‘Divinity in times of decadence…’, a non-materialist, anti-Enlightenment critique of the Middle Eastern sacredness Until the twentieth century, attempts to review the doctrines of Middle Eastern monotheisms and their essence fell into...
more‘Divinity in times of decadence…’, a non-materialist, anti-Enlightenment critique of the
Middle Eastern sacredness
Until the twentieth century, attempts to review the doctrines of Middle Eastern monotheisms and their essence fell into the trap of positivism: the view that man would describe the World and its phenomena fully scientifically by ’falling on his knees before small facts’. When the culture of the Occident began to associate the sacred exclusively with a faith from Asia Minor, doctrine of the belief in the one God, as the only one appropriate for everyone, the process of capturing human and non-human life on Earth started - continent after continent. Criticism of this faith existed from preconceived positions of obvious failure – from naturalistic and sometimes naively emancipatory positions: liberation from the yoke of religion, religious superstition, religion as anti-intelligence, etc. The closer to modernity, the more radically religion and science were stated in opposition. Thus, when rationalist centres criticised institutionalism (e.g. the catholic church) and invoked arguments, e.g. from the conduite of the Middle Eastern clergy and from the financial embezzlement that resulted, among other things, from links between throne and altar or pressure on public institutions under the pretext of ethical considerations, they did not shy away from attacks on religion itself as a source of all “evil”, indoctrination, etc. They thus deprived themselves of the right to have an opinions in matters of the sacred and religious beliefs - they made it easier for those intellectual centres they criticised to take the initiative. Enlightenment thought was bogged down in the paradoxes of quasi-religious arguments: in the impossibility of definitively explaining the phenomena of Life by the laws of natural science - God was replaced by nature, which is essentially no different from the abandoned God. Materialism was unable to implement its idea of social progressivism. It did not take into account, for example, the anthropomorphic intra-species diversity of perception. The quotation from Friedrich Nietzsche, quoted in the title, points to the strong connection between the nature of religiosity and the prevailing order and political and social climate, and at the same time to the specific character of theism formed after the fall of Hellenism in Europe. He also points out the necessity of critiquing religious doctrines in their ontological, sacred architecture, and not only in the socio-political dimension. On the basis of, among other things, an analysis of Nietzschean philosophy and thought after the “death of God” in French post-structuralists (Barthes, Deleuze, Derrida, among others), the paper will cover the forming new type of criticism of religiosity from the Levant. The considerations approach the problem of the inadequacy of reductionist approaches, including detailed science, libertinism, naturalism linking religion with anti-rationalism, and can demonstrate the relevance of new interpretations; there is room for epistemological pluralism. The work is also an attempt to understand the mechanisms of totalizing the public sphere by one “right” paradigm and reflect on its sources and morphology.