Is the Human Being Redeemable? A Self-Defeating Question

IF 0.2 2区 哲学 0 PHILOSOPHY
V. Liska
{"title":"Is the Human Being Redeemable? A Self-Defeating Question","authors":"V. Liska","doi":"10.1163/1477285X-12341319","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nRosenzweig’s pathos with respect to an ultimate redemption raises the question of the desirability of a state in which so much has to be undone in order to retain nothing but the One, the All, the Eternal, and the True. Similar doubts arise concerning Rosenzweig’s portrayal of the ways that this state of redemption is anticipated in life: through prayer, love of neighbor, the communal hymn of the We. How accessible are these to “the human being” as such? Rather than arguing against what appears as a grand remnant of the urge for totality, I invoke here two figures whose concepts of redemption partly resemble Rosenzweig’s, but depart from him in ways that make all the difference: Benjamin and Kafka.","PeriodicalId":42022,"journal":{"name":"JOURNAL OF JEWISH THOUGHT & PHILOSOPHY","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2021-03-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JOURNAL OF JEWISH THOUGHT & PHILOSOPHY","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/1477285X-12341319","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"PHILOSOPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Rosenzweig’s pathos with respect to an ultimate redemption raises the question of the desirability of a state in which so much has to be undone in order to retain nothing but the One, the All, the Eternal, and the True. Similar doubts arise concerning Rosenzweig’s portrayal of the ways that this state of redemption is anticipated in life: through prayer, love of neighbor, the communal hymn of the We. How accessible are these to “the human being” as such? Rather than arguing against what appears as a grand remnant of the urge for totality, I invoke here two figures whose concepts of redemption partly resemble Rosenzweig’s, but depart from him in ways that make all the difference: Benjamin and Kafka.
人类是可救赎的吗?弄巧成拙的问题
罗森茨威格对终极救赎的悲情提出了这样一个问题:为了保留“一”、“一切”、“永恒”和“真”,那么多事情必须被取消,这种状态是否可取?类似的疑问也出现在罗森茨威格对这种救赎状态在生活中被期待的方式的描述上:通过祈祷,对邻居的爱,我们的公共赞美诗。这些对“人类”本身来说有多容易理解?我并不是要反驳那些似乎是对整体的强烈渴望的伟大残余,而是要在这里引用两个人物:本雅明和卡夫卡,他们的救赎概念部分类似于罗森茨威格,但在某些方面却与罗森茨威格截然不同。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.40
自引率
25.00%
发文量
12
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信