- 13
- 244 498
aragon123ist
เข้าร่วมเมื่อ 8 เม.ย. 2011
David Bentley Hart - Nihilism and Freedom: Is There a Difference?
In this illuminating talk, given on 3/22/07 at the University of Minnesota, Dr. Hart takes a brief but variegated look into the relationship between nihilism and freedom, and, in the course of doing so, reflects extensively on ideas from Heidegger, Nietzsche, and medieval theologians, among others. The lecture portion was followed by a critical response from UMN's Dr. Timothy Brennan, as well as by a Q&A session.
Dr. Brennan's rebuttal starts at the 1:00:00 mark.
[Note: The audio in the original mp3 clip (which, for some reason, is no longer available online) gets a little "choppy" at around 54:00, and the choppiness doesn't stop until about 59:00]
Dr. Brennan's rebuttal starts at the 1:00:00 mark.
[Note: The audio in the original mp3 clip (which, for some reason, is no longer available online) gets a little "choppy" at around 54:00, and the choppiness doesn't stop until about 59:00]
มุมมอง: 50 443
วีดีโอ
David Bentley Hart - An End to All Endings
มุมมอง 24K11 ปีที่แล้ว
David Bentley Hart engages in a profound meditation on ancient religious responses to death and how the Christian conception was entirely subversive of the political and cosmic order they had established. In the course of his talk, he cautions Christians against espousing that previous vision of death (in which death is somehow necessary and part of God's established order), for in doing so the...
David Bentley Hart on the New Atheist Myth of "Secular Progress" (p5)
มุมมอง 4.8K13 ปีที่แล้ว
Is the world guaranteed to become a paradise - or at the very least a vastly better place - without "religion"? In particular, is Western civilization guaranteed to become better once it has been purged of all Christian influence? Or is the post-Christian age of "secular enlightenment" simply an atheist delusion? Contra Sam Harris, Richard Dawkins, Christopher Hitchens, Daniel Dennett, et al., ...
David Bentley Hart on the New Atheist Myth of "Secular Progress" (p4)
มุมมอง 5K13 ปีที่แล้ว
Is the world guaranteed to become a paradise - or at the very least a vastly better place - without "religion"? In particular, is Western civilization guaranteed to become better once it has been purged of all Christian influence? Or is the post-Christian age of "secular enlightenment" simply an atheist delusion? Contra Sam Harris, Richard Dawkins, Christopher Hitchens, Daniel Dennett, et al., ...
David Bentley Hart on the New Atheist Myth of "Secular Progress" (p3)
มุมมอง 7K13 ปีที่แล้ว
Is the world guaranteed to become a paradise - or at the very least a vastly better place - without "religion"? In particular, is Western civilization guaranteed to become better once it has been purged of all Christian influence? Or is the post-Christian age of "secular enlightenment" simply an atheist delusion? Contra Sam Harris, Richard Dawkins, Christopher Hitchens, Daniel Dennett, et al., ...
David Bentley Hart on the New Atheist Myth of "Secular Progress" (p2)
มุมมอง 9K13 ปีที่แล้ว
Is the world guaranteed to become a paradise - or at the very least a vastly better place - without "religion"? In particular, is Western civilization guaranteed to become better once it has been purged of all Christian influence? Or is the post-Christian age of "secular enlightenment" simply an atheist delusion? Contra Sam Harris, Richard Dawkins, Christopher Hitchens, Daniel Dennett, et al., ...
David Bentley Hart on the New Atheist Myth of "Secular Progress" (p1)
มุมมอง 18K13 ปีที่แล้ว
Is the world guaranteed to become a paradise - or at the very least a vastly better place - without "religion"? In particular, is Western civilization guaranteed to become better once it has been purged of all Christian influence? Or is the post-Christian age of "secular enlightenment" simply an atheist delusion? Contra Sam Harris, Richard Dawkins, Christopher Hitchens, Daniel Dennett, et al., ...
David Bentley Hart - Nostalgia for a pagan past
มุมมอง 13K13 ปีที่แล้ว
In an interview with CPX (a Christian organization based in North Sydney, Australia), extremely erudite Eastern Orthodox theologian and philosopher David Bentley Hart shares a few thoughts on a modern trend wherein nostalgia is harbored for pagan antiquity. [note: CPX is the original creator of this video, not me. I am reposting it for others' edification. For more information, please go to www...
David Bentley Hart - Gnosticism and alternative gospels
มุมมอง 16K13 ปีที่แล้ว
In an interview with CPX (a Christian organization based in North Sydney, Australia), extremely erudite Eastern Orthodox theologian and philosopher David Bentley Hart shares a few thoughts on gnosticism and alternative gospels. [note: CPX is the original creator of this video, not me. I am reposting it for others' edification. For more information, please go to www.publicchristianity.org]
David Bentley Hart - Suffering and the problem of evil
มุมมอง 39K13 ปีที่แล้ว
In an interview with CPX (a Christian organization based in North Sydney, Australia), extremely erudite Eastern Orthodox theologian and philosopher David Bentley Hart shares a few thoughts on suffering and the problem of evil. He does so from the perspective outlined in his book, The Doors of the Sea, which was written in the aftermath of and in direct view of the 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami. The...
David Bentley Hart - Ethics and the good life
มุมมอง 10K13 ปีที่แล้ว
In an interview with CPX (a Christian organization based in North Sydney, Australia), extremely erudite Eastern Orthodox theologian and philosopher David Bentley Hart shares a few thoughts on ethics and the good life. [note: CPX is the original creator of this video, not me. I am reposting it for others' edification. For more information, please go to www.publicchristianity.org]
David Bentley Hart - The new atheists and an ugly God
มุมมอง 29K13 ปีที่แล้ว
In an interview with CPX (a Christian organization based in North Sydney, Australia), extremely erudite Eastern Orthodox theologian and philosopher David Bentley Hart shares a few thoughts on the "New Atheist" movement. His book, Atheist Delusions, can be purchased here: www.amazon.com/Atheist-Delusions-Christian-Revolution-Fashionable/dp/0300164297/ A rough idea of what the book is about is en...
David Bentley Hart - The violence of Christian history
มุมมอง 20K13 ปีที่แล้ว
In an interview with CPX (a Christian organization based in North Sydney, Australia), extremely erudite Eastern Orthodox theologian and philosopher David Bentley Hart shares a few thoughts on the violence of Christian history. [note: CPX is the original creator of this video, not me. I am reposting it for others' edification. For more information, please go to www.publicchristianity.org]
Is there free will in Heaven?
He isn’t an author. More a prop. No original ideas just pretentious accidents of memory.
The Old Testament makes a variety of pointed didactic claims that have nothing to do with any allegorical reading. Hart evidently lacks the fortitude or intellect to deal with the matter straightforwardly. Should I be surprised with this weak tea?
Great lecture! Maybe our freedom consists in repeatedly erring about gods-- striving to gain insight into the mystery and failing spectacularly?
How can anyone write a true theodicy until God . by revelation , gives understanding of His plan and His will for mankind's destiny which is contained in scripture . Few love Satan for example despite Christ's plain command in scripture to do so " love your enemies " ; exposing their lack of understanding of the God who is love , along with His plan and His will. God is Sovereign down to the roll of a dice so you better believe evil and suffering are part of His plan to achieve His will of subjecting all things unto Himself so that He is all in all.
Harold bloom said all American religion is gnostic I feel that these new converts to Eastern Orthodoxy are turning Orthodoxy into some neo-Victorian new age fantasy when they are not turning it into an evangelical appolegy, when they are not whole heartedly embracing the spectacle.
The humanities would still be alive if they were driven by the vision and conviction voiced here by DBH. Instead, the humanities are dying because they are represented by people like Dr. Brennan, who can't really even grasp Hart's central claims much less respond to them in any meaningful way. Brennan is so out of his depth. He can only wring his hands over DBH's use of Heidegger--in spite of the fact that Hart is taking issue with Heidegger as much as he is endorsing Heidegger. Brennan's other argument is that his Indian relatives wouldn't care about Christianity. I can't imagine the restraint it took on Hart's part not to unload his deep understanding of Vedantic thought on Brennan.
Incredible
Thank you for uploading this. Wonderful.
Suffering and evil are not problems for Christians.
They are for the ones who believe in Hell.
@@storba3860 Not for Fred Phelps and Steven Anderson as well as all the rest of them.
🎸
Great lecture. Also interesting how Christians in the United States seem to have been able to integrate this new view of personal freedom into their theology much better than other christians.
In case you're looking for his essay version of this talk, you can find it in his book, "The Hidden and the Manifest: Essays in Theology and Metaphysics," essay 13. Death, Final Judgement, and the Meaning of Life
I studied theodicy, because I am a retired Registered Nurse (Haematology & Palliative Care), and often encountered suffering. I found the writings of STANLEY HAUERWAS ('Naming the Silences') especially compelling: because he uses another writer's example of his daughter's treatment for a form of leukaemia. Hauerwas leaves us with mystery: but not a mystery which damages the love of God.
I found Hauerwas recently in an attempt to make sense of sufferings I have seen as a medical student, and I agree with you in that he is very helpful.
@@garrettdyess1110 Thanks Garrett. I studied Theology back in the 1970s, but couldn't be ordained. In retirement it remains my reading-of-choice.
@@Mark_Dyer1 That is wonderful! Would you say Hauerwas and Hart are the most helpful writers on the relationship between suffering and Providence?
@@garrettdyess1110 I am presently reading Hart's, 'THAT ALL SHALL BE SAVED'; and have not yet encountered how he envisages 'providence' sitting in the Universalist schema, which he claims held sway in Christianity for the first centuries......perhaps even to the fifth! I also have to read, and re-read, following post-cardiac-arrest brain damage (complete cardiac block) sustained in January 2008. Aside from 'NAMING THE SILENCES', the only other book of Hauerwas I have read is 'SUFFERING PRESENCE' (but that was a long time ago). I have to admit to never thinking about 'providence' in connection with human suffering: although I suspect that it will be tackled in my present reading; given that some Christians have some very strange ideas about the providence of God.
@@Mark_Dyer1 I am sorry to hear that. Yes, I also do not understand how Providence can terminate in the suffering we see in the world. I have found Hart's DOTS to be the best take on the topic. However, I never felt like the answer to the question of why is the world this way versus another way to be answered.
Most gnostics are teens trying to be edgy
24:40 thirteen years later and this seems all the more explicit
I never really understood why Hart connected totalitarianism to voluntarism/nihilism. I guess there might be a link of a necessary connection, but the idea of making a perfect man seems like it requires moral realism (rather than requiring anti-realism).
It's connected to metaphysical voluntarism precisely because what is "perfect" in the totalitarian worldview is declared by the power of political _decree._ This is what Carl Schmitt himself proclaims in his philosophy of decisionism. What is _perfect_ in the totalitarian worldview is precisely that which is _most powerful._ And if might is what makes right, then domination is what determines moral good.
@@Synodalian was he saying that power as such is a value or that value is just whatever the most powerful deems to be valuable? Because I don’t think they’re interchangeable. The former is being realist about a specific value, albeit not a usual one for realism. The latter is explicitly voluntarist.
Pity about the recording.
1:10:28 bookmark 40:00 bookmark
What I find rather bizarre is how anti-religion apologists literally can't quote any religious text or theologian, or even accurately describe historical events, because they simply don't care enough to study more than what they already believe they know, but still are arrogant enough to believe they are capable enough of engaging in debates. That's embarrassing. The guy is supposed to be an expert in secularism and can't quote one name from memory, gives rather childish accounts of history, and goes on firmly holding the same points as he started without nor a developed philosophical stance, nor any worthy example whatsoever. I've never read David Bentley Hart either, but I feel bad that he had to debate on such poor terms.
I'm slave to the idea 💡 of being free ✨️
20:16
Sophistry
The reason for these caricatures is quite obvious: opponents of religion WANT there to be a boogeyman. Perhaps for the same reason that conspiracy theorists (implicitly) WANT there to be a cabal of elite oligarchs orchestrating world events. That reason is simply the hope that there is an easy fix to our problems. The notion that science alone (sometimes humanitarianism is also appealed to) can liberate us from our predicament is just so attractively simple. But this narrative really makes a religion of Reason and a messiah of Science.
Freedom from slavery to our passions
47:53 "And then maybe even that strange, and haunting, and irrecoverable immediacy of the small child's experience of the world is a foretaste of our true home"
Too much repeating. Terry doesn’t under that DBH’s point is that Christian “moral grammar” is a necessary condition for the kind of ethics he is talking about. Not that Christianity necessarily produces moral outcomes. And DBH doesn’t actually go on to give concrete examples that prove his point. Like, for example, how one can see the lack of certain ethical principles in antique pagan ethics secularists might take for granted.
Tbh it felt like Terry was being interrupted too much. Just let him make his point before he speaks.
What is that word that sounds like Buynasian I.e. Dominican determinism?
@@jongalan1975 Well, well thank you so much. I have never heard of him. It really is very helpful of you to let me know and I appreciate it a lot.
@@kinglear5952 It's Domingo Banez who argued against Molinism in the De Auxilis controversy.
@@jongalan1975 It's Domingo Banez who argued against Molinism in the De Auxilis controversy.
@@gregbrougham1423 Oh him, that utter heretic!
What a fool! He is not even capable of showing that his own religion is the only true one let alone refuting any atheist thinker!
Read his books. It’s extremely disingenuous to think that someone cannot defend their beliefs simply because they didn’t do it in a four minutes TH-cam video devoted to a different topic.
How about making a Documentary about Atheist Regimes. Much more Eviil to talk about !!!
My take is that we need to apply double standard to God versus people on the issue of killings. After all God kills all of us, in peaceful time with natural death. In the Bible God promises eternal life after our earthly deaths, so while we shalt not kill, God always kills. That may reduce the horror of God’s killings in the Old Testament.
58:01 holy crap, is that Fr. John Behr asking the question?
He is been too generous to Christianity here. Christianity crushed and banned any rival religion and plunged the west into intellectual darkness for centuries, which would be repeated all over again in the colonial period.
I think he loses it a bit around the 22nd minute mark. Kill God? Human goodness grounded in nature? Has he not studied Buddhism, for instance? (I happen to know he has.) God is not a necessary hypothesis as far as the freedom to will the good of the other is concerned. Indeed, as he points out in his talk on universalism, if Hod WERE the psychopath of late Augustinian and Calvinistic conception, TRUE morality would require precisely a rebellion against this celestial despot, very much like a Bodhisattva, i.e. the Buddhist parallel of a messianic figure. And nature? Nature is a brutal cesspool of Darwinian natural and sexual selection, fundamentally and quintessentially ableist and abusive. Nature is precisely what the spirit/conscious transcend, in angelic, buddhistic, etc. Love, not the SOURCE of our morality. And this includes the moral/ethical impulse to see beauty in nature (often projection of transcendental beauty upon a fallen, material plane) and to save conscious creatures within nature, including suffering animals.
The horrendous suffering of animals is even more scandalous. Especially since christians act as if our modern way of livestock is somehow defendable.
Thank you...
Minute 26:00 onwards, Wow!
I don't understand, is bennets argument that since Indians don't care about Christianity its claims cannot be universal?
I only speak English, so E=mc2 only sounds right to me if I hear it in English.
I thought it was that these modern problems have no barring on the whole world. But idk why he thought that beats DBH’s point.
I love his reflections.
10 minutes in and I know where this is going. Alright, I think presuppositions might have something to do with explaning the willingness to embrace nihilism. In people embracing this worldview which would contradict absolutely empathy for other people in this type of framework the question then becomes how does one prevent hedonism which hurt everyone and helps no one? I think the saying goes something like..have your cake and eat it too
France as a pinnacle o well being sounds ridiculous now.
Heidegger at Todnauberg.
Nothing Indo-European about Isis, the most popular goddess of late antiquity. If you talk in this pompous way all the time, people may take you to be really smart. He needs to read David Potter on the late empire and the persecutions.
Ultimate Ultimate Yes, as you say, Isis was not Indo-European in origin, but was worshipped widely in Greco-Roman history. which is what I said. You seem to think you are disagreeing with me. Perhaps such a confused mind is to be expected from someone who imagines that DBH is a brilliant thinker.
Ultimate Ultimate His writing on cultural issues was of some use, but on matters of theology one is unlikely to be either impressed or edified by heretics and schismatics.
@@ransomcoates546 Isis certainly _became_ "Indo-European," like many other gods and goddesses of antiquity. The thing about ancient paganism was that it was an assortment and bricolage of various customs and cults, both domestic and foreign. It's rather arbitrary, then, to make the assertion that Isis is "not Indo-European." It can be somewhat helpful to categorize these impulses of the past, but it can also be to your great detriment.
Insufferably pompous in his self-invention of Christianity. Even when he says something true he is so irritating he makes you want to entertain falsehood.
Absolutely blows every easter sermon I've ever heard out of the water
Yes
14:40
Very helpful
11:00
I don't believe in God. I have an alternative argument for "the problem of evil". What if there is no such thing as "evil" in our universe. I recognize that bad things happen. I recognize that there are things that are generally good(and bad) for most people. I feel that all bad things exist because we(as a species) have not learned all of our lessons yet.
Dennis, what “lessons” have we to learn? And why do they matter? If we are simply a collection of cells on a mote of dust spinning in the endless dark without meaning or reason, then there can be no metaphysical “lessons” for us to learn as a species. You’re very welcome to be an atheist! I just wonder how your metaphysical claim could possibly harmonize with atheism .
@@TheProdigalSaint Great question. I don't put any stock into metaphysics. Let's consider an example of what some would call an evil in this world(sudden infant death). This example shows that bad things happen to good people. I must assume at this date 9/14/2020 mankind still does not know why there is sudden infant death syndrome and there is no known way to stop/prevent this from happening. However, one day we(as a species) will discover why this happens and we will put measures in place to stop/prevent this from happening. Effectively learning our lesson on the subject of sudden infant death syndrome. No metaphysics involved at all. I feel confident about this because this learning happens continuously at a slow pace. Every cure or vaccine is proof of these lessons.
@@dennistucker1153 from your position, all life is ultimately directed toward the aim of perfect goodness, and evil is just the resistance we experience when that aim is opposed. But who draws that arc of achieving perfect goodness? And what is perfect goodness, anyway? It is certainly not something humanity has scripted. To believe that creation is destined for perfect goodness but simultaneously to reject the existence of God is irreconcilably contradictory, unless you are willing to conceive of goodness as no morally different from evil. The objectivities of good and evil are the direct voice of God.
@@sambyassee9132 Thanks for the reply Sam. I understand and can appreciate your views. I think that time and space may be infinite in scope. As awareness and understanding grows, it seems like the list of things that we don't understand grows as well. It's like a baby becoming aware of things in his/her crib, then a bit later becoming aware of things in the room and later becoming aware of things in the house. Each time, the baby's world expands and there are more things to become familiar with. Eventually, the baby matures and ventures into the outdoors and discovers that there are so many things that he/she cannot possibly know all about. Since I think the space and time are infinite, I doubt that there could be any limit to this learning curve. Or at least, mankind may evolve into something else long before we learn even 10% of all that is knowable. I don't think there will ever be ultimate good or ultimate bad.
@@dennistucker1153 well mathematically, space and a time are not infinite. But regardless, an ultimate good is not stagnant, it is infinite. Goodness is infinite, there is not a point where we have achieved a certain level of goodness and can go no further. What it means to reach an ultimate good for creation is to be in a state where it can only grow forward in goodness, and not backwards (hence there is no evil). But anyway, the universe did not create itself, it is not the result of its own actions. Its order and its beauty are not calculated products of its own consciousness of itself. The universe depends on something, on a source, a mind, a power. To this we give the name God.