Coincidentia oppositorum
Coincidentia oppositorum (Latin; "coincidence of opposites") is a central concept in the thinking of the philosopher and theologian Nikolaus von Kues (Cusanus).
prehistory
Even Aristotle had in his work Physics via the efficient cause , the formal cause and the final cause found: but now go three times in one together (Latin translation: (co) incidunt in unum ). The late medieval philosophers Albertus Magnus and Heymericus de Campo related this to the identity of these three causes in God. The word coincidentia comes from Heymericus, who was friends with Nikolaus von Kues and strongly influenced him. Heymericus has not yet spoken of a collapse of opposites.
The idea of the collapse (coincidence) of opposites to form a unity emerged from the tradition of Neoplatonism . Thoughts of the late antique Neo-Platonist Pseudo-Dionysius Areopagita and Meister Eckhart gave an impetus , but it is an innovation introduced by Nikolaus von Kues. Nikolaus emphasizes that he has thus developed a new, independent theory that the previous philosophy has lacked. He sees the idea of coincidence as a core element of his approach or method (by which he does not mean a doctrine or a system). With reference to the novelty of his way of thinking, he distances himself sharply from the Aristotelian school philosophy of late medieval scholasticism .
concept
Nicholas differentiates between reason ( intellectus , intellect) and understanding ( ratio ). By “understanding” he means the force that orders the sensory impressions by differentiating between them and thus including and excluding, i.e. also negating what the senses are unable to do. All intellectual knowledge is relative because it is based on comparison. The mind delimits something and thereby determines (defines) it. His objects are characterized by the fact that they can have more or less. The mind cannot grasp anything absolute or infinite, because for it there is no proportion between the finite and the infinite. It fails where there is no comparative experience. Nevertheless, man can develop the concept of infinity and spiritually approach the infinite. He is helped by a special ability, reason, which, according to Nikolaus, is far above reason. Since reason negates the distinguishing negation of the understanding, which can only think of opposites separately, it arrives at the concept of infinity and infinite unity in which the opposites coincide into one. This concept of coincidence is inaccessible to intellectual activity as a rational content; to the mind it is paradoxical .
In theological terms, the infinite unity is God. In the sense of the Neoplatonic tradition, it is the one , the primordial ground of becoming, which Nicholas identifies with the utmost simplicity. The Catalan thinker Raimundus Lullus , whose teachings Nicholas eagerly studied, had already pointed out that in God the divine properties are not different from one another. Accordingly, in God goodness and wisdom are the same; they are to be thought of as one without distinction. Nicholas applies this principle to all kinds of contraries ( opposita on). From his point of view, the opposites are folded in God, unfolded in the world. Paradoxically, in the unity of opposites, he also expressly includes the contradictory (contradicting) opposites, which according to the Aristotelian principle exclude each other from contradiction . He limits the validity of this proposition to the realm of intellectual activity; beyond this realm, he removes the limitation of thought by prohibiting contradiction. In doing so, he turns against Aristotle and the medieval Aristotelians, who viewed the principle of contradiction as the basic principle of all reality and all thought that grasps reality.
The mental apprehension of coincidence
Nicholas has endeavored all his life to spiritually achieve the “simple unity” of God, in which all opposites coincide. He sees the understanding of coincidence as an absolutely necessary prerequisite for the knowledge of God.
In his 1440 work De docta ignorantia ("About the instructed ignorance") he takes the view that reason is finite and therefore, like understanding, cannot surpass contradictions and reach coincidence. Later, in De coniecturis (around 1442) and the small writings written in the period 1445–1447, Nicholas rated the possibilities of reason more highly. Now he thinks that it can overcome the contradictions against the resistance of the intellect and thus gain paradoxical insights, for example equating the greatest with the smallest. In addition, he now ascribes the ability to a “divine” thinking that transcends the opposition of affirmation and negation in the sense of coincidence. He claims that this divine thinking also leaves reason and its understanding of contradicting opposites behind, in order to turn towards absolute unity and infinity. God is not the coincidence of opposites, but the coincidence thinking is only the way human reason appropriate to approach him. Therefore, in De visione dei in 1453, Nicholas described the coincidence as a “wall” between the seeker and God. However, he sees no insurmountable obstacle in this wall.
Nikolaus follows the tradition of Platonism , which emphasizes the importance of mathematical thinking for philosophy, by symbolically illustrating his metaphysical thoughts with the aid of mathematical examples. He illustrates the infinite unity with the example of an infinite straight line. This is not only a straight line, but also a triangle, the base of which has become infinitely long and the corresponding height infinitely small; the largest angle (180 °) also appears as the smallest (0 °). The straight line is also a circle with an infinitely large diameter.
reception
Theology professor Johannes Wenck , a contemporary of Nikolaus, was a sharp opponent of the concept of coincidence . He believed that this way of looking at things led to pantheism , since ontologically it allowed God and the world to coincide and thus cancel out the difference between creator and creature. Therefore it is heresy . Nikolaus fiercely defended himself against this accusation.
Giordano Bruno , an admirer of Cusanus, continued the idea of coincidence in a pantheistic sense. In the 18th century, Johann Georg Hamann took up the concept of the coincidence of opposites and made it a central element of his philosophy. Even Schelling followed up on it.
Hegel never mentions the name of Nikolaus von Kues. His idea of the relationship between the absolute idea and the world (with nature and history) is influenced by the concept of coincidence.
In the course of his philosophical development, Harald Holz has given more and more space to reflect on a partly dialectical, partly coincident transcendental logic for his own systemic philosophizing.
literature
- Kurt Flasch : Nikolaus von Kues: The idea of coincidence . In: Josef Speck (ed.): Basic problems of the great philosophers. Philosophy of Antiquity and the Middle Ages , Göttingen 1992, pp. 221–261.
- Josef Stallmach: Coincidence of opposites and wisdom of ignorance. Basics of the philosophy of Nikolaus von Kues . Aschendorff, Münster 1989, ISBN 3-402-03493-X .