Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Religion
Related: About this forumJester and Priest: On Leszek Kolakowski
http://www.thenation.com/article/176016/jester-and-priest-leszek-kolakowski#axzz2eKnhfUsEAlmost a quarter-century after the collapse of communism, and four years after his own death at the age of 81, the Polish philosopher Leszek Kolakowski remains a prisoner of the Cold War. He has been lionized in the West for Main Currents of Marxism, the indispensable three-volume history of Marxist ideas first published in Paris (in Polish) in 1976, and also for the essays he wrote a decade earlier that inspired advocates of socialism with a human face. Yet travel across the old Iron Curtain to Warsaw or Wroclaw, and one will encounter a different Kolakowski: not the Marxologist or dissident socialist, but the religious thinker and elusive cultural critic who found wisdom and solace in the works of Spinoza, Erasmus, the Dutch heretics and the Catholic skeptic Blaise Pascal. Highly esteemed in Polish Catholic circles, Kolakowski was a frequent guest of John Paul IIs at Castel Gandolfo, the papal summer residence. But even in Poland, opinion about this other Kolakowski is mixed. Marek Edelman, a leader of the 1943 Warsaw Ghetto uprising, was among the mourners at his graveside in July 2009, and upon hearing the blessings being spoken as the casket was lowered into the pit, he whispered audibly, Why are you making a Catholic out of him, that man was a decent atheist!
Was Kolakowski a socialist, a Catholic, an atheist or something else entirely? In the early 1950s, he was the communist states most prominent critic of Christianity; in 1956, along with most of Polands intellectual elite, he broke with Stalinism and began floating ideas for reform. By the 1970s, his certainty about Gods nonexistence had waned, and he took to calling himself an inconsistent atheist. Late in life, he playfully labeled himself a conservative-liberal-socialist. To the question of whether he believed in God, he answered that only God knew.
Yet Poles, whatever their politics and opinions about religion, do not want to disown Kolakowski. Looking past his complexities and caginess, they are proud of a countryman who was born in the humble provincial town of Radom in 1927 and became world famous. As a professor at Warsaw University for more than a decade and at Oxford for nearly four, Kolakowski garnered countless awards and honorary doctorates, but the near-universal esteem he enjoys in his homeland is perhaps his greatest laurel.
With Is God Happy?, Kolakowskis daughter Agnieszka has collected (and partly translated) twenty-seven of her fathers essays that together span half a century. (Ten of them are appearing in English for the first time.) The book is a valuable introduction to Kolakowskis extraordinary intellectual versatility: here are his reflections on the heritage of socialism, Erasmus, the death of God, relativism, the future of truth and much else. Still, Is God Happy? gives a partial view of the philosopher. Kolakowska has omitted from it the body of work that Kolakowski wrote before 1956, so this collection alone cannot help us answer an essential question: How did a communist devoted to demystifying religion in Poland become a vocal apostle of a reactionary Polish pope?
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
2 replies, 1206 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (4)
ReplyReply to this post
2 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Jester and Priest: On Leszek Kolakowski (Original Post)
xchrom
Sep 2013
OP
Jim__
(14,076 posts)1. I'm sure I'll disagree with a lot of what's in this book.
For example, from the article:
...
Now calling his positions conservative, Kolakowski forged a new social critique in a lecture in Geneva called The Revenge of the Sacred in Secular Culture (it is not included in Is God Happy?). What he abhorred about secularism was not so much its negation as its universalization of the sacred, a development that affected even the church. Liberal Catholics blessed all forms of worldly life, creating a mode of Christian belief lacking a concept of evilthat is, the understanding that evil is not the absence or subversion of virtue but an irredeemable factand leaving the church no reason or means to stand against the secular. The dissolution of the sacred from within and without had observable effects on the culture as a whole, contributing to a growing amorphousness and laxity in making distinctions. This was dangerous, Kolakowski argued, because the sacred gave to social structure its forms and systems of divisions, whether between death and life, man and woman, work and art, youth and age. He advocated no mythology in particular, and would admit only that a tension between development and structure was inherent in all human societies. Yet it was clear that certain developments troubled him deeply, and if the liberation movements unleashed in the 1960s continued, he feared the outcome would be mass suicide.
...
By now, Kolakowskis intellectual sympathies for atheism were irrelevant. He acknowledged that God can of course be rejected as morally dangerous, denied as unacceptable to reason, cursed as the enemy of humanity, yet he countered that without the Absolute, there was no basis for morality and law. Human reason is finite and can provide no path to such principles. He called in an unlikely witness for his bitter theism: If we reject the principle that the end justifies the means, we can only appeal to higher, politically irrelevant moral criteria; and this, [Leon] Trotsky says, amounts to believing in God.
...
Now calling his positions conservative, Kolakowski forged a new social critique in a lecture in Geneva called The Revenge of the Sacred in Secular Culture (it is not included in Is God Happy?). What he abhorred about secularism was not so much its negation as its universalization of the sacred, a development that affected even the church. Liberal Catholics blessed all forms of worldly life, creating a mode of Christian belief lacking a concept of evilthat is, the understanding that evil is not the absence or subversion of virtue but an irredeemable factand leaving the church no reason or means to stand against the secular. The dissolution of the sacred from within and without had observable effects on the culture as a whole, contributing to a growing amorphousness and laxity in making distinctions. This was dangerous, Kolakowski argued, because the sacred gave to social structure its forms and systems of divisions, whether between death and life, man and woman, work and art, youth and age. He advocated no mythology in particular, and would admit only that a tension between development and structure was inherent in all human societies. Yet it was clear that certain developments troubled him deeply, and if the liberation movements unleashed in the 1960s continued, he feared the outcome would be mass suicide.
...
By now, Kolakowskis intellectual sympathies for atheism were irrelevant. He acknowledged that God can of course be rejected as morally dangerous, denied as unacceptable to reason, cursed as the enemy of humanity, yet he countered that without the Absolute, there was no basis for morality and law. Human reason is finite and can provide no path to such principles. He called in an unlikely witness for his bitter theism: If we reject the principle that the end justifies the means, we can only appeal to higher, politically irrelevant moral criteria; and this, [Leon] Trotsky says, amounts to believing in God.
...
But, given Kolakowski's background, I think the book will be an interesting read.
xchrom
(108,903 posts)2. i disagree with him greatly about 'liberal' christians lacking a concept of evil.
and the question he leaves out is -- what did the old 'catholic' concept get us?
BUT he seems like a fascinating, thoughtful man regardless.