Coincidenţa contrariilor reprezintă un punct esenţial în gândirea umanităţii, echivalând, în cele din urmă, cu dorinţa omului de a aduna într-un tot unitar pe cele ce se opun în univers. Această preocupare a stat la baza scrierilor unor gânditori importanţi, între care se numără Sfântul Dionisie Areopagitul, Meister Eckhart, Nicolaus Cusanus sau Mircea Eliade. Deşi au scris în perioade de timp diferite şi au aparţinut unor tradiţii diferite, operele lor stau mărturie faptului că motivul coincidentia oppositorum a fost (...) şi continuă să fie o constantă în viaţa omului în dorinţa acestuia de a atinge Absolutul. (shrink)

In 1919, Nishida Kitarō delivered a speech at Ōtani University discussing the relationship between Nicolaus of Cusa’s coincidentia oppositorum (the coincidence of opposites) and love. The address, given within weeks of a disabling injury suffered by Nishida’s wife, Kotomi, gives evidence of how severe personal crisis would come to influence his philosophical work, and highlights several themes that would dominate the writings of the last twenty-five years of his life.

In 1919, Nishida Kitarō delivered a speech at Ōtani University discussing the relationship between Nicolaus of Cusa’s coincidentia oppositorum and love. The address, given within weeks of a disabling injury suffered by Nishida’s wife, Kotomi, gives evidence of how severe personal crisis would come to influence his philosophical work, and highlights several themes that would dominate the writings of the last twenty-five years of his life.

Nella storia della metafisica è stato un grande problema come chiarire l’idea della coincidentia oppositorum (la coincidenza degli opposti) di Cusano, il quale è riconosciuto comunque da Cassirer come il primo epistemologo del pensiero moderno, in particolare come colui che ha saputo conquistare l’infinito alla mente umana. Dopo alcuni secoli, ha avuto una grande importanza una idea simile a quella di Cusano, la dialettica di Hegel, la quale aggiunge una negazione ad una prima frase negata per ottenere una (...) sintesi in termini generali. Ma poi queste idee sono state sempre meno seguite, eccetto che nel XX secolo da un filosofo non accademico, Lanza del Vasto che ha criticato Hegel e si è ricondotto a Cusano. Nello scritto esamino questa tematica mediante gli strumenti recentemente forniti dalla logica matematica, già verificati sugli scritti di altri scienziati; essi sono capaci di distinguere con precisione che cosa, negli scritti di uno studioso, è un passaggio logico formale e che cosa è una semplice illazione, derivata dalla conoscenza comune o dalla sua creatività; e se è un passaggio logico, decidere di che tipo di logica è. Per mezzo di questo metodo formale, i) presento alcune caratteristiche del ragionare di Cusano; ii) critico il metodo di Hegel; il risultato si accorda con la analisi critica di Hegel che Lanza del Vasto ha compiuto in maniera intuitva; iii) dimostro che la relazione tra Cusano e Lanza del Vasto è più forte di quanto dichiara quest’ultimo; iv) suggerisco una spiegazione della coincidentia oppositorum, chiarendo che la novità di ragionare in logica non classica è stata così innovativa che il tentativo di Cusano di precisarne il metodo è risultato in una scorciatoia, non errata ma valida solo in alcune situazioni; mentre è stato deviante il tentativo di Hegel; Lanza del Vasto, che ha portato un contributo al metodo di Cusano, si è comunque reso conto che occorreva arrivare a formalizzare un nuovo tipo di logica, che oggi risulta essere quella non classica. In definitiva, occorre attribuire a Cusano il merito di aver suggerito una nuova maniera di razionalità logica, quella capace di ragionare in logica non classica e di averne dato, sia pure in maniera imprecisa ed oscura, una prima formalizzazione. (shrink)

In Plato's Parmenides we find on the one hand that the One is denied every property , and on the other hand that the One is attributed every property . In the course of the history of Platonism , these assertions - probably meant by Plato as ontological statements of an entirely formal nature - were repeatedly made the starting points of metaphysical speculations. In the Mystical Theology of the Pseudo-Dionysius they became principles of Christian mysticism and negative theology. I (...) shall show that the two assertions can each be interpreted within the ontological framework of ancient and medieval logic in such a manner that it becomes true, and I shall make plausible that they were understood, with regard to their logical core, by pagan and Christian Platonic metaphysicians just as is indicated by that interpretation. The mentioned ontological framework is basically the Boolean algebra of first-order properties. The main points of the interpretation are on the one hand the identification of the One with the maximal element of the algebra of properties, and on the other hand two alternative intuitively prominent mereological definitions of ontic predication. (shrink)

Normal 0 21 false false false MicrosoftInternetExplorer4 On February 12, 1440 Nicholas of Cusa (1401-1464) concludes in his birthplace of Kues drafting the first major systematic formulation of his thinking: De docta ignorantia . The main category of his metaphysics in this context, i.e. the maximum , is analyzed and interpreted by him on three considerations: the maximum in an absolute sense, as contracted and finally as absolute and contracted, at the same time. In the context of the First Book, (...) which presents the singular methodology of the docta ignorantia , considers the maximum in itself in light of the paradoxical concept of coincidentia oppositorum in the absolute. In the final chapters of this first book tackles the critical of the theological discourse and thus, the problem of the ineffable name of maximum et minimum absolutum . Hence the purpose of this work is the further on cusan’s evaluation of language problem as it shows through treatment of the theological discourses and divine names that emerge from them, in light of the way of docta ignorantia. (shrink)

This article aims to elaborate two meanings of the category of the political in relation to the question of legitimacy in constitutional regimes: John Rawls's conception constructed on the regulative ideal of political neutrality and Carl Schmitt's notion of the political as friend-enemy distinction relying on a logic of exclusion. A comparative textual examination explicates that these two approaches imply opposed meanings to be attributed to the nature, essence, and boundary of the political, although both thinkers have the common aim (...) of developing a theory of the political realm free of religious, metaphysical, and ideological connotations. (shrink)

This article aims to elaborate two meanings of the category of the political in relation to the question of legitimacy in constitutional regimes: John Rawls's conception constructed on the regulative ideal of political neutrality and Carl Schmitt's notion of the political as friend-enemy distinction relying on a logic of exclusion. A comparative textual examination explicates that these two approaches imply opposed meanings to be attributed to the nature, essence, and boundary of the political, although both thinkers have the common aim (...) of developing a theory of the political realm free of religious, metaphysical, and ideological connotations. (shrink)

Aunque Nicolás de Cusa, no es un anti-aristotélico estricto, el propósito de este artículo es mostrar en qué sentido la reflexión acerca del principio capital de la filosofía de Nicolás de Cusa el principio de la coincidencia de los opuestos, supone una lectura crítica de Aristóteles. En diálogo con la literatura secundaria propongo que el contacto con el llamado Aristoteles latinus ofrece al Cusano la oportunidad para plantear una superación de las condiciones de la contradicción y encontrar un marco especulativo (...) adecuado para una nueva concepción del Primer Principio. While Nicholas of Cusa is not a strict anti-aristotelian, the purpose of this article is to show the sense in which in the first principle of cusanian philosophy, the principle of the coincidence of opposites, contains a critical reading of Aristotle. Discussing some contemporary positions, it is proposed here that the contact with the so-called Aristoteles latinus gives Nicholas of Cusa the opportunity to attempt a critical examination of the conditions of contradiction and to open a speculative framework for a new conception of the First Principle. (shrink)

Bajo su apariencia supuestamente cristiana, La Historia del sello de Salomón nos incita de manera muy particular a reconstruir los restos de tradiciones esotéricas musulmanas, que en otros Libros Plúmbeos se muestran de manera menos clara. La traducción francesa que ofrecemos, junto con la edición crítica del original árabe de este texto inédito, acompañadas de las versiones latinas de los traductores pontificios y de Bartolomé de Pectorano por un lado, y de la castellana de Adán Centurión por otro, constituyen una (...) primera aportación al establecimiento definitivo de este corpus de textos.Sous ses dehors supposément chrétiens, L'Histoire du sceau de Salomon nous incite d'une manière toute particulière à y relever la trace de traditions ésotériques islamiques, qu'on observe moins nettement dans d'autres 'Livres de plomb'. La traduction en français que nous en offrons, accompagnée de l'édition critique de l'original arabe de ce texte inédit, en parallèle avec celle des versions latines des interprètes pontificaux et de Bartolomé de Pectorano, d'une part, et celle en castillan d'Adán Centurión, d'autre part, constituent une première pierre à l'établissement définitif de l'ensemble de ce corpus de textes. (shrink)

In the Reality we know, we cannot say if something is infinite whether we are doing Physics, Biology, Sociology or Economics. This means we have to be careful using this concept. Infinite structures do not exist in the physical world as far as we know. So what do mathematicians mean when they assert the existence of ω? There is no universally accepted philosophy of mathematics but the most common belief is that mathematics touches on another worldly absolute truth. Many mathematicians (...) believe that mathematics involves a special perception of an idealized world of absolute truth. This comes in part from the recognition that our knowledge of the physical world is imperfect and falls short of what we can apprehend with mathematical thinking. The objective of this paper is to present an epistemological rather than an historical vision of the mathematical concept of infinity that examines the dialectic between the actual and potential infinity. (shrink)

Nikolaus von Kues veranschaulicht sein metaphysisch-theologisches Prinzip der coincidentia oppositorum anhand geometrischer Konstruktionen. Eine dieser Darstellungen bringt den Beryll ins Spiel. Ich versuche, seine Rolle in Cusanus’ Ausführungen zu klären und Parallelen aufzuzeigen zwischen dem Einsatz dieses Instruments und Strategien der Begriffsbildung in der heutigen Mathematik. Nicolaus of Cusa illustrates his metaphysico-theological principle of ›coincidentia oppositorum‹ by means of geometrical constructions. One of these representations uses a beryl as an auxiliary instrument. In this paper, I attempt (...) to explore the role played by the beryl in Cusanus’ considerations, and to demonstrate some similarities between his use of this instrument and certain strategies in the formation of concepts in modern mathematics. (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:BOOK REVIEWS 285 than" which is both immanent and transcendent, a kind of "coincidentia oppositorum" beyond logic and definition. It is the realm of the "person" within which, although the tragic conflict is not resolved, there arises the free self from whose non-dual perspective the unity and eternity of life are seen. Within this realm the individual gains an illumination the result of which is "amor fad," (...) his free decision to affirm his being. In this act of decision lies the "meaning" and "value" of life. The substance and point of Miss Bauer's book is to show the connection between the metaphysical ground of Simmel's concept of the tragic and its manifestations in different aspects of human experience. Her account is especially interesting in her chapter on the "tragic opposition" in which as an example of a tragic personality she cites Socrates who, by his refusal to flee from his prison, freely embraced his fate and, by choosing to die, confirmed his decisive, binding truth that the heavenly powers remain silent to the questions asked by a doubting and despairing humanity. His act declares that the individual must really stand alone in the world, taking counsel only from himself. Miss Bauer's book is written with a sympathetic understanding of Simmel's philosophy. By opening our eyes to the significant in human existence she succeeds in showing file relevance of his thought to our time. RIA STAVR1DES Vassar College Dialogo con Maurizio Blondel. By Michele Federico Sciacca. (Milano: Carlo Marzorati Editore, 1962. Pp. 159. L. 1300.) Sciacca has gathered here various articles which he had written about Blondel as well as new notes about this French thinker. Blondel struggled against the cult of science seeking to vindicate man's religious needs. Man longs for an end which transcends the natural order. Hence philosophy cannot ignore religion which points to a supernatural human destiny. According to Blondel, God is the only Word which answers the search of man and makes his action both fruitful and progressive. PAUL T. FUHRMANN Columbia Theological Seminary Essays in Ontology. By E. G. Allaire, M. Brodbeck, R. Grossman, H. Hochberg, R. G. Turnbull. Vol. I, Iowa Publications in Philosophy. (The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff, 1963. Pp. 216.) Essays in Ontology is the introductory volume of a new series of monographs to be published by the Department of Philosophy at the University of Iowa. The first volume, as its title indicates, is a collection of essays whose authors are closely affiliated with the Iowa Philosophy Department, being faculty members there now (Allaire and Turnbull) or former students (Hochberg, Grossman, and Brodbeck). Considered as a representative display of talent, the collection is somewhat unbalanced, since twelve of the fourteen papers are by three of the contributors, Allaire, Grossman, and Hochberg, while the other two are contributed by Brodbeck and Turnbull. It is also a matter of some disappointment that eleven of the fourteen papers have seen the light of print elsewhere; although this feeling is somewhat offset by the impact of sustained inquiry into one philosophical problem which the papers make when brought together in this way. The three new papers are "Particulars and... (shrink)

To many, chance and art are antagonistic terms. But a number of 20th century artists have turned this notion on its head by attempting to create artworks based on randomness. Among those, three in particular articulated a well-argued and thorough theory of the radical use of chance in art: André Breton (writer), John Cage (composer) and François Morellet (visual artist). The implications of such a move away from established aesthetics are far-reaching, as much in conceptual as in practical terms, as (...) this book hopes to make clear. Of paramount importance in this coincidentia oppositorum is the suggested possibility of a correlation between the artistic use of chance and a system of thought itself organised around chance. Indeed placing randomness at the centre of one’s art may have deeper philosophical consequences than just on the aesthetical level. (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:BOOK REVIEWS 285 than" which is both immanent and transcendent, a kind of "coincidentia oppositorum" beyond logic and definition. It is the realm of the "person" within which, although the tragic conflict is not resolved, there arises the free self from whose non-dual perspective the unity and eternity of life are seen. Within this realm the individual gains an illumination the result of which is "amor fad," (...) his free decision to affirm his being. In this act of decision lies the "meaning" and "value" of life. The substance and point of Miss Bauer's book is to show the connection between the metaphysical ground of Simmel's concept of the tragic and its manifestations in different aspects of human experience. Her account is especially interesting in her chapter on the "tragic opposition" in which as an example of a tragic personality she cites Socrates who, by his refusal to flee from his prison, freely embraced his fate and, by choosing to die, confirmed his decisive, binding truth that the heavenly powers remain silent to the questions asked by a doubting and despairing humanity. His act declares that the individual must really stand alone in the world, taking counsel only from himself. Miss Bauer's book is written with a sympathetic understanding of Simmel's philosophy. By opening our eyes to the significant in human existence she succeeds in showing file relevance of his thought to our time. RIA STAVR1DES Vassar College Dialogo con Maurizio Blondel. By Michele Federico Sciacca. (Milano: Carlo Marzorati Editore, 1962. Pp. 159. L. 1300.) Sciacca has gathered here various articles which he had written about Blondel as well as new notes about this French thinker. Blondel struggled against the cult of science seeking to vindicate man's religious needs. Man longs for an end which transcends the natural order. Hence philosophy cannot ignore religion which points to a supernatural human destiny. According to Blondel, God is the only Word which answers the search of man and makes his action both fruitful and progressive. PAUL T. FUHRMANN Columbia Theological Seminary Essays in Ontology. By E. G. Allaire, M. Brodbeck, R. Grossman, H. Hochberg, R. G. Turnbull. Vol. I, Iowa Publications in Philosophy. (The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff, 1963. Pp. 216.) Essays in Ontology is the introductory volume of a new series of monographs to be published by the Department of Philosophy at the University of Iowa. The first volume, as its title indicates, is a collection of essays whose authors are closely affiliated with the Iowa Philosophy Department, being faculty members there now (Allaire and Turnbull) or former students (Hochberg, Grossman, and Brodbeck). Considered as a representative display of talent, the collection is somewhat unbalanced, since twelve of the fourteen papers are by three of the contributors, Allaire, Grossman, and Hochberg, while the other two are contributed by Brodbeck and Turnbull. It is also a matter of some disappointment that eleven of the fourteen papers have seen the light of print elsewhere; although this feeling is somewhat offset by the impact of sustained inquiry into one philosophical problem which the papers make when brought together in this way. The three new papers are "Particulars and 286 HISTORY OF PHILOSOPHY Time" and "Common Names" by Grossman, and "The Tractatus: Nominalistic or Realistic?" by Allaire. With the exception of May Brodbeck's elegant analysis of John Dewey's philosophy, Edwin Allaire's article on Berkeley, and Herbert Hochberg's disquisition on Quine's supposed rejection of mental entities, all the essays concern themselves, in one way or another, with the problem of universals. Sometimes the problem is looked at independently of any historical context--as in the first seven papers---or as emerging from such a historical setting, as in Robert Turnbull's tightly argued discussion of Ockham's logic, Reinhardt Grossman's investigation into Frege's ontology, and Herbert Hochberg's article on the status of the "non-natural properties" mentioned by G. E. Moore in his early works. There is thus a common core of subject matter in the collection; but even beyond that, the papers reveal a tightly knit community of philosophical opinion. The writers share a common outlook on what the problem of universals is... (shrink)

Between Mircea Eliade and Rudolf Otto many connections can be made concerning the idea of sacred. Even though, the scientist of Romanian origin perceives the sacred reality differently from the German theologian. If the latter puts an emphasis on the irrational side of the divine, the former argues that the sacred has to be perceived twofold: as irrational and rational in the same time, the concept of coincidentia oppositorum best embodying the sacred reality. The sacred’s materializations are the (...) hierophanies, the history of religion being nothing else than a sum of hierophanies. Finally, for Eliade, the ascred is connected to the life of homo religiosus. (shrink)

The aim of my research is to define the religious hermeneutics that can be identified as the specific core of Antaios (1959–71), the German journal directed by the historian of religions Mircea Eliade and by the writer and philosopher Ernst Jünger. Drawing on their insights, we will focus on the philosophical-religious interpretation of Antaios contents: the so-called “mythical-symbolic hermeneutics” is probably the most interesting theoretical theme connected to the Weltanschauung of Antaios. This cultural journal could embody a counter-philosophical perspec­tive that (...) is at the same time intrinsic to Western speculation. This position has repeatedly emerged in many phases of our cultural history. I refer here to mythical-symbolic thought, characterized by an analogical interpretation of the world, whose structure is considered a stratification of truth levels that are complementary ontological levels of reality. This tradition sees reality as a specific kind of totality that allows human perception to take place through the structures of myth and symbols. The theoretical unity of the project is rooted in the mythical-symbolic tradition that, starting from the religious and esoteric pre-philosophical medita­tions, spans Platonic thought, the various neoplatonisms, passes through medieval mysticism and alchemy, reappears in Romanticism and is revealed in the twentieth century by the reflections of the “thinkers of Tradition.” With this paper I would like to highlight the main topics that can be identified from this hermeneutics: speculations about symbol, myth, coincidentia oppositorum (coincidence of opposites), archetypes, and ontological pluralism. These are at the core of this paradigm. (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:Ignorance, Knowledge, and Omniscience: At and Beyond the Limits of Faith and Reason after Shinran:Reflections on The Boundaries of Knowledge in Buddhism, Christianity, and Science, with Special Attention to Dennis HirotaAmos YongAlthough published in the series Religion, Theologie und Naturwissenschaft, Paul Numrich's edited volume is really about epistemology in religion and science, in particular about human knowing in Buddhist and Christian traditions shaped by the world of science on (...) the one hand, and how such knowing might also inform scientific knowledge on the other hand.1 The panoply of positions is presented by both Buddhist and Christian thinkers.From the Buddhist side, the following arguments are sketched:• that religion and science are complementary modes of knowing and that "understanding the true nature of the physical world" opens up "the way to enlightenment" (Trinh Xuan Thuan).2• that Buddhism is both continuous with (and hence deserving of serious consideration amidst) the epistemic discourses of modernity in many respects and yet also discontinuous with (and hence capable for critically interrogating) modernity's epistemology in other respects as well (David L. McMahan).3• that a Shin Buddhist approach to human knowledge—which in this chapter is brought into dialogue with Martin Heidegger's (1889-1976) notion of truth—opens up to a Kuhnian philosophy of science that emphasizes how paradigmatic shifts occur when new perspectives replace older frameworks (Dennis Hirota).4• that the questions raised by theoretical and quantum physics provide a scientific framework for discussing fundamental epistemological, ontological, and metaphysical questions that Buddhists and Christians might otherwise disagree about (Mark T. Unno).5From the Christian side, the following theses are explored: [End Page 201]• that boundary constraints confront not only working scientists but also Buddhists and Christians, and that these constraints can thus serve as a springboard for a science and religion "trilogue" (Paul O. Ingram).6• that the mystery of creative becoming (God, in traditional Christian terms) is the dynamic backdrop to the ongoing human quest for knowledge (Gordon D. Kaufman).7• that it is at the boundaries of knowledge that genuine creativity occurs (not only scientific creativity but also theological creativity emerges, i.e., the apophatic tradition of Eastern Orthodoxy or the theory of coincidentia oppositorum of Nicholas of Cusa [1401-1464]), and where, as a result of such creative approaches, distinct fields of inquiry open up and different domains of knowledge emerge (Antje Jackelén).8• that theological discourse is paradoxical precisely because such discourse marks the fluid boundaries demarcating sense and nonsense (Tom Christenson).9And, befitting a volume on the encounter between religion (i.e., Buddhism and Christianity) and science, there is a concluding chapter from a physicist on the limits of scientific knowledge that both is encouraged by the gains made by science (presuming a critical realist approach to science's modeling of reality) and yet also is honest about there being much more to learn on small and big questions (John R. Albright).10The foregoing summaries do not do justice to the complexity and sophistication of the chapters in the book. However, they provide a broader context for my interactions with Dennis Hirota's chapter on Shinran's (1173-1263) epistemology and its implications for both religious and scientific knowledge. As an evangelical Christian, I am particularly intrigued by the challenges confronting a Shin Buddhist approach to the sciences, even as I am hopeful that such a consideration will precipitate creative insights both for the Buddhist-Christian encounter and for the religion-science dialogue. I am all the more motivated since I have long been convinced that the religion-science dialogue has been dominated by generically religious approaches and that it is time for more particularistic or even confessional positions to be registered in the discussion.11 I am optimistic that the specificity of the Shin tradition will provide both complementary and contrasting perspectives to the contemporary Buddhist encounter with science that has so far been dominated by the broadly Tibetan approaches of His Holiness the Fourteenth Dalai Lama (1935-) and those in his circle of dialogue partners,12 and that this will in turn open up new trajectories—even initiate new paradigms, as Hirota suggests—for the Buddhist... (shrink)

In these discussions between Mircea Eliade and Thomas Altizer we can recognise two important things: there are some points of contact between these two thinkers and some differences. The problem lies in determining whether or not these points of contact are simply two different ways of understanding the same concepts. On the one hand,“Death of God” theology was in vogue in the United States in the 1960s, but today has few adherents. However, a new evaluation of this theological movement is (...) necessary because we need to understand its possible impact on the renewal of Christianity. On the other hand, Eliade was considered an important scholar in the field of history of religions. In our time, many critics contest his influence in this field and criticize him for the fact that he relativizes Christianity. This new interpretation of both scholars was an opportunity to link the research in the theology with that in the history of religions, an important motive for our time. In ecumenical discussions, the link between research in both these fields is so important. The concept of coincidentia oppositorum, the understanding of the sacrality of our time, in different religions, and the new language for discussing with people of different faiths are the main preoccupations of the ecumenical movement. (shrink)

This paper proposes a reassessment of Hegel’s critical reading of Spinoza and of the charge of acosmism, for which this reading is known. We argue that this charge is actually the consequence of a more fundamental criticism, namely Spinoza’s presumable inability to conceive the unity of the finite and the infinite. According to Hegel, the infinite and the finite remain two poles apart in Spinoza’s metaphysics, which thus fails to be a true monism, insofar as it contains an irreducible duality. (...) Against this reading, we argue that Spinoza’s conception of the causal co-determination of finite modes entails the acknowledgment of their essentially infinite nature. The study of this particular instance of coincidentia oppositorum enables to counter some of Hegel’s criticisms as well as to illuminate a fairly unexplored aspect of Spinoza’s substance monism. (shrink)

This paper proposes a reassessment of Hegel’s critical reading of Spinoza and of the charge of acosmism, for which this reading is known. We argue that this charge is actually the consequence of a more fundamental criticism, namely Spinoza’s presumable inability to conceive the unity of the finite and the infinite. According to Hegel, the infinite and the finite remain two poles apart in Spinoza’s metaphysics, which thus fails to be a true monism, insofar as it contains an irreducible duality. (...) Against this reading, we argue that Spinoza’s conception of the causal co-determination of finite modes entails the acknowledgment of their essentially infinite nature. The study of this particular instance of coincidentia oppositorum enables to counter some of Hegel’s criticisms as well as to illuminate a fairly unexplored aspect of Spinoza’s substance monism. (shrink)

El trabajo intenta mostrar, a partir de una introducción historiografica, uno de los modos posibles en que pueden vincularse el sistema filosófico de Nicolas de Cusa [1401 -1464], a traves de la reformulación que hace el Cusano de la coincidentia oppositorum en el Trialogus De possest' [1460], con la teoria sustancialista de Baruch de Spinoza [1632 -1677], tal como es presentada en el Liber Primus de su Ethic.

It was William Blake's insight that the Christian churches, by inverting the Incarnation and the dialectical vision of Paul, have repressed the body, divided God from creation, substituted judgment for grace, and repudiated imagination, compassion, and the original apocalyptic faith of early Christianity. Blake's prophetic poetry thus contributes to the renewal of Christian ethics by a process of subversion and negation of Christian moral, ecclesiastical, and theological traditions, which are recognized precisely as inversions of Jesus, and therefore as instances of (...) the forms of evil that God-in-Christ overcomes through Incarnation, reversing the Fall. Blake's great epic poems, particularly Milton (1804–08) and Jerusalem (1804–20), embody his heterodox representation of the final coincidence of Christ and Satan through which, at last, all things are made new. (shrink)

During the intense philosophical and theological renaissance of the Russian Silver Age, the German Cardinal Nicholas of Cusa (1401–1464) received a unique appraisal in the work of Semyon Liudwigovich Frank (1877–1950), hailed by some as ‘the greatest Russian philosopher’. This paper will show that five of Frank's central philosophical arguments can be traced directly to Cusa's writings. Once these key arguments are taken together with Frank's own comments about Cusa, it can be concluded that Frank saw himself as Cusa's modern (...) successor, presenting his ideas in a different intellectual context. In this sense, we can speak of Frank as the ‘Russian Cusanus’. The arguments in question include Cusa's docta ignorantia, our knowledge of being, the recognition of absolute being as ‘non‐other’, the identity of possibility and actuality in the absolute, and finally the coincidentia oppositorum. (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:284 HISTORY OF PHILOSOPHY Although this is not the first time that Gentile has been translated into French (a major work of his, L'esprit, acte pur, was published in Paris in 1925), the fact remains nevertheless that his neo-Hegelian system of philosophy fell on deaf ears originally in France, due to the predominance then of Bergsonism and positivi.sm in different areas of French thought. However, as Michele F. Sciacca (...) (another commentator on Gentile) notes in the Preface, the Gentilian system of "actual idealism" should get a better hearing in France from now on, because the widespread interest in Hegel there since 1925 has prepared the ground for its proper reception. The Bibliography, for which Sciacca himself is responsible, includes a section on Gentile's own writings "concerning the national and political formation of Italy" (p. 14); but, significantly enough, those dealing directly with Fascism are all omitted. This omission seems a deliberate attempt to separate Gentile the philosopher from Gentile the Fascist. No matter how understandable psychologically and politically may be the motive here--to have French readers forget that Gentile was the philosopher of Fascism--the attempt itself at bibliographical expurgation, ironically, runs completely counter to the very accent of the Gentilian theory of "pure act" on the unity of thought and action in human experience and history. Rightly or wrongly, Gentile (in sharp contrast to Croce) saw in Fascism the political expression of that unity. As to the secondary sources, the Bibliography again is unnecessarily incomplete, citing as it does only one work in English on Gentile. The anthology closes with a critical note on Gentile's transcendental conception of immortality by the translator (Joseph Moreau), who argues that the "actualistic" philosophy, despite its "religious tone," defeats itself by ending up with an "Epicurean attitude" (p. 324) toward death and the afterlife. PATRICK ROMANELL University o/ Oklahoma Die Tragik in der Existenz des modernen Menschen bei G. Sirnmel. By Isadora Bauer. (Berlin: Duncker und Humblot, 1962. Pp. 94. DM 12.60.) Miss Isadora Bauer's book lends a salutory touch to contemporary philosophical literature, so much of which is abstract and removed from experience. Her treatise, on the other hand, has for its subject matter the human condition, its finitude, and its inescapable tragedy. Georg Simmel, an early twentieth-century philosopher, is less known in this country than he deserves to be. His "Lebensphilosophie," as Miss Bauer points out, although it was influenced by Schopenhauer and Nietzsche, found an original expression through him and foreshadowed in many ways the work of Husserl and the contemporary existential thinkers. Miss Bauer's presentation of Simmel's concept of the tragic is lucid and thorough and manages in a wonderful way to let us see through this one aspect the broad outlines of Simmel 's philosophy as a whole. In Simmel's formulation, life itself, unfolding in tragic antinomy of flux and form, of becoming and being, is the ultimate ground of all tragic conflict. The dynamic life process brings forth all forms and also endangers and destroys them over and over again. The human being encounters these opposites in all aspects of his experience: his existence is tragic at its core. "Moira," the ancient goddess who confronted the Greek hero as an alien power, is in Simmel's modern view of tragedy within man himself. She is the opposition between continuity and discontinuity, the mere stream of events and their form or meaning broken in tragic conflict. At this point, Simmel's dialectics leads to a "third realm," a "more BOOK REVIEWS 285 than" which is both immanent and transcendent, a kind of "coincidentia oppositorum" beyond logic and definition. It is the realm of the "person" within which, although the tragic conflict is not resolved, there arises the free self from whose non-dual perspective the unity and eternity of life are seen. Within this realm the individual gains an illumination the result of which is "amor fad," his free decision to affirm his being. In this act of decision lies the "meaning" and "value" of life. The substance and point of Miss Bauer's book is to show the connection between the metaphysical ground of Simmel... (shrink)

Transformations are not only conditioned by facts encompassing narrower or wider panoramas: from concentrating on death and one (political) role (the ode of Horace), through recalling Cleopatra’s mature life and love (the drama of Shakespeare), to creating an image embracing the heroine’s whole life with its numerous roles, but as a mother and a daughter in the first place, because even her lovers resemble a father and a child (the fictional biography of Karen Essex). Above all, they appear to be (...) more connected with different attitudes towards universal references lying within human cognitive abilities. Horace’s didactic opposition of contradictory patterns leads to the victory of one of them — and it is a linear pattern, as an equivalent of modern myth, which is accepted by the author himself. In Shakespeare, it takes a form of tragedy resulting from the fragmentary character of each pattern, one of which introduces change (archaic myth) and the other constancy (modern myth), and from a painful attempt to combine them. In Essex, the vision of the world in which archaic myth, strongly represented by a child, triumphs is utopian. Irrespective of the differences, all the works realize the essential role played by images developed by heroes, and especially by authors, in human cognition. (shrink)

Simon L. Frank ist nach dem Urteil des Philosophiehistorikers und Theologen W.W. Senkowski "der größte russische Philosoph überhaupt". Frank hatte um die Jahrhundertwende Vorlesungen Georg Simmels in Berlin gehört und sich mit der Philosophie des Neukantianismus, mit Fichtes Idealismus, mit Schleiermacher, Spinoza und dem Pragmatismus auseinandergesetzt. Er rezipierte die Phänomenologie Husserls und den Personalismus. Als seinen "in gewissem Sinne einzigen Lehrer der Philosophie" aber bezeichnete er Nikolaus von Kues. Peter Ehlen geht den Einflüssen nach, die Frank verarbeitet hat. Er zeigt, (...) wie Frank ausgehend von der personalistischen Phänomenologie eine Seinslehre begründet, in der die Problematik von Transzendenz und Immanenz im Sinne der subtilen Cusanischen Lehre der coincidentia oppositorum gelöst wird. Die Welt wird als Symbol der unergründlichen göttlichen Realität, der Mensch wird als "Gottmensch" begriffen. Der Begriff der "religiösen Erfahrung" findet durch Frank eine tragfähige Begründung. Ehlen zeigt, dass Franks Gedanken der gegenwärtigen Religionsphilosophie fruchtbare Impulse geben können. (shrink)

Simon L. Frank (1877-1950) ist nach dem Urteil des Philosophiehistorikers und Theologen W.W. Senkowski "der größte russische Philosoph überhaupt". Frank hatte um die Jahrhundertwende Vorlesungen Georg Simmels in Berlin gehört und sich mit der Philosophie des Neukantianismus, mit Fichtes Idealismus, mit Schleiermacher, Spinoza und dem Pragmatismus auseinandergesetzt. Er rezipierte die Phänomenologie Husserls und den Personalismus. Als seinen "in gewissem Sinne einzigen Lehrer der Philosophie" aber bezeichnete er Nikolaus von Kues. Peter Ehlen geht den Einflüssen nach, die Frank verarbeitet hat. Er (...) zeigt, wie Frank ausgehend von der personalistischen Phänomenologie eine Seinslehre begründet, in der die Problematik von Transzendenz und Immanenz im Sinne der subtilen Cusanischen Lehre der coincidentia oppositorum gelöst wird. Die Welt wird als Symbol der unergründlichen göttlichen Realität, der Mensch wird als "Gottmensch" begriffen. Der Begriff der "religiösen Erfahrung" findet durch Frank eine tragfähige Begründung. Ehlen zeigt, dass Franks Gedanken der gegenwärtigen Religionsphilosophie fruchtbare Impulse geben können. (shrink)

The question whether Nicholas of Cusa had any influence on Schelling at all, is usually debated with regard to Giordano Bruno. The paper shows that there is also another possible trait of reception. We will find strong evidence that Johannes Kepler intermediates between both philosophers. Therefore five modi cogitandi are systematically analyzed as points of convergence between Cusa and Schelling: 1. docta ignorantia, 2. coincidentia oppositorum, 3. visio intellectualis, 4. coniectura, 5. the literary form of a ›philosophy of (...) mysteries‹. (shrink)

The French philosopher and intellectual historian Pierre Hadot (1922-2010) is known primarily for his conception of philosophy as spiritual exercise, which was an essential reference for the later Foucault. An aspect of his work that has received less attention is a set of methodological reflections on intellectual history and on the relationship between philosophy and history. Hadot was trained initially as a philosopher and was interested in existentialism as well as in the convergence between philosophy and poetry. Yet he chose (...) to become a historian of philosophy and produced extensive philological work on neo-Platonism and ancient philosophy in general. He found a philosophical rationale for this shift in his encounter with Wittgenstein's philosophy in the mid-1950s (Hadot was one of Wittgenstein's earliest French readers and interpreters). For Hadot, ancient philosophy must be understood as a series of language games, and each language game must be situated within the concrete conditions in which it happened. The reference to Wittgenstein therefore supports a strongly contextualist and historicist stance. It also supports its exact opposite: presentist appropriations of ancient texts are entirely legitimate, and they are the only way ancient philosophy can be existentially meaningful to us. Hadot addresses the contradiction by embracing it fully and claiming that his own practice aims at a coincidence of opposites (a concept borrowed from the Heraclitean tradition). For Hadot the fullest and truest way of doing philosophy is to be a philosopher and a historian at the same time. (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:Reviewed by:Heroic Virtue, Comic Infidelity: Reassessing Marguerite de Navarre’s HeptaméronG. Mallary MastersHeroic Virtue, Comic Infidelity: Reassessing Marguerite de Navarre’s Heptaméron, by Dora E. Polachek; 170 pp. Amherst: Hestia Press, 1993, $19.00.The volume of essays edited by Professor Polachek represents one of the most attractive collections of symposium papers I have seen in recent years. Attractive to see and to read, it contains a variety of approaches dealing with a (...) timely topic, the “feminine” perspective of a sixteenth-century French collection of novellas within the framework of a “romance” written by a female author. Professor Polachek has masterfully edited the materials, grouping them by subject and giving her readers a text remarkably clean of typographical errors. Her introduction gives a review, as it were, a critical evaluation of the contents. The reader who wishes a more detailed synopsis of the studies in the volume may consult it to advantage.Building upon the historic reference implicit in the introduction, “The Heptaméron Then and Now,” the first group of essays by Robert D. Cottrell, Robert Melançon, and Judy Kem appear in the section entitled “Locus Amænus: Setting the Stage.” They provide background setting for the two groups that follow. Articles by Patricia Francis Cholakian, Carla Freccero, Jeffery C. Persels, and François Paré deal with the topic “Heroic Virtue: Signaling Crisis.” Gary Ferguson, Paula Sommers, Jerry C. Nash, and Dora E. Polachek conclude the volume’s third part with the theme “Engendering Laughters: Men Mocked.”The Amherst conference on Marguerite proved, of the three I attended, the most varied in theme, in critical approach, and in openness of discussion. It produced an outstanding volume of essays: timely, imaginative, qualitative, and even provocative. Colloquium implies dialogue, and dialogue means dialectic, open debate of divergent opinions. And yet, even as Marguerite herself would [End Page 150] wish it, the total experience is one of harmony, the sounding together in unison of the divergent themes, the seemingly discordant approaches that parallel the different voices created by one of the great sixteenth-century female authors of the French Renaissance. In her edition of the conference, Professor Polachek has succeeded very well in presenting a coincidentia oppositorum of the sometimes discordant opinions of Marguerite’s critics whose divergent points of view contribute to our better understanding of her too often underestimated text.The volume will prove very useful for students of Marguerite at all levels of inquiry, as it permits exposure to many different critical approaches to the text and provides additional bibliography such that readers may pursue their own interests and serious research on the subject by looking into the best of Marguerite criticism of the last decades and, indeed, of the last two centuries. The studies contained in it propel us back to the beginnings, so to speak, of Marguerite criticism, bring us up to date in terms of the most recent approaches, and move us forward through the setting of new directions and standards for future research.G. Mallary MastersUniversity of North Carolina, Chapel HillCopyright © 1995 The Johns Hopkins University Press... (shrink)

Disentangling Complexio OppositorumCarl Schmitt's Roman Catholicism and Political Form (1923) features a term, the importance of which political philosophy has yet to fathom. This notion is complexio oppositorum, describing Catholicism as “a complex of opposites”: “There appears to be no antithesis it [Roman Catholicism] does not embrace. It has long and proudly claimed to have united within itself all forms of state and government.…But this complexio oppositorum also holds sway over everything theological.”1 The striking depth and breadth of (...) the complex are already evident in this brief passage. Broadly speaking, its elastic form—and more needs to be said on…. (shrink)

To avoid the mystical rapture that seizes interpreters put before the theme of unitas oppositorum in Cusanus and Leibniz, this contribution shall move from the prosaic question: what does ensue from such opposites or from their conjunction? 2) interweave the analysis with some external point of view, notably that of Erasmus. This question will be investigated on the background of two antitethical traditions in dealing philosophically with opposition and contradiction, although in the end we shall try and find out (...) other ways and reasons for connecting the two thinkers on the ground of the various possible unitates oppositorum, than those of the metaphysical doctrine of the opposites. (shrink)

In his 1923 work, Roman Catholicism and Political Form, Carl Schmitt claims that representation is a complexio oppositorum and incarnates a hierarchical form of political authority, which is alternative to liberalism. This article shows that Carl Schmitt’s interpretation of the political theology of representation is based on a misreading. Schmitt selectively overlooks some meanings of the theology of repraesentatio to build his decisionistic political agenda. An investigation of the original conceptual meanings of representation in Tertullian, the first Christian author (...) who theorized representation and established many of its subsequent theological meanings, shows a different picture. At its inception, representation already included mechanisms of plurality and participation, which anticipated, and perhaps motivated, the absorption of the representation vocabulary within democratic discourse and practice. Political theology is a valuable field of inquiry to prove the claim that the... (shrink)

When in October 2016 I started working on my book Jorge Mario Bergoglio. An intellectual biography I did not have the slightest idea of ​​the importance played by the figure and work of Gaston Fessard in the formation of Bergoglio’s thought. There was nothing to suggest that Gaston Fessard could be a relevant author for the intellectual formation of the future Pope. I was struck by the polar and dialectical model of thought that animated him, the possibility of harmonizing opposites, (...) of inviting concepts to a common table that apparently could not be approached, because it places them in a higher plane in which they find their synthesis. This paradigm, of the Church and of the Society of Jesus as complexio oppositorum, finds its verification, according to Bergoglio, in the way in which the Jesuits have achieved the inculturation of the faith in the indigenous peoples of Latin America. Bergoglio rereads Ignatius in the light of a dialectical model. As he will say in one of the interviews he gave me on the occasion of the writing of my book: “In Ignatian spirituality there is always this bipolar tension”. It is certainly an original, uncommon reading of Ignatius’s thought. It is the ideal factor that allows us to explain why Bergoglio, when in 1986 he went to Frankfurt to write his doctoral thesis, chose the Guardinian essay dedicated to the polar opposition. When I concluded my volume on the intellectual biography of the future Pontiff in February 2017, one element, however, remained obscure. Where, from which author had Bergoglio drawn his polar model? Where did your antinomic reading of Ignatian spirituality come from? Not by Guardini discovered philosophically in 1986. Francis indicated the starting point of his intellectual formation. The reading of Fessard’s La dialectique des Exercices spirituels de saint Ignace de Loyola, published in 1956, is the work that “ had a great influence “ on him. It is the work that clarifies Bergoglio’s antinomian thought, his subsequent ideal encounter with Guardini’s philosophy. (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:Politics Is a Mushroom: Worldly Sources of Rule and Exception in Carl Schmitt and Walter BenjaminKam Shapiro (bio)Life is not a mushroom growing out of death.—Carl Schmitt, The Visibility of the ChurchTo isolate death from life, not leaving the one intimately woven in the other, and each one entering into the other’s midst—this is what one must never do.—Jean-Luc Nancy, L’intrus1Carl Schmitt’s theory of the exception was bound up (...) with a thoroughgoing critique of philosophies of immanence, materialism, and “atheism,” which he treated as interchangeable. In his early writings, he adopted the Christian perspective according to which postlapsarian nature cannot by itself yield a juridical order, or in his poetic phrase, “life is not a mushroom growing out of death.” Yet—in accord with Catholic doctrine—he also found sources of life, or law, in this world. While he repudiated theories of collective self-legislation, he embraced a popular sovereign empowered to impose form on a chaotic society. In Political Theology (1922), he compared the form-giving power of the sovereign to an act of divine intervention. Law, he argued, can only function in a lawful or “normal” situation that precedes formalization, and the sovereign “produces and guarantees the situation in its totality” [13]. In The Crisis of Parliamentary Democracy (1923) Schmitt retained his theological terms: “A scientific study of democracy must begin with a particular aspect that I have called political theology” [32]. In the modern age, democratic constituent power (pouvoir constituant) replaces the will of God as the transcendent source of a substantial order, namely democratic homogeneity. Democratic will-formation thereby becomes an act prior to its subject, or as Schmitt wrote, “[...] only political power, which should come from the people’s will, can form the people’s will in the first place” [Crisis 28]. A variety of democratic theorists dwell on the paradoxical character of democratic sovereignty, sometimes tracing it back to Rousseau’s well-known formulations [see esp. Connolly and Honig]. They highlight the gap between a transcendent (ideal or fictive) will in whose name political power acts, and the bounded, material consensus it forms, ostensibly rendering the latter vulnerable to challenge. As I argue, however, a closer look at Rousseau’s discussion of democratic founding in On the Social Contract reveals instead a dynamic relay between dispersed substantial or immanent sources of affiliation, on the one hand, and various agents and techniques of political power that draw on and combine them in a collective will, on the other, or what I call the virtual and the virtuosic.2 After briefly exploring this dynamic in Rousseau’s [End Page 121] On the Social Contract, I will highlight similar dynamics at work in Schmitt’s Weimar writings, examining three instances: the complexio oppositorum (1923), national myth (1923), and the polemical opposition of friend and enemy (1927), focusing especially on the first. Contrary to familiar readings of Schmitt’s metaphysical “exceptionalism,” I argue that for Schmitt, as for Rousseau, political power does not create a normative order from a vacuum, and the apparent transcendence of sovereign authority has a variety of worldly sources.3 Finally, I consider what I call “democratic virtuosity,” or virtuosity from below, focusing on Walter Benjamin’s repudiation of sovereign acts of lawmaking or law preserving in favor of ongoing collective habit-formation. As I argue, Benjamin returns spiritual force to the material world not only to shatter human authorities, but also to democratize creation.Rousseau—Anticipating the PeopleIn the Social Contract, Rousseau formulated the paradox of democratic founding to which so many, including Schmitt, would return. “In order for an emerging people to appreciate the healthy maxims of politics, and follow the fundamental rules of statecraft, the effect would have to become the cause; the social spirit, which should be the result of the institution, would have to preside over the founding of the institution itself; and men would have to be prior to laws what they ought to become by means of laws” [Rousseau 69]. As Rousseau argues, a constitution can form a general will only if it commands the loyalty of the people, that is, if there is... (shrink)