Date: Sat, 18 Feb 1995 21:41:39 -0700 (MST)
From: LEO MEEKS  <lmeeks-AT-du.edu>
Subject: Re: nietzsche & christianity




On Wed, 15 Feb 1995, Jim Elson wrote:

> On Mon, 13 Feb 1995, LEO MEEKS wrote:
> >
> > What i am saying is that if we look at the genealogical emergence of 
> > nietzsche we shouldn't go back primarily to descartes -- which is the 
> > general direction most people attempt to respond to western thought, as 
> > an endnote to the cartesian subject -- but instead back to Luther, and 
> > one could argue even the Italian Rennaissance. 
> 
> Leo, very interesting.  This reminds me of McIntrye's _Short History
> of Ethics_ which barely mentions Descartes but devotes an entire
> chapter to Luther and Machivelli as central players in the advent
> of the modern notion of the individual.  I found this intriguing.
> Is this getting closer to your thesis?
> 
> --Jim
> ===========================================================================> James L Elson:              |<o  When you stare into the abyss too long  o>|
> School of Arts & Humanities |<o       the abyss stares back into you.    o>|
> University of Texas-Dallas  |                  --Nietzsche--               |
> 
> 
> 
> 	--- from list nietzsche-AT-jefferson.village.virginia.edu ---
> 
jim,

Sorry it took so long to reply on this, but work has been a bit hectic.
i've not read the Short History as i tend to shy away from ethics but i 
think anyone who is looking for the real key to unlocking the charm of 
modernity, or the enlightenment, or late christendom, is going in the 
correct direction in beginning with the Reformation rather than Descartes.
When it all comes right down to it i really think when philosophy has 
dropped its fascination with the scientific method, someone like 
descartes will be seen for what he is, a mere footnote or aversion in the 
larger textuality of the West.  No doubt Husserl -- and therefore 
everything which has come from phenomenology --  owes a debt to 
Descartes; however, it is really the internal critique of phenomenology 
which has made the greatest impact and i mean heidegger.  For all the 
problems i have with heidegger, and these are strictly philosophical as i 
shy away from political discourse, i really think his critical edge (as 
outlined in John van Buren's excellent book The Young Heidegger shows) is 
the incorporation of New Testament epistleography against philosophical 
language, the philosophical enterprise itself.  

Sorry i went a bit off there. In short, yeah i think the book you suggest 
would go a way in approaching my position, but i would suggest 3 books on 
Heidegger as an approach to the way i am going: Gadamer Heidegger's Ways, 
John van Buren The Young Heidegger, and Otto Poggeler Der Denkweg Martin 
Heideggers.  Of course there is Gadamer's classic From Hegel to Nietzsche 
which itself moves along these lines but is not exactly what i have in mind.

-leo


	--- from list nietzsche-AT-jefferson.village.virginia.edu ---

     ------------------