Fw: 20th WCP The Concept of Transcendence in Heidegger

20th WCP: The Concept of Transcendence in Heidegger

----- Original Message -----=20
From: Gary C Moore=20
To: Gary C Moore=20
Cc: Gary C Moore=20
Sent: Monday, May 27, 2002 4:05 PM
Subject: 20th WCP The Concept of Transcendence in Heidegger





      Philosophy of Religion

      The Concept of Transcendence in Heidegger

      Philippe Capelle
      Institut Catholique de Paris
      philosophie@xxxxxx



        ABSTRACT: The history of Heideggerian commentaries confront us =
with a string of parallel concepts: metaphysics and theology, =
onto-theology and Christian theology, thought and faith, Being and God, =
and so on. It should also be noted that these different dual concepts =
have served, in various ways, several strategies for the interpretation =
of Heidegger. These various strategies are summarized as follows: the =
relation between philosophy and theology in the thought of Heidegger is =
threefold and should be read to the rhythm of his thinking according to =
the themes of facticity and transcendence.
    =20



      History of heideggerian commentaries confronts us with a series of =
parallel notions : "Metaphysics and Theology", "Onto-Theology and =
Christian Theology", "Theology and Faith" and finally "Being and God". I =
should also point out that these different dual concepts organise =
several strategies to interpret Heidegger.

      These strategies can be gathered under four grand points.

      First of all, a diagnosis in terms of "secularised Theology" =
coupled with an exitentialisation of the fundamental concepts presiding =
over the duality of the Dasein. According to this diagnosis, Heidegger's =
work is seen, in the best case, as a veiled revival of christian =
Theology.=20

      In this perspective it is appropriate to recapture the existential =
analysis and to open it up towards the theological language, since he =
has never really been far from it.

      A second way of reading the relation between Philosophy and =
Theology in Heidegger's work consist in organising a "theological =
deconstruction" within christian Theology.

      A third strategy prefers to read the link between Philosophy and =
Theology in terms of territorial delimitation, a sort of epistemological =
"Yalta" between two speculative exercises.

      Finally, I should mention a fourth type of strategy which finds =
its origin in the "ontological difference" and wants to renew the terms =
of proximity to the divine.

      The recent publication of some of Heidegger's unpublished works =
pleads for a renewed reading and gives credit to the hypothesis which I =
summarise as follows : the relation between Philosophy and Theology in =
Heidegger's thought is threefold and coextensive with Heidegger's =
thinking itself, according to the two themes of "facticity" and =
"transcendence". (1)=20

      I. THREE TOPICS

      The different meanings of the concept of Philosophy and Theology =
point to three topics concerning the relation of Philosophy and Theology =
as such. These topics should be formulated as follows : first of all as =
the relation between "Philosophy and Scriptural Theology". Ontology, as =
a science, while distanciating itself from whatever "Weltanschauung", =
happens in rigorous fidelity to the philosophical adventure. It faces =
Christian Theology, an ontical science elaborated in the "Positum" of =
the Faith in a crucified God. The lecture "Phenomenology and Theology" =
(1927), the first part of the lesson "Einf=FChrung in die Metaphysics" =
(1935) and the letters dated 1928 recently published as part of the =
correspondence with E. Blochmann, should be read in this perspective and =
only in this perspective.

      Second topic : both Philosophy and Theology (wether it is =
christian Philosophy or philosophical Theology) find their field of =
development in the dimorphic structure, that is to say in the =
onto-theological structure of western metaphysics.

      The last topic : "The thought of Being and waiting for the God", =
the following point is debated : the possibility of the happening of a =
divine god, beyond Christian or anti-christian reference, can only be =
thought in the Opening-up of Being. This god, the "last god" does not =
occur like a resolution coming from above, the God is not the new =
subject of an exterior Revelation. On the contrary, it belongs to the =
ever present transcendence of the Being and the diffusion of Ereignis.

      What is emergent here, on two accounts at least, is the necessity =
to take up anew a diachronic study of Heidegger's writings. I would like =
to examine the structures of thinking that enables us to understand, to =
reconstruct the relation between Philosophy and Theology.

      II. FACTICITY AND TRANSCENDENCE

      The diachronic approach is bound to start by considering Heidegger =
famous expression "Without this theological source, I would have never =
have taken the way of thought. Source means future".

      Three comments can be made. First of all, it is well known that =
Heidegger did receive a fundamental training in Theology, the context =
and practice of which should be examined. Secondly, Heidegger uses =
speculative and crafted tools that he borrows from the theological =
tradition, this process of appropriation of Theology needs to be taken =
into account. Finally, it is to be noted that the link between Theology =
and thought is an active link : "Source means future".

      In order to qualify the three different levels of interpretation, =
I shall now use three terms : rooting, debt and source.=20

      Rooting is a good word to specify the peculiar relation that =
Heidegger has with the catholic world. This relation is complex, it =
refers to a variety of plays. I should mention the one which is best =
known. As a high school student, Heidegger discovers the specificity of =
ontological questioning through the reading of Franz Brentano's =
dissertation "On the manifolds meanings of Being according to =
Aristotle". This initial connection to Theology is not, as one might =
think at first sight, only a first exhibition of the conceptual and =
diagnostic data of Theology; it is overall a way to tell that the =
practice of historical thinking is an opening of the questioning of =
Philosophy and of ontology in particular.

      Debt. The relation between Heidegger and Theology ca be understood =
on another level and can be defined in terms of debt. We would like to =
show that some of the main Heideggerien schemes are not understandable =
unless they are, first of all, referred to Christian experience where =
they have been elaborated.

      At the beginning of his lesson in the 1923 summer semester "The =
Hermeneutics of Facticity", Heidegger writes : "Young Luther has been my =
companion through my search. Aristotle, whom Luther hated, was my model. =
Kierkegaard span me on and Husserl gave me eyes to see". These lines, =
obviously written after mature reflection, condense in a few words the =
influence that these figures imposed on Heidegger in a definite way. The =
common link between them is the concept of facticity. At the beginning =
of 1930, as Otto P=F6ggeler, the first, insisted on, facticity is the =
central theme in Heidegger's reality, the one to which he returns again =
and again. This theme points to both areas (convergent in Heidegger's =
eyes) : the area of Protestant Theology and that of Husserl's =
phenomenology. I shall elaborate briefly the forms.

      Through his weekly encounters with Bultmann, Heidegger reads =
Luther, within the Protestant tradition, and through Luther he reads =
Saint Paul, Saint John, Saint Augustin and Kierkegaard. For the first =
time, he is looking at the possibility of establishing a necessary =
correspondence between theological conceptualisation and the specific =
contents of the New Testament.

      In Saint Augustin's work Heidegger analyses, first of all, the =
christian experience, in terms of attachment to life as facticity; =
"facticity" here does not only mean "factuality", that is to say : the =
contingency of objects of experience, but more deeply, facticity must be =
understood from Augustin's facticia est anima. This underlines the =
structure of the soul which does not find its origin in itself.=20

      With Bultmann, Heidegger shares a theological approach of the =
transcendental constitution of man. It was already present in his early =
work on Duns Scot in 1917. It is for him the way it will construct his =
most prominent themes of temporality and finitude.

      But later, while he is working on the existential forms from the =
facticity of Christian experience, he does finally abandon the =
theological resolution. From that moment on, facticity will become the =
better term to indicate the question of Being.

      Source. This third level is the most difficult one because it =
implies a structural ambivalence in the relation between Philosophy and =
Theology. In his letter of of August 8th, 1928 which he sent to =
Elisabeth Blochmann, Heidegger tells how, in Marbourg, his work was =
always ambivalent (dewusst zweiseitig). This ambivalence consists in the =
fact that he is worrying (beunruhigend). This point is understandable in =
relation with the following words "I dismissed from Theology more than =
one student : nobody could say if it was worth it. But, if in this way =
young men have found their own freedom, I suppose it was for their =
good". (2) During the winter semester of 1927, in "Die Grundprobleme der =
Ph=E4nomenologie", Heidegger elaborates the notion of "ontological =
difference" close to that of "theological difference". God versus =
Creature: the latter, in fact is only one side of the ontological =
difference, but, in itself, it invites to look towards the Being.

      "The thesis (that essentia and existentia belong to every being) =
indicates the more general problem of the articulation of the Being =
between what it is and the way the Being has its own gesture".

      How should we understand the verb "to indicate"? The answer is : =
the theological transcendence belongs to another transcendence, the =
transcendence of Being. This thought rings the end of the traditional =
pair Transcendence versus Immanence : "The world is [...] the actual =
transcendence [...]. So is the authentic ontological meaning of =
transcendence". (3)=20

      III. ANOTHER TRANSCENDENCE

      Here is the link to the third topic : "The thinking of Being and =
the waiting for the God". Heidegger fights against the enclosement of =
the beings, whether it comes from the superior Being or from a =
self-instituted subjectivity. The question now arises : why? The precise =
reason is that he wants to respect the foundation which should never be =
forgotten : the irreducible history of Being.

      This third topic is systematically developed after the turn (die =
Kehre). One must maintain the motive of the initial diffusion of Being =
if one wants to wait for the God. This is achieved by the use, crucial =
at that time, of two terms Ereignis and Seyn, the latter written in the =
ancient German spelling with a "y". Such is this other transcendence =
which is common to the Being and the God, such is their common =
inhabitation; the God is not the Being, but the God is at home in the =
transcendence of Being. We should not - according to Heidegger - =
sacrifice the God on the altar of finitude; on the other hand, we should =
not sacrifice the thought that thinks the retreat of Being on the altar =
of a faith and a Theology compelled by a religious Revelation.=20

      Therefore, the "last god" is not a superior figure, a somewhat =
more believable Dionysos; for in this case, the god would be, once =
again, a metaphysical determination. Faith is already present, and =
Theology may come into presence only insofar as thinking is riveted to =
the retreat of Being.=20

      It is a donation (es gibt, das es gibt) that determines the =
conditions of the waiting for the god ; if the god has to arrive ; and, =
thus, prior to that, if god has to be expected, then he should be =
thought within the donation itself.


    =20

      Notes

      (1) Ph . CAPELLE, Philosophie et th=E9ologie dans la pens=E9e de =
Martin Heidegger, Paris, Cerf, 1998

      (2) M. HEIDEGGER - E. BLOCHMANN, Briefwechsel 1918-1969, Marbach =
am;Neckar,1989, p.26 ;=20

      (3) Gesamtausgabe, V. Klostermann, t.24, pp.458-459


    =20




    =20

      Paideia logo design by Janet L. Olson.
      All Rights Reserved
    =20


    =20


     --- from list heidegger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---