More or less every thinking man has at one point in his life uttered or at least heard the phrase "X is a-historical" or "Y is not in continuity with history". Admittedly, this doesn't apply to thinking middle aged children one must often deal with in the public sphere of our day, but the question still stands: what exactly do we mean when we claim that something is historically shallow?
Prompted by the passing of great English conservative philosopher Roger Scruton, we take the opportunity to sketch the distinguishing marks separating what it means to be a conservative and what it means to belong to Tradition, stances only seemingly similar but in actual fact worlds apart from each other. We take Scruton as an exemplary figure of contemporary conservative thought and his attitude towards religion as a starting point and argue that it has very little to do with what might be called a traditional attitude. Further we discuss the understanding of time, eternity and causality peculiar for traditional thought and explain how conservatism is in fact alienated from it. We conclude with a broad sketch of what we see as signs that modernity is actually over, taking into consideration an ongoing dissolution of popular art, i.e. the lowest form of the expression of modern spirit.
We continue discussion of the basic notions of metaphysics with the outline of the profound reality beyond the word "hypostasis". We talk about the profound shift in the understanding that came to pass with the formation of the Christian Tradition on Incarnation and the birth of understanding of hypostasis as implicitly personal being. Also we give a brief outline of the significance of the notion of hypostasis as person to the development of what is usually misunderstood as the modern "discovery" of inviolability of person in both moral and legal terms.
In this podcast of the ongoing "Notions of Metaphysics" series we treat the problem of inverted meaning of traditional notions of metaphysics. We use the example of the complementary opposites of material and formal, something we today understand in precisely opposite way to their original meaning. Why this happens, what are the consequences and how does it influence our everyday life are some of the questions we rise in the course of the podcast.
In this Christmas podcast we take a moderately deep dive into Christian understanding of the body and the senses, a peculiar and rarely recognized consequence of the Revelation which arguably created the deepest distinction between Christianity and the soil of the civilization it was implanted in to sprout into what we call a Christian civilization.
It is said that "Christianity is against human nature". Well, if you think that unspoken reason for saying this was originally: "because it prevents people of wanting to conquer and shag each other, thus at the same time deadening their more creative impulses", you would be quite wrong. The original intellectual objections to Christianity came from people who denounced Christians for rejecting the palaios logos - "the word of old" - that is, ancient metaphysical tradition and civilization built around it, and thus ushering a sort of, what we would now call, a revolutionary new beginning. In this series of essays we'll attempt to indicate not only how and why this was a fundamental misunderstanding, but how Christians who in turn unequivocally rejected the proverbial "Athens" for the sake of absolute - in fact: isolated - "Jerusalem" committed quite a congenial mistake.
Materialism is not only a mentality or metaphysical orientation. It is also an ontological mood - the peculiar sense of the world and oneself that is highly personal yet at the same time it imbibes all the metaphysical propositions of materialist with rather well defined pathology. This pathology, we claim is the source and the purpose of materialist metaphysics and materialist life, while the systemic form it builds for itself, be it Communism, scientism or something entirely different is quite secondary. To explain what we mean, we focus on the statements of one old fashioned dialectical materialist: Slavoj Žižek, wherein he explains his worldview.
In this podcast we talk about the traditional notion of Being and its unwarranted "deconstruction" by modern philosophers, premier among them being Martin Heidegger. As a starting point we take a passage from Boethius' De Trinitate on how Being can never be a subject or substrate and juxtapose it to Heidegger's "phenomenological destruction of traditional ontology" which claims that Tradition does precisely the opposite. From there on we point out the importance of spacial metaphors in metaphysics, where what is "groundless" can mean both something below and something above. It is our contention that thinkers in the vein of Heidegger confuse this metaphysical above and below, and seek abyss where traditional thought sought heaven.