Subject: Re: Nietzsche and the Philosophes
From: Joshua Stott (jstott@bigplanet.net)
Date: Fri Jun 30 2000 - 13:13:25 GMT
Maybe I'd better explain myself better...
I, too, read the first paragraph of "Sickness Unto Death" probably about
25 times the first time I cracked the book, and I felt similar feelings
of utter confusion. (This is the traslation I read: The self is a
relation that relates itself to itself or is the relations relating
itselft ot itself in the relation...)
Actually, because I'd read "Practice in Christianity" already and had
already tasted the sweet truth eminating from Soren K. First, I would
urge that the most important reason I would call K's writing very
readable is because -- what he writes is true. I know, I know... You've
all bowed your heads, shaking them gently with closed eyes and pursed
lipes... It is a hard quality to come-by in a philosopher, but for
heaven's sake, if they've all spent their lives in search of it, why not
admit that some, at least, have grasped it, at least in their sphere of
inquiry. Specifically I'm referring to PIC and SUD, which K himself has
called "his most true works". Actually, anthing written under the
pseudonym Anti-Climacus is bound to take you down to the path to pure
enlightenment within the scope of the book/work.
Being true, I would say, is either the quality that will best be the
catalyst to understanding... but contrarily, will also be the best
catalyst for misunderstanding. As K tells us, "The truth is a snare:
you cannot have it, without being caught. You cannot have the truth in
such a way that you catch it, but only in such a way that it catches
you."
Second (remember, there was a first up there in the clutter), I was
lucky enough to have taken on as a mentor a professor/philosopher that,
unbeknownst to me at the time was very, very, heavily influenced by K,
and by the time I came upon K. myself, I had established an intuitive
background in the same ideas I was about to read.
So... why would I recommend K. to a person newly coming onto the
frontiers of Philosophy if I acknowledge that I understood partly out of
preparation? Because I think that K. is all you need as preparation. I
was happy and grateful to my preparation, but K. does a better job
preparing you for his truth than anyone else can. He does dash you to
pieces intellectually in the opening paragraph of SUD as he dashes you
to pieces spiritually in the beginning of PIC -- this is the beginning
of his preparation. How many times did I come back to read those
opening lines of SUD as I learned more and more from K. as I continued
forward. K. himself will tell you to quit now if you don't want to pay
the price upfront for what he's about to offer you... you must be meek
and humble as you enter those pages and as you lower your guard he'll
"wound you from behind" -- as that is the only way to penetrate the
safe-guards that western-philosophy/religion has given you to defend
yourself against truth (please don't read more into this last sentence
than is there on the page -- because that is all that is there, nothing
else). As you enter further and further into SUD or PIC or FaT, he'll
succor your wound, but show you why he was able to attack you and why
you fell and how to heal yourself with the help of He or those who can
help you.
So there's my Testimonium Kierkegaadium.
Have at it.
Josh
-
* Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message
* UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b25 : Thu Jul 13 2000 - 23:22:21 GMT