Principles of Future Philosophy — Ludwig Feuerbach (1/5/19)

Credit: Wikipedia— Ludwig Andreas von Feuerbach 

The Eminent Muse For Philosophy

Ludwig Feuerbach continues his journey from theology to philosophy through the anthropocentric lens that confronts Hegel’s methodology and the intellectual status quo. Feuerbach promulgates a new kind of embodied philosophy that stays silent toward abstraction. Yet, this argument can only be seen as fodder for producing new philosophies from future readers. 

What one finds within the argumentation and conclusions of Feuerbach is the nascent thoughts for greatly influencing some of the masters of suspicion (Freud, Marx, and Nietzsche) and Western European existentialists (Heidegger, Jaspers, Buber, Sarte). Its deconstructive angle is important for the philosopher, theologian, or public intellectual that needs to clear away assumptions in order to feel a kind of “new wind” take them into producing knowledge. Nevertheless, Feuerbach’s anthropocentric angle is at best a pill for idealism, at worst a mudding of the waters on the question of what is a human being. On the other hand, the best thing one can take from Ludwig is a sense of true grappling with the psychology of human experience and the sociological framework for human experience. 

Feuerbach attacks Hegel’s totalizing philosophy that much of academia still wrestles with, not Kant. However, Ludwig never reaches the production of principles for this future philosophy, only paradoxically proving the difficult task of casting off the chains of intellectual history and embeddedness. The audience of such literature would be most helpful for most seminary students, particularly in regards to Feuerbach’s acceptance of skepticism and adherence towards the finitude of human capacity for full knowledge. Dubious though it may sound, Feuerbach is not to be feared, nor radically embraced. Feuerbach punts on much of what could solidify or explicate his point. 

Thomas Wartenberg properly stresses Ludwig Feuerbach’s brilliance and the necessity for being read towards the end of his introduction. “In [Feuerbach’s] work, there are deep and stimulating reflections on the nature of human existence, but reflections that one feels impelled to push further, to develop in different directions. Being the stimulus to original philosophical reflection is, after all, one of the most important roles that a philosopher can play, and it is a role for which Ludwig Feuerbach is still eminently suited.”

The Creation Debate?

The god particle is a recent post from Jesse Carey, who contributes to RELEVANT, on the ongoing Creation debate. For some, the debate is not over the reality of Creation, like some evangelicals…it is really about the authority and inspiration of Scripture. While on the side of many people is the reality of what science has been leading us to believe is “HOW” the cosmos was formed.

The debate on whether God did or did not create the world in six literal 24 hour days is a hot button issue for many conservatives. This is part of my “night cap” section for the specific reason of directing you to a place, where I think it was well-written and thoughtful. If you fall on either side of the line, congrats…I really don’t care.

http://www.relevantmagazine.com/god/worldview/god-particle

My view is still out, because I think there are certain things, other than the context of Genesis 1-3, within Scripture making this debate and conversation nulled and void, yet I understand articulating it is critically important. In other words what I am saying is: I’m still thinking about it, and it is okay for me to say that.