I am not a philosopher. I am not a not philosopher also. I just like to read some philosophy especially the existentialist for it provided me what antihistamines and cold tablets cannot give—yawns and sleep. I mean, philosophy is the most soporific of all the literatures with the exception of theology.
I discovered existentialism through Nietzsche’s “The Madman”. Although I read some of his allegories “Zarathustra,” and that “Will to Power blah, blah, blah,” It is really “The Madman” that bothered me. God is dead and we have killed him said the madman. Although many regard Nietzsche, especially the fundamentalist or the fundamentally mentally fundamental, as an anti-God and an anti Christ, he was in reality, just one of those people who are so disgusted with organized religion that he’d rather had God killed than join religion. “What are these churches now if they are not the tombs and sepulchers of God?” The Madman retorted. Hair raising isn’t it? But oh so true! He demolished everything—hence nihilism (nihil means nothing.) From skepticism to Cartesian doubt to Kant’s critique of pure reason to Berkeley’s idealism, Nietzsche tops them all. Why doubt existence, why doubt reality, why doubt perception? Why not destroy them all! His nihilism is so powerful and influential that he is now regarded as the father and the saint of the age where we now belong—the postmodern era. I mean I’m not an authority on philosophical system but there’s one thing so understandable about Nietzsche and that is his philosophy is based on and looked forward to destruction—no system, no doctrines just the bleak reality that we are all doomed. I admire him for his honesty.
Of course the guy went mad.
I also liked to read about the Greeks like Plato and his forms (or ideas) and the becoming. According to him the material reality is just an imperfect reflection or a poor representation of the world of ideas (or form). For example we have a Kris Aquino here who acquired syphilis, or is it gonorrhea, or crabs but in the world of ideas (or forms) there is a perfect Kris Aquino who follows her mother’s advice and does not go around hosting quiz shows with stupid lines like “deal or no deal” . And to top it all, according to Pluto, our perception of reality is a recalling or a remembering of the ideas (or forms), imperfect as they are. Now, if there’s Plato there must Aristotle (Aristotoel is how it is pronounced but it does not matter the guy’s dead anyway.) He invented logic. (The subject that made me famous in the campus. Here’s the story: Our instructor asked us to construct a syllogism and here’s my syllogism “1. Painting is an art. 2. Mona Lisa is a painting. 3. Therefore Moan Lisa is an art.” “No, wrong conclusion, Mona Lisa can also be a song or a person.” The instructor calmly told me. “But premise number two says she is a painting! How can she be a song or a person” I argued. And the war started. I didn’t back out, in the end it was a draw. I was surprised because despite the argument, I received a very good grade in logic. I found out later that she, my instructor, was a law graduate.)
Back to Aristotle, Aristule was not only a philosopher but he was also a famous biologist known for his scientific theories on physiology and anatomy. Let me quote from Jim Hankinson’s erudite book The Bluffer’s Guide to Philosophy: Be an Instant Expert on Philosophy. “For Aristotle, semen is not produced in the testicles, but in the spinal column. (The testicles function apparently as a sort of rest area for the traveling sperm); furthermore, cold semen is infertile, and the further it has to travel, the colder it gets (hence the well-known fact, he remarks, that men with long penises are infertile, but they aren’t; therefore they have no testicles.)” I don’t know if Aristotle said this but…Here’s another from the same book “Snakes have no penises, because they have no legs and they have no testicles, because they are long.” (De Generatione Animalium) I don’t know, but I’m beginning to doubt Aristotle’s logic…
The Greeks are interesting, as shown by the biological theories of Aristotle and the metaphysics of Plato, because they dare to say what is obvious…I mean, they dare to theorize. There are a lot of these Greek philosophers but I don’t have the time nor the references to write about them But there is one underrated Greek philosopher that I believe possessed the truth, Anaximenes (not related to Joyce Jimenez) he theorized that all things is made up of one element—air.
Listen to politicians, movie actors, rock stars, and once in a while to Willie Revillame and you will realize that this Jimenez…err…Anaximenes guy is right. People are air. Not stupid, not bright just empty; Nietzsche’s right we’re all doomed.
4 comments:
I may not agree… I consider theology books as the most soporific of them all. I regret that I didn’t pursue philosophy. I could not understand why people study philosophy then. And I couldn’t comprehend theology later because all I studied in college was math. I never had logic or philosophy courses both in high school and in college, and that was unfortunate. Engineering is good but for me it is a useless knowledge… but it made our old man happy and I guess it’s worth it.
I admire Nietzsche in a way. He was honest about his inability to have faith. And he can cite all excuses against organized religion to deny the existence of God and I think that was his mistake. Bonhoeffer, Barth and Kierkegaard were all against organized religions but it brought them to the opposite direction that Nietzsche had taken. And they didn’t turn mad. Well, I guess it’s part of the risk.
But for me, Nietzsche embodies what an atheist should be. Because Christianity needs a smart atheist to keep it honest, for me he is the best example of a “purifying atheist” The son of a Lutheran pastor, Nietzsche had a deeper understanding of Christianity than the vast majority of theologians, past and present. And unlike modern atheists, he took the idea of God very seriously. He may have reached some of the same conclusions about religion as modern atheists, but he took a very different route. His writings bear witness, not to a simple-minded dismissal of God, but to a profound confrontation with his religious heritage. In the end, his struggle may have yielded a purer and more faithful account of the Christian faith. Thus, Eberhard Jungel could say that "[Nietzsche's] thoughts come very close to the Christian truth which he was opposing. They merit special attention."
Atheists always put the burden of proof to the Christians but I think atheists have a lot of work to do to disapprove the non-existence of a divine. And Nietzshe did just that. My assessment is that Filipinos are too lazy to think to become an atheist. Some of us are atheists not on rational ground but because of theodicy—they experience too much suffering that they stopped believing in God.
As for Willie Revillame and all of the actors (this is a gross generalization)… if they live during the Renaissance period they are nothing but jesters, and they should be beheaded if they failed to entertain the masses. I wish we could still do that today.
I once read two Filipino philosoper talked about Nietszche's nihilism--they said that what N had was an honest doubt a doubt so honest that it can obly be considered faith. eniway don't worry about me.
I once read two filipino priestphilosophers call N's nihilism as faith. A doubting so hoest that it can only be conseidered faith
Naa!! I never worry about you get mad! Just kidding :-)
Now i am convinced that faith helps us keep our sanity in this world gone mad.
Post a Comment