomas Carlson, U of Chicago Press,
1991.) which begins with a definition of God contra the shcolastic tradition
of proofs of Gad by saying that God is so utterly fantastically perfect that
he not only doesn't have to exist but we can't even to begin to think of the
existence of god, et cet et cet. A provocative and ocnvincing reading of
Heidegger and nietzsche et al.
michael
--
"Every age gets the renaissance it deserves" (Aby Warburg)
Michael Maranda
mm017g@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
--- from list heidegger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---
>
> I believe that somewhere Heidegger says something to the effect
> of "Philosophy is and remains essentially atheism." I cannot now find
> this passage. Does anyone recall where it is to be found? Thanks.
>
> Martin Weatherston,
Well, Iknow what phrase you might be referring to but can't find it (just
read it yesterday, actually) but htere is the following that might be of
use in complicating what follows:
"Only from teh truth of Being can the essence of the holy be thought. Only
>from the essence of holy is the essence ofthe divinity to be thought. Only
in the light of the essence of divinity can it be thought or said waht the
word 'God' is to signify .... Being
"In such nearness, if at all, a decision may be made as to whether and how
God and the gods withhold their presence and the night remains, whether iand
how the day of the holy dawns, whether and how in the upsurgence of the holy
an epiphany of God and the gods can begin anew. But the holy, which alone is
the essential sphere of divinity, which in turn alone affords a dimension
for the gods and God, comes to radiate only when Being itself beforehand and
after extensive preparation has been illuminated and is experienced in its
truth." Letter on Humanism, Krell translation p.230, p.218 [? -- so it is
referenced in the book in front of me]
Remember, however, that the God of whom Heidegger speaks, is the god of
philosophy -- the god of causa sui, which is a god that is implicated in
Being and beings, and that he also leaves open the possibility of some other
god, that is not spoken of in the sense of bieng, that can not be spoken
(for to speak of is to create an idol, in the sense that Jean-Luc Marion
speaks of Icons and Idols in _God_without_being_) -- something, that is,
that does not invite the gaze to infinity but rather fixes the gaze and
provides a screen beyond which that which can not be seen at the time of
seeing the idol (which is created by the gaze) can never be seen, but the
true approach is hrough the icon which (by inviting the gaze) suggests the
possibility of the excess. The death of god as proclaimed by Nietzsche is
the death of the metaphysical god, the moral god. Even Nietszche offers the
possibility (if not the necessity) of there being a god (or gods) who did
not die, and this isn't his multiple gods of choice made in the image of man
but the other god which has no investment in being and no place in being
spoken of.
What I would really like to find is the phrase whereby Heidegger claims that
if he were to write a theology he would not use Being but I can't seem ot
find it ... sorry ...
You might find it useful tolook at a book by Jean-Luc Marion,
_Dieu_sans_l'etre:_Hors-texte_. Paris: Librairie Artheme Fayard, 1982.
(God_without_Being:_hors-texte_. trans. Thomas Carlson, U of Chicago Press,
1991.) which begins with a definition of God contra the shcolastic tradition
of proofs of Gad by saying that God is so utterly fantastically perfect that
he not only doesn't have to exist but we can't even to begin to think of the
existence of god, et cet et cet. A provocative and ocnvincing reading of
Heidegger and nietzsche et al.
michael
--
"Every age gets the renaissance it deserves" (Aby Warburg)
Michael Maranda
mm017g@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
--- from list heidegger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---