(this is a copy of a message that did not seem to have gone out)
If it is right to claim that Heidegger retained his Catholic faith
(and this is a point that is being hotly disputed), then Heidegger's
position is certainly odd. Presumably Heidegger is saying:
1) ontically, I am an atheist, and
2) I have faith in God and Jesus Christ. Most people would regard
these statements as mutually contradictory, but perhaps that is just
metaphysics talking.
But the contradiction is not easy to shrug off in this way.
Doesn't Christian faith demand that we believe the claim that Jesus was
the son of God and that he died for our sins is indeed a fact, in the same
way that the claim that Julius Caesar died on M arch 15th is a fact?
Or should we follow Kierkegaard, and claim that faith is
ultimately absurd? (I would not be surprised if Heidegger were influenced
by Kierkegaard here). The difference would be that Kierkegaard urges us
to cling to faith and to shun all else, while Hei degger seems to be
claiming at least equal validity (if you will excuse the word) for asking
the question of Being. (The temptation to equate Kierkegaard's
"objectivity" with Heidegger's "metaphysics" is tempting, but ultimately
unconvincing).
Christian metaphysics arose from a quite understandable desire to
link the realms of thought and faith. By denying Being to God, Heidegger
seems to be decreeing a perpetual divorce. Is he prescribing an
ultimately schizoid existence?
Martin Weatherston,
Philosophy & Religious Studies Dept.,
East Stroudsburg University,
East Stroudsburg, PA 18301.
--- from list heidegger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---
If it is right to claim that Heidegger retained his Catholic faith
(and this is a point that is being hotly disputed), then Heidegger's
position is certainly odd. Presumably Heidegger is saying:
1) ontically, I am an atheist, and
2) I have faith in God and Jesus Christ. Most people would regard
these statements as mutually contradictory, but perhaps that is just
metaphysics talking.
But the contradiction is not easy to shrug off in this way.
Doesn't Christian faith demand that we believe the claim that Jesus was
the son of God and that he died for our sins is indeed a fact, in the same
way that the claim that Julius Caesar died on M arch 15th is a fact?
Or should we follow Kierkegaard, and claim that faith is
ultimately absurd? (I would not be surprised if Heidegger were influenced
by Kierkegaard here). The difference would be that Kierkegaard urges us
to cling to faith and to shun all else, while Hei degger seems to be
claiming at least equal validity (if you will excuse the word) for asking
the question of Being. (The temptation to equate Kierkegaard's
"objectivity" with Heidegger's "metaphysics" is tempting, but ultimately
unconvincing).
Christian metaphysics arose from a quite understandable desire to
link the realms of thought and faith. By denying Being to God, Heidegger
seems to be decreeing a perpetual divorce. Is he prescribing an
ultimately schizoid existence?
Martin Weatherston,
Philosophy & Religious Studies Dept.,
East Stroudsburg University,
East Stroudsburg, PA 18301.
--- from list heidegger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---