Philosophical theology in the age of nihilism

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The philosophical theology in the age of nihilism is an existential-philosophical variant of a natural religion developed by Wilhelm Weischedel around 1961 .

The philosophical way of existence

Weischedel starts from philosophizing as a mode of existence in order to justify his philosophical theology. Philosophizing is radical questioning and shows that unfounded assumptions are assumed everywhere. The radical questioning forms the starting point for philosophical theology.

Philosophy is committed to three basic attitudes:

  1. the open skepticism as they all allegations strictly truth reviewed, but does not deny the possibility of truth;
  2. the open atheism , since it God did not accept, but also its non-existence can not proclaim dogmatically;
  3. the open Nihilism : Nihilism asserts that there is no sense and no being there and statements about the meaning and manifestations are not true. Philosophy is open nihilism because it neither denies nor presupposes the possibility of truth. All being appears to her as questionable, but not as null and void. It asks radically for reasons for meaning, but does not deny from the outset that there can be reasons.

Meaning means comprehensibility, what is meaningful is what is understood. It is forgiven by a subject, but it comes to the cause itself. Something that creates meaning gives meaning to what is meaningful. However, what gives meaning must itself be meaningful in order to be able to create meaning. If there is something that makes sense, it is in a comprehensive context. The meaning of the individual can only be judged if there is an overall meaning. If there is a conditional sense, there is also an unconditional one. There is only one unconditional sense or total senselessness.

Even before any reflection, man unconsciously assumes a sense of what he is doing and thus a sense of the whole, ultimately an unconditional sense. However, this naive certainty of meaning can always be questioned. No established, unconditional sense can be found. A nihilist denies the meaning of everything and lives in the mode of existence of defiance or irony. A believer dogmatically postulates a meaning. Between the two alternatives, the philosopher remains in the open limbo between meaning and senselessness.

The (radical) questioning is a fundamental element of human nature. Man can come to the decision of constant radical questioning, which is the only response to the questioning that does justice to it. The philosophical way of existence is not necessary, however, the human being is free to seize other possibilities as well.

Foundation of philosophical theology

A philosophical theology must be inferred from the consequences of the philosophical mode of existence. It must not make any additional assumptions other than that of radical questionability.

The radical questioning is the basic philosophical experience. Experiences of questionability can be in failure, in betrayal , death of another or one's own near death, boredom , war , silence (for example a mild summer night), in the distance of fellow human beings, through thinking about the infinite or simply looking at a thing in relation to his being occur. These experiences can be made by everyone and are made every now and then by everyone. The individual experiences indicate the radical questionability. It is immediately present in these experiences, but cannot be traced back to the individual experiences. The experiences are comparable to the borderline situations of Karl Jaspers .

The essence of reality is radical questionability, because this is the only thing that remains when everything becomes questionable. Hence the question of the conditions of the possibility of questionability, which itself is also questionable. However, this should not be understood as a question of the reason or the origin of the questionable nature, as this would mean falling back into traditional substance metaphysics . Therefore the best formulation is the question of the "from where" of the questionable. Weischedel therefore wants to establish a relational ontology .

The source of the questionable is the only way to still speak of God. God is no longer the highest being or a person or a spirit. It must be viewed from the perspective of the questionability of reality and can therefore be nothing other than the origin of the questionability. However, this must by no means be understood as a deduction in the sense of a proof of God.

God cannot be talked about in the same way as about immediate conceptual or real givens, but only in a philosophical decision which regards the world as questionable and who regards God as the origin of questionability. Since the from where has a different mode of being than the reality in question, the question arises of how one can talk about God. Silence or a new language are insufficient answers. Speaking about what comes from requires a floating language: One can only speak of God in an analogous way, i.e. speaking with regard to something else. There is agreement in speaking, but no conceptual identity. There is a qualitative difference between God and the world.

The from where can be described as a secret. This is part of his being. What comes from becomes present in the experience of the reality in question. It is an essential approach to the reality in question. It is inherently powerful as it throws everything into question. However, this should not be understood as if the from whence were a person with power. Shaking also belongs to the essence of the from where. The procedure causes the hovering between being and non-being.

The god of the philosophers (the from whence) is the absolute floating between being and not being. Nothing more can be said about God. It is wider than what the human mind can grasp. That is why speaking about God is replaced by silence. The from where is not only being, but also making sense. But at the same time it is also destructive. World reality can neither be viewed as clearly meaningful nor as clearly meaningless.

Differentiation from the God of Christianity

The new, philosophical concept of God has nothing to do with traditional Christian talk about God. There are clear differences in the fact that Christianity sees God as the Trinity . The god of the philosophers is not a transcendent god. Philosophical theology cannot make any statements about the essence of God (e.g. that he is person or spirit), since this cannot be experienced. In philosophical theology there is no revelation of God (e.g. in history, through persons or in Jesus ). There is thus a contrast between the basic experiences in Christianity and in a philosophical theology.

literature

  • Wilhelm Weischedel : The god of the philosophers. Foundation of a philosophical theology in the age of nihilism. Two volumes. Scientific Book Society, Darmstadt 1971 f.
  • Jörg Salaquarda (ed.): Philosophical theology in the shadow of nihilism. De Gruyter, Berlin 1971.
  • Robert Deinhammer: Questionable Reality. Questionable life. Philosophical theology and ethics with Wilhelm Weischedel and Peter Knauer. Echter-Verlag, Würzburg 2008.