- Traditional Christianity (Onto-theology) 9 votes
- Liberal Enlightenment (Science, Progress) 9 votes
- Christian Existentialism (Kierkegaard & Dostoevsky) 8+1(Dreyfus) votes for K & 43 votes for D
- Atheistic Existentialism (Nietzsche) 16 votes
In this last lecture, Dreyfus described how, to followers of one strand of existentialism, another strand looks like it is in error and doomed, even though they share many of the same approaches, such as the five he listed:
- There is no human nature ("custom is our nature" -Pascal "the undetermined animal" -Nietzsche)
- We can change human nature - History is the story of changing human natures
- The Individual is higher than the Universal ("suspension of the ethical" - Kierkegaard)
- The Involved point of view is better than Detached ("truth is subjectivity" -Kierkegaard "perspectivism" - Nietzsche)
- Against Onto-Theology but retain The Sacred: they reject the view that One Creator God grounds all meaning ("calling without a caller" -Kierkegaard "connectedness of all beings" -Dostoevsky "we are all gods" -Nietzsche)
The chart tries to graphically represent the Heideggerian concepts of world disclosing (open circle), world collapse (x mark) and the revitalization of marginal practices (dotted lines). This is me reaching for what I think the class is really about: how these three examplars of early existentialism set up Heidegger, and ultimately, Dreyfus.
(click on the diagram below to enlarge it)
Anybody care to take a stab at how Heidegger/Dreyfus would construct such a diagram?
Here's my cut: