Dissertations / Theses on the topic 'Eric Voegelin'

The problem of understanding political foundings is situated at the nexus between political philosophy and political science. This thesis rethinks founding by asking both the philosophical question of how political order comes into being, and the political science question of how to understand particular founding moments. These two questions stimulate and structure a dialogue between the works of Leo Strauss, Hannah Arendt and Eric Voegelin. The approach of founding in all three has a common starting point: they begin from ordinary experience and outline a political science that is mindful of the phenomenality of political life. I show that Strauss’s return to ordinary experience is partial. By limiting political life to the normative claims raised in it and submitting them to philosophical judgment, Strauss moves too quickly beyond political phenomena. His account of founding, as a consequence, vacillates between understanding particular founding acts and conceiving the perfect founding moment in abstract thought. Arendt’s work decisively shifts the problem on the side of practical understanding. Yet, her ontological account of action as appearance subtly displaces her concern for understanding historical actions. I move away from approaching historical foundings as a mode of appearing in the world, by recovering an account of action as experience. On that basis, I suggest a hermeneutics of experience which approaches foundings in light of the quest for meaning. With Voegelin founding is recovered as a symbol that exists only in the quest of understanding. Founding occurs in the experience of struggle to restore a reality that has become symbolically opaque. This experience is shared by the philosopher and the political actor; therefore to understand moments of founding requires the interweaving, and not separation, of political philosophy and political science. At the end, the quest of understanding founding moments is neither derivative, nor preparatory, but encompassing the philosophical question of how order comes into being.

Made available in DSpace on 2016-04-27T17:27:11Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Marcelo de Souza Cleto.pdf: 1362779 bytes, checksum: 748402aa0ca6e2a5226a536720b3b307 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2015-09-03
The theory of participation developed by the dialectical science assumes the ontological meaning of the intermediate conceptually called by the ancient tradition of metaxy philosophy. In contemporary times the debate on the concept of property got an epistemological relief according to the reflections made by the philosopher and political scientist Eric Voegelin. The author s interpretation of the work scaled its ontology prioritized by the political substance of the human, which finds in the intermediate causal nexus of its participation in the other dimensions of the being (daimon, cosmos and society). After examining the mutual participation within the community of the being the thesis presents the problems of the modernity of metaxy, which highlighted in contrast with the gnosis, puts the term via historiogenesis the tension between truths. The victory of a representation of the truth culminated in a history of order, explained since the representative experiences of archaic Greek tradition as myths (Hesiod) and rites (Dionysus). The route of the investigation enhances the history, the criticism of positivism and the differences brought to light through the development of archeology, a fact that made possible the specific treatment of experiences that are retroactive to the noetic period. The hypothesis of ontological plethora of finite being is confirmed following the logic of the identical and different, unfolded into its continuities and discontinuities ranging from the evocative and transcendent character of symbols to the present intentionality in the philosophies of Anaximander and Heraclitus
A teoria da participação elaborada pela ciência dialética, pressupõe o sentido ontológico do intermediário, conceitualmente chamado pela tradição antiga da filosofia de metaxy. Na contemporaneidade o debate sobre as propriedades do conceito adquiriu relevo epistemológico em função das reflexões efetuadas pelo filósofo e cientista político Eric Voegelin. A exegese da obra do autor dimensionou sua ontologia primada pela substância política do humano, que encontra no intermediário o nexo causal de sua participação nas demais dimensões do ser (daimon, cosmos e sociedade). Após o exame da participação mútua no interior da comunidade do ser a tese apresenta a problemática da modernidade da metaxy, que realçada no contraste com a gnose, coloca a termo via historiogênese a tensão entre verdades. A vitória de uma representação da verdade culminou numa história da ordem, explanada desde as experiências representativas da tradição grega arcaica como os mitos (Hesíodo) e os ritos (Dionísio). O trajeto da investigação valoriza a história, a crítica ao positivismo e as diferenciações vindas à luz através do desenvolvimento da arqueologia, fato que tornou possível o tratamento específico de experiências que retroagem ao período noético. A hipótese da superabundância ontológica do ser finito foi confirmada segundo a lógica do idêntico e do diferente, desdobrada em suas continuidades e descontinuidades que vão desde o caráter evocativo e transcendente dos símbolos até a intencionalidade presente nas filosofias de Anaximandro e Heráclito

Dans le chapitre du Contrat social consacré à la mort du corps politique, Rousseau rappelle que cette mort est « la pente naturelle et inévitable des Gouvernements les mieux constitués ». En effet, poursuit-il, « si Sparte et Rome ont péri, quel État peut espérer de durer toujours ? Si nous voulons former un établissement durable, ne songeons donc point à le rendre éternel ». Malgré l’avertissement de Rousseau, la tendance à rendre l’ordre politique éternel semble être un phénomène constant, jusqu’à nos jours. En témoigne l’idée d’une « fin de l’histoire » résultant de l’alliance du capitalisme et de la démocratie libérale, ou d’un modèle occidental se comprenant comme la réalisation du seul but de l’histoire, à laquelle ne s’opposeraient que des puissances « retardatrices ». À travers ces phénomènes se manifeste une « politique du temps », un discours de légitimation de l’ordre politique donnant un sens politique à sa dimension temporelle.Compris de cette manière, le problème que pose la « politique du temps » ne peut être abordé par une critique limitée à ses derniers avatars, telle la thèse de la fin de l’histoire. Il est au contraire nécessaire de remonter à la racine du problème, c’est-à-dire à la place qu’occupe cette question au sein du rapport entre temps et politique. Si la politique du temps s’avère aussi tenace, c’est en effet parce qu’elle s’inscrit dans un questionnement intrinsèquement lié à l’ordre politique, confronté à la nécessité d’assurer son « être-dans-le-temps ». La politique du temps répond à cette nécessité par une politisation du temps et de l’histoire pouvant conduire, dans sa forme extrême, à une éternisation de l’ordre politique, qui prétend alors englober la totalité du temps, du passé au futur.Compte tenu de la persistance de cette conception temporelle de l’ordre politique, de même qu’il ne suffit pas de limiter la critique à ses avatars actuels, de même serait-il impropre de la diriger contre sa seule forme extrême, dans la mesure où ce sont précisément certains discours proclamant la fin des idéologies qui tendent à reproduire aujourd’hui les structures de la politique du temps. Par conséquent, ce n’est qu’en abordant dans son ensemble le problème formé par la atemporalisation du politique et la politisation du temps qu’il est possible d’attaquer à la racine ce type de discours de légitimation, sous toutes ses formes.Pour mener à bien ce projet, deux objectifs complémentaires, correspondant aux deux fils directeurs de l’analyse, sont traités en parallèle. D’une part, nous proposons de systématiser la question du temps politique afin de montrer les grands traits communs aux phénomènes qui s’y rattachent et quelles directions s’ouvrent à la critique. Le second axe de lecture met l’accent sur les œuvres d’Eric Voegelin et de Karl Löwith en tant qu’elles apportent une contribution décisive tant à la systématisation du problème que, surtout, à son dépassement.Notre hypothèse de départ est que Löwith et Voegelin eux-mêmes sont conscients de la relation problématique entre temps et politique et cherchent, par l’intermédiaire de la dimension temporelle, à aborder un problème politique dont l’importance s’explique non seulement par la situation historique à laquelle ils sont directement confrontés, mais aussi par sa valeur systématique intrinsèque, en tant qu’il représente une évolution de la conception du politique. Tous deux sont convaincus de la nécessité de surmonter le nihilisme et l’absence de toute fondation durable en tant que tels, c’est-à-dire de surmonter la temporalisation radicale de l’ordre politique, mais également les tentatives visant à l’éterniser. C’est dans ce cadre que prennent sens leurs projets, qui cherchent à dissocier le politique et le temps et, en repensant leur relation, à éviter que tout point de référence permanent ne soit dissout par le cours du temps sans toutefois produire une éternité artificielle et absolue
In the chapter of the Social Contract on the death of the body politic, Rousseau emphasizes that its death is “the natural and inevitable propensity even of the best constituted governments”. Indeed, he continues, “if Sparta and Rome have perished, what state can hope to last for ever? If we want the constitution we have established to endure, let us not seek, therefore, to make it eternal”. Despite Rousseau’s warning, the tendency to make the political order eternal seems to be a pervasive phenomenon even in our time, as can be seen in the idea of an “end of history” that results from the combination of capitalism and liberal democracy, or in a Western model conceived as the realisation of the sole aim of history that only “delaying” powers would resist. These are examples of a “politics of time”, a concept that refers to a type of discourse contributing to the legitimization of the political order by giving a political meaning to its temporal dimension. Understood in this way, the problem of the “politics of time” cannot be addressed by focusing only on its recent developments, such as the “end of history” thesis, it is also crucial to understand these developments in the broader context of the relation between time and politics. Consequently, only a fundamental critique can put an end to the “politics of time”. The origin of the persistence of the “politics of time” has to be traced back to an essential problem that the political order is facing, namely the necessity to ensure its existence in time. The “politics of time” answers this problem by politicizing time and history, which can lead, in its most extreme form, to an eternisation of the political order that pretends to last for all time.Considering that this temporal conception of the political order is still widely present in many contemporary discourses, it would be insufficient to limit the critique to contemporary phenomena or to the extreme forms of the politics of time in modern ideologies, since precisely some proclamations of the end of ideologies tend to repeat the structure of the politics of time. It is therefore necessary to tackle the problem of the temporalisation of politics and politicisation of time as a whole. This is the only way to question the different occurrences of this kind of legitimising discourse.To achieve this, this study has two parallel aims. First, I begin by reconstructing a systematic account of the question of political time in order to highlight the main characteristics of the phenomena that are related to it. My second aim is to analyse Eric Voegelin’s and Karl Löwith’s works regarding their contribution to the systematisation of the problem, but first and foremost insofar as they offer an answer to it.Central to this work is the claim that Löwith and Voegelin not only develop a theory of the problematic relation between time and politics, but also defend a solution to tackle this problem. This problem, as they see it, is not restricted to their particular historical situation but remains of interest as an evolution of the concept of the political itself. Both Löwith and Voegelin are convinced that nihilism and the lack of any durable foundation must be overcome as such or, in other words, that it is necessary to overcome not only the temporalisation of the political order but also the attempts to “eternalise” it. The meaning and significance of Löwith’s and Voegelin’s projects appear clearly in this framework, as they can be seen as two attempts to dissociate the political from the temporal and, by reworking this relation, to prevent the relativisation of any durable foundation in the flow of time without, however, creating an artificial and absolute eternity

Tese (doutorado) - Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina, Centro de Filosofia e Ciências Humanas, Programa de Pós-Graduação em Filosofia, Florianópolis, 2014.
Made available in DSpace on 2015-09-22T04:01:52Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 334526.pdf: 1479027 bytes, checksum: 96c845eb35af869cc24044f291c440b9 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2014
Esta tese parte do fato de que Hannah Arendt e Eric Voegelin tentam interpretar o fenômeno totalitário e o fazem de forma distinta. Arendt discorda do diagnóstico apontado por Voegelin que afirma que o totalitarismo tem suas origens a partir das seitas gnósticas. Essa discordância chama atenção para outros pontos críticos como é o caso da diferente concepção de política entre ambos: Eric Voegelin expõe sua preferência por teorias inauguradas por Platão e que seguem com o cristianismo, enquanto Arendt tenta encontrar um conceito puro de política que se perdeu na tradição. Por outro lado, há algumas semelhanças no trabalho dos dois autores, como é o caso da ideia de common sense, por exemplo. Todas essas temáticas serão tratadas nesta tese de doutorado cujo objetivo extrapola apenas a mera comparação entre os dois autores, mas também busca situá-los no quadro da filosofia política contemporânea.

Abstract : Hannah Arendt and Eric Voegelin interpret differently the totalitarian phenomenon. Arendt disagrees with Voegelin about the nature of totalitarianism: he maintains the hypothesis that the totalitarianism is a kind of political religion and has their origins with the Gnostic sects. This discrepancy draws attention to the other aspects in Arendt's and Voegelin's framework, such as the different conception of politics among both autors: Eric Voegelin prefers the political philosophy of Plato and Arendt tries to find a pure concept of politics which was lost by tradition. In contrast, there are some similar characteristics among Arendt and Voegelin, like the idea about common sense, for example. All these issues will be problematized in this work, which goal goes beyond the simple comparison among Arendt and Voegelin, but tries to check the importance of the two thinkers in the contemporary political philosophy framework.

La controverse entre Hans Kelsen (1881-1973) et Eric Voegelin (1901-1985) commence au début des années 1920 à Vienne et se termine aux Etats-Unis dans les années 1970. Voegelin s'est d'abord opposé à la théorie pure du droit dès les années 1920, en développant une critique très acerbe de la théorie juridique de son ancien directeur de thèse. Après leurs exils aux Etats-Unis, Kelsen et Voegelin se sont confrontés en théorie politique, en particulier au sujet de l'interprétation des totalitarismes. Cette fois-ci, c’est Kelsen qui a attaqué la théorie politique de Voegelin dans deux manuscrits non publiés de son vivant. C'est à travers le prisme de l'opposition entre les Lumières et le Romantisme que nous tenterons d’expliquer cette controverse et de donner les clés de lecture qui permettent de la comprendre. L’étude de cette controverse permettra d’éclairer la théorie de l’un par celle de l’autre
The controversy between Hans Kelsen (1881-1973) and Eric Voegelin (1901-1985) arose in the early 1920's at the University of Vienna, and came to an end in the U.S in the 1970’s. Voegelin opposed Kelsen’s pure theory of law as early as the 1920’s, developing a scathing critique of the juridical theory of his former thesis supervisor. While both in exile in the U.S, Kelsen and Voegelin clashed once again on the topic of political theory, particularly on the interpretation of totalitarianisms. This time, Kelsen attacked Voegelin’s political theory in two manuscripts which were published only recently. I use the opposition between Enlightenment and Romanticism to interpret and understand the disagreement between the two authors. The study of this controversy will shed light on the theory of one by that of the other

Cette thèse porte sur le rapport de l'Islam à la raison et au politique qui n'y est pas étudié de manière systématique chez tel ou tel penseur musulman spécifique ou à l'intérieur d'un courant historique de pensée donné, mais dans le but de repérer les structures générales. Une réflexion philosophique y est menée sur les catégories mêmes de raison et de politique à travers l'oeuvre d'Eric Voegelin. Cette travail se positionne dans la lignée de la pensée postcoloniale et suit deux axes parallèles qui sont mis en dialogue : d'une part l'explicitation de la pensée de Voegelin au fur et à mesure de sa mobilisation et, d'autre part, le recours à un corpus de textes issus du monde musulman. La première conclusion de cette thèse est que l'on peut mieux comprendre les débats animés qui ont traversé l'histoire de l'Islam sur le statut de la rationalité et le rôle qui devait lui être attribué dans la Cité musulmane si on les rapproche de l'herméneutique élaborée par Eric Voegelin de la notion de noûs chez Platon et Aristote. Elle inverse une opinion répandue : ce n'est pas chez les théologiens rationalistes (les Mu'tazila) que l'on trouve les réflexions les plus intéressantes sur la raison mais plutôt chez des penseurs tels qu'Ibn Taymiyya, auteur d'un traité contre la logique grecque. Deux champs paradigmatiques de l'histoire du monde musulman sont explorés dans les deux premières parties : le développement de l'univers éthico-juridique de la sharia et les débats autour de la notion de fitra ou nature humaine qui sont apparus dans le monde musulman bien avant la réception du corpus philosophique grec
This dissertation examines Islam's rapport with reason and politics. The investigation was not carried out within the thought of a specific author or within a given historical school of thought. The purpose was to identify some general structures beyond the diverse manifestations of this rapport. The dissertation also offers an analysis of the very categories of reason and politics through Eric Voegelin's political philosophy. This work which is also a contribution to postcolonial theory follows two parallel lines: on one hand, it endeavors to render Eric Voegelin's philosophical insights explicit and, on the other hand, it caries out an analysis of a corpus of texts from the Muslim world on the basis of such insights. The main conclusion of this dissertation is as follows: the heated historical debates on the status of human rationality within the Islamic polity could be better understood if they are brought Gloser to the hermeneutics of Platonic and Aristotelian nous developed by Eric Voegelin. It reverses a widely-held opinion by suggesting that it is not within the rational theology practiced by the Mu'tazila that one finds the most interesting discussions on reason but rather in the writings o such thinkers as Ibn Taymiyya, the author of a treatise against Greek logic. Two paradigmatic fields within the history of Sunni Islam were explored in the first two sections: the graduai elaboration of the ethical/legal universe of the sharia, and the debates around the notion of fitra or human nature which appeared long before the Islamic reception of the Greek philosophical corpus

PONTIFÍCIA UNIVERSIDADE CATÓLICA DO RIO DE JANEIRO
COORDENAÇÃO DE APERFEIÇOAMENTO DO PESSOAL DE ENSINO SUPERIOR
PROGRAMA DE SUPORTE À PÓS-GRADUAÇÃO DE INSTS. DE ENSINO
Uma das temáticas mais fascinantes e recorrentes nas Ciências Sociais e, mais especificamente na Antropologia, é a problemática da ordem. Essa dissertação foca a sua análise em como os homens empreendem a imprescindível tarefa de dar significado às suas vidas, às suas instituições, às suas sociedades. Ordenar, nesse contexto, nada mais é do que dar uma justificação, um fundamento à todas as coisas que compõem a vida humana. Assim, parto da ideia de que a maneira mais eficaz de dar ordem e significado (seja a vida individual ou a sociedade e suas instituições) se encontra na religião. Admito, porém, que as estruturas de significado presentes nas diferentes culturas não possuem a firmeza necessária para se impor a todos com a mesma intensidade e da mesma forma. Portanto, para evitar que o mundo social perca a sua eficácia, é necessário nomizar ou ordenar a sociedade de uma forma estável e duradoura. A religião, admitida aqui como a forma mais eficaz de dar ordem ao meio social, aparecerá no contexto do que o filósofo Eric Voegelin chamou de sociedades cosmológicas, ou nas chamadas sociedades frias como denominou o antropólogo Claude Lévi-Strauss. A ordem e a construção dos significados nas diferentes sociedades serão analisadas através das obras desses dois autores.
One of the most fascinating and recurring themes in Social Sciences and, more specifically, in Anthropology, is the problem of order. This dissertation focuses its analysis on how men undertake the essential task of giving meaning to their lives, their institutions and societies. To order, in this context, is nothing more than to give a justification, a ground for all things that make up human life. Thus, I take off from the idea that the most effective way of ordaining and establishing meaning (whether to individual life or society and its institutions) lies in religion. I admit, however, that the structures of meaning present in different cultures do not have the necessary firmness to enforce all with the same intensity and in the same manner. Therefore, to prevent the social world from losing its effectiveness, it is necessary to normalize or order society in a stable and lasting way. Religion, admitted as the most effective way to provide order to social life, appears in the context of what the philosopher Eric Voegelin called cosmological societies., or cold societies as Claude Lévi-Strauss called in his works. The order and the construction of meanings in the different societies will be analysed through the works of this two authors.

Par-delà la dispersion thématique et aphoristique de l’œuvre du philosophe colombien Nicolás Gómez Dávila (1913-1994), un spectre hante sa pensée : le spectre du gnosticisme. Quel lien ce courant religieux ou para religieux né au sein de l’Empire romain entre le Ier et le IIIe siècle de notre ère, peut-il avoir avec notre monde moderne ? Quel rapport entretien ce courant avec la philosophie ? En effet, la connaissance philosophique est totalement différente de la « connaissance » gnostique (gnosis). Alors que la philosophie, d’une part, se fonde sur une recherche de la vérité à partir d’un questionnement sur la réalité, la gnose est étroitement liée à une expérience de révélation, de sorte que la réception de la vérité, par illumination intérieure, remplace la théorie et l’argument rationnel. D’autre part, elle a pour objet la voie du salut, sans enseignement théorique, par transformation ou destruction de la réalité. On ne peut donc que s’interroger sur les coïncidences entre la gnose ancienne et ce que le philosophe austro-américain Éric Voegelin (1901-1985) a nommé « la modernité sans frein ». Ne pourrait-on pas voir dans les idéologies modernes (communisme, socialisme, nationalisme, libéralisme, etc.) à l’instar d’Éric Voegelin, des « religions politiques » ou, comme il le développera ensuite dans son œuvre une résurgence et excroissance du gnosticisme cherchant ici-bas le salut par la divinisation de l’homme ? C’est la thèse de Gómez Dávila qui radicalise celle de Voegelin en faisant de la gnose l’origine de la religion démocratique et de ses dérivations dans l’ordre théologico-politique (athéisme, progressisme, relativisme, étatisme et totalitarisme) et anthropologico-juridique (égalitarisme, jusnaturalisme et individualisme)
Beyond dispersion set of themes and aphoristic of the work of the Colombian philosopher Nicolás Gómez Dávila (1913-1994), a spectrum haunts his thought: the spectrum of the Gnosticism. Which link this current religious or para religious born within the Roman Empire between 1st and the 3rd century of our era, can it have with our modern world? Which maintenance report this current with philosophy? Indeed, philosophical knowledge is completely different from gnostic “knowledge” (gnosis). Whereas philosophy, on the one hand, is based on a research of the truth starting from a questioning on reality, the gnosis is closely related to an experiment of revelation, so that the reception of the truth, by interior illumination, replaces the theory and the rational argument. In addition, it has as an aim the way of the salvation, without theoretical teaching, by transformation or destruction of reality. One can thus only wonder about coincidences between the old gnosis and what the Austria-american philosopher Éric Voegelin (1901-1985) named “modernity without restraint”. Couldn’t one see in the modern ideologies (communism, socialism, nationalism, liberalism, etc.) following the example of Éric Voegelin, “political religions” or, as it will then develop it in his work a resurgence and growth of Gnosticism seeking here below salvation by the deification of the man? It is the thesis of Gómez Dávila which radicalizes that of Voegelin by making gnosis the origin of the democratic religion and its derivations in the theologico-polical (atheism, progressism, relativism, statism and totalitarianism) and anthropologico-legal order (egalitarianism, jusnaturalism and individualism)

This thesis presents an alternative perspective to the "discourse of crisis" that currently pervades political debate. "Post-truth politics", "post-politics" and "anti-politics" - these are only a few of the new concepts that have recently emerged to describe what is perceived as a deviation from politics proper. At the core of this crisis appears to be the phenomenon of externalisation, where self-realisation is outsourced to external markers of identification, such as race or nation. Traditional political concepts no longer seem sufficient to grasp such externalisation - hence the discourse calls for new, original ways of thinking and doing politics. This thesis discusses the limits of the discourse of crisis and introduces the philosophy of presence, traditionally excluded from the canon of modern political thought. It is concerned with the question of politics only as a derivative. Unlike contemporary mainstream and critical political thought, this philosophy argues that externalisation is not a deviation from politics, but its very essence. Its core argument is that another order, prior to and beyond the political, is already present in the world and can be experienced by human faculties, so that, instead of ordering the world politically, the task is to "become present" to the world spiritually. Hence, the philosophy of presence puts politics in its place - secondary to experience. I present this philosophy by exploring four thinkers in depth and by focusing on what I refer to as "practices of presence": means by which presence can be cultivated and made habitual. Thereby, I seek to show that the philosophy of presence does not promote withdrawal but may lead to another type of community and sociality - one that is not political. The thinkers discussed will be Gustav Landauer and his practice of Absonderung, Eric Voegelin and his practice of Anamnesis, Simone Weil and her practice of Malheur and Václav Havel and his practice of Neklid.

The philosopher Eric Voegelin (1901-85) held that at the heart of an adequate political philosophy must be a philosophy of consciousness. This study discusses Voegelin's thought in its significance for "political theology", by which is understood that mode of theological thinking which focuses on the relationship of Christian faith to the pursuit of social justice. The study falls into two parts. Part One is an exposition of Voegelin's thought with the perspective of political theology continuously in mind. Chapter One justifies the choice of this perspective. There follow chapters an the symbol of the metaxy, which Voegelin takes from Plato and which is fundamental to his thought, and on the rational structure of symbols and their articulation. Then the modes of symbolic discourse most important for Voegelin are considered in turn: myth, classical philosophy, Christian theology, history, and politics. Part One finishes with a discussion of Voegelin's work on the Hebrew and Christian Scriptures. Part Two concentrates on three topics central to the concerns of Voegelin and political theologians alike. Besides being intrinsically important, these topics permit one to estimate how valuable is Voegelin's work as a resource for political theology. The topics are the relationship between individual and societal transformation; the scope and limits of Christian hope for the attainment of a just social order within history; and the nature of political responsibility and irresponsibility in the light of faith. The thesis ends with a summary of its conclusions. It is argued that Voegelin's thought offers a powerful and constructive challenge to political theologians, but that political theology in turn provides a vantage point which reveals certain serious shortcomings in Voegelin's powerful thought. In particular, it is argued that Voegelin fails to articulate adequately the social implications of his own philosophical principles.

Thesis (MPhil)--University of Stellenbosch, 2003.
ENGLISH ABSTRACT: In this thesis, 'shadow' is investigated as an object of thought and (analogically connected to this) of perception. This dialectical process is structured through means of a series of experiments and Plato's allegory of the cave, which is interpreted as a process directed towards selfconciousness. This process is further explained through thinkers such as, Blumenberg, Heidegger, Levinas en Voegelin. The purpose of this study is to break with the self-evident way in which 'shadow' is 'normally' treated and to bring back about a sense of astonishment for it.
AFRIKAANSE OPSOMMING: In hierdie tesis word die 'skaduwee' as waarnemingsobjek en (analogies verwant daaraan) as denkobjek ondersoek. Hierdie dialektiese proses word gestruktureerd met behulp van 'n aantal eksperimente en Plato se grotgelykenis, wat geinterpreteer word as programmaties van die proses van selfbewuswording. Hierdie proses word verder toegelig aan die hand van denkers soos Blumenberg, Heidegger, Levinas en Voegelin. Die doel van die ondersoek is om die vanselfsprekendheid waarmee daar met die fenomeen van die skaduwee omgegaan word te deurbreek en weer verwondering daarvoor op te roep.
NEDERLANDSTALIGE SAMENVATTING: In deze thesis wordt de 'schaduw' als waarnemingsobject en (analogisch verwant daaraan) als denkobject onderzocht. Dit dialectische proces wordt gestructureerd met behulp van een aantal experimenten en Plato's grotvergelijking, die geïnterpreteerd worden als een proces gericht op zeltbewustwording. Dit proces wordt verder toegelicht aan de hand van denkers zoals, Blumenberg, Heidegger, Levinas en Voegelin. Het doel van het onderzoek is om de vanzelfsprekendheid waarmee met het fenomeen van de 'schaduw' omgegaan wordt, te doorbreken en er opnieuw verwondering voor op te roepen.

In the following work, I present Eric Voegelin's account regarding the tradition of natural law as an intellectual and spiritual phenomenon of Western civilization. The eight-volume History of Political Ideas, published posthumously, gives a compelling account of the shift from classical to modern natural law. Chapter one will set up the parameters of the study and give a summary of the background details surrounding the controversy of Voegelin's History. The second chapter will deal with the account given on the development of natural law from the early church fathers and the Hellenic-Stoic thinkers, up to Thomas Aquinas. Chapter three explores Voegelin's critique of Martin Luther and John Calvin as largely responsible for the dismantling of Aquinas' synthesis and anthropology which is based on a loving friendship (amicitia) between man and God. Reformed theology and the emergence of the nation-state as the sole political unit are the primary factors motivating the quest to establish "new orders" in modern political philosophy. Hugo Grotius, Thomas Hobbes, and John Locke are the focus of chapter four, as Voegelin carries out an analysis of their new modes of natural law, concluding with a grim assessment. Finally, I will briefly comment on integrity of Voegelin's story as a plausible interpretation regarding this rich civilizational heritage.

In addition to his renowned musical output, Richard Wagner produced a logorrhoeic prose oeuvre, including a dramatic sketch of the last weeks of the life of Jesus Christ entitled Jesus von Nazareth. Though drafted in 1848-1849, it was published only posthumously, and has therefore been somewhat neglected in the otherwise voluminous Wagnerian literature. This thesis first examines the origins of Jesus von Nazareth amidst the climate of revolution wherein it was conceived, ascertaining its place within Wagner’s own internal development and amongst the radical thinkers who influenced it. While Ludwig Feuerbach has traditionally been seen as the most prominent of these, this thesis examines Wagner’s sources more broadly. The thesis then summarizes and analyzes Jesus von Nazareth itself, particularly in terms of Wagner’s use of biblical scripture. The thesis demonstrates how his not infrequent misuse thereof constitutes one way in which Wagner transmogrifies Jesus as mutable lens through which his own ideology of social revolution is reflected. It also attempts to provide a critical assessment of the relative dramatic merits of Jesus von Nazareth and looks into Wagner’s ultimate decision not to complete the work. The thesis then briefly summarizes the changes that occurred in Wagner’s mature Christological outlook subsequent to his drafting of Jesus von Nazareth, attempting to concisely demonstrate some developments beyond Wagner’s well-known encounter with the philosophy of Arthur Schopenhauer. The thesis concludes with an evaluation of how Jesus von Nazareth informed Wagner’s general religious outlook and the extent to which this worldview is a productive one.

碩士
中原大學
宗教研究所
93
Eric Voegelin believes that Gnosticism, either ancient or modern, is the most important part to represent the modernity, and also a main reason of disorder. Pass through Athens civilization, Israel civilization and Christianity civilization, Eric Voegelin revealed the history of disorder in the world. He emphasized that participation is the only one way to understand hierarchy, harmony and balance in the universe. Ecclesiastes 1, verse 9: “…there is nothing new under the sun” is his conclusion to why any reasons of disorder can not reach out the unchangeable essence of order.

博士
輔仁大學
哲學系
102
Voegelin noted that "the conception of a history of ideas was an ideological deformation of reality" and to conclnde that history is a "process of man's participation in a flux of divine presence" and "mystery in process of reveloation" .This studay is the analytical conception of the history of order that Voegelin revises in all his books.

Hanna Arendt (1906-1975) and Eric Voegelin (1901-1985) were two political thinkers which can be placed in the Totalitarianism-theory discourse. In 1951, Voegelin was commissioned to review Hannah Arendt´s recently published book The Origins of Totalitarianism (1951). Arendt was given the right to reply. Voegelin also wrote a letter to Arendt in German which she responded to. With their dialogue as a starting point, aspects of the theoretical content of the philosophical and political thinking in Voegelin and Arendt was analyzed. The main conclusion is that their theories complement each other and that they can be better understood in light of each other. A deeper understanding of Arendt´s and Voegelin´s ideas has been achieved using the anthropological concept liminality. It is an aid to understanding the dissolution of an order and the transition towards a new order. All kinds of changes in paradigm can be studied from the perspective of liminality. The political situation in Europe in the 30ths was a liminality of the thinking of Voegelin and Arendt. Therefore, their ”conservatism” can be interpreted as a ”plasticity” of ideologies-discourse according to the specific liminality, and their ideas as both radical and conservative due to the political situation in the liminality. Conducting a reflexive approach towards their ideas has clarified their explicit divergence as both divergence and convergence. Their supposed divergence is sometimes explained by their different theoretical perspectives. Despite a disagreement with sine ira et studio in dialogue, their views correspond to each other, since both affirm a historical approach to political phenomena which is evaluative but not judicial in the sense that empiri judge evaluative statements. Arendt rejected the idea of totalitarianism as a utilitarian-scientific project, but could not deny the empiri of nazism and bolshevism using utilitarian-scientific (”everything is possible”) propaganda language. Nor did Voegelin see a direct causality from 16th century scientism to totalitarianism, but concluded that scientism was a discourse for the totalitarian ideologies in which mankind had immanentized God into the concept ”everything is possible”. None of them accepted a metaphysical and essential concept of the human nature. Arendt`s foundation for human Being was a plurality of mankind while Voegelin founded it in a consciousness which transcend to the world. Regarding political religion Arendt reject totalitarianism as a secular religion, although she observes the religious elements while Voegelin adopt a political religion theory. The divergence is accomplished by their different theories in the concept religion. They both observe same phenomena, but Voegelin theorized totalitarianism in a way Arendt would call speculative. It is further suggested that the concept pneumopathology can be used as a model for approaching the phenomena totalitarianism.

The topic of this work was to discuss the question of order from the standpoint of Eric Voegelin. (Political) order is not understood as an artificial man-made construct, but as an intelligible structure of the whole, which is to be attuned to. Disastrous experiences of the last century led Voegelin to the attempt at rediscovery of the science of order: politiké epistemé. To this end he pursued a detailed study concerning history, i.e. the subject in which he hoped to find structures of order and, in particular, the experience of order in soul of man. Therefore it is possible -in his view- to reflect on political order adequately only after we have attended to philosophical anthropology which should facilitate the detection of constants of human nature. These appear against a background of unexceeded tension between poles of God and man. In the first chapter of the main part, I discuss the relationship between the human and transcendent pole and I try to clarify Voegelin's conception of metaxy (also participation of the human on the transcendent pole). In the following chapter, I pursue the theoretical and pragmatic consequences arising for the political order, whose goal is the preservation of man, society, and good life. The result is the admission of both pragmatic and spiritual order. The third part...

Cette étude, qui s'intéresse aux appropriations de l'Antiquité grecque au XXe siècle, se propose d'analyser les impacts de la lecture de Platon sur le développement de la pensée politique et éthique de Hannah Arendt. Notre approche du sujet est historique et philosophique. Premièrement, nous considérerons la toile de fond biographique, intellectuelle et historique de cette lecture. La relation intellectuelle entre Hannah Arendt et Martin Heidegger reçoit une attention particulière, puisque le Platon arendtien présente parfois des similarités avec celui de Heidegger. Nous considérerons également la réception de Platon en Allemagne entre la période de Weimar et l'après-guerre : les lectures idéologiques de l'époque nazie, et le débat autour du statut de Platon en tant qu'ancêtre du totalitarisme, clamé par Karl Popper, ont assombri la réputation philosophique de Platon jusqu'à la fin du XXe siècle. Nous trouvons des échos de ce climat intellectuel particulier dans le traitement de Platon chez Arendt. Dans un deuxième temps, nous examinerons les thèmes et les motifs de la lecture arendtienne en observant minutieusement une sélection d'ouvrages, d'essais, d'ébauches d'Arendt, en plus des notes du Journal de pensée (Denktagebuch) et des extraits de dialogues de Platon sur lesquels s'appuient sa lecture. Arendt déconstruit, transforme, altère et utilise ces textes afin de démontrer que notre tradition de pensée politique s'est édifiée sur un mépris de la politique qui trouve sa source dans la pensée platonicienne. Ce mépris culmine dans la pensée de Marx et le totalitarisme. Mais les réflexions d'Arendt sur la pensée, le jugement et la conscience, et son traitement du cas Eichmann suggère qu'elle s'approprie par moments la pensée de Platon. Des comparaisons avec d'autres penseurs émigrés allemands, qui s'inspirent aussi de Platon et des Grecs pour édifier leur pensée politique, Leo Strauss et Eric Voegelin, vont nous permettre d'affiner notre compréhension du Platon d'Arendt.
This study, which concerns the appropriations of Greek Antiquity in the 20th century, proposes to analyze the impacts of the reading of Plato on the development of Hannah Arendt's political and ethical thought. Our approach of this subject is historical and philosophical. First, we will consider the biographical, intellectual and historical background of this reading. The intellectual relationship between Hannah Arendt and Martin Heidegger receive a special attention, since Arendt's Plato is sometimes similar to the heiddeggerian one. We also consider Platonic reception in Germany between the Weimar period and the postwar era : the ideological readings of the Nazi era, and the debate surrounding Plato's status as the forebearer of totalitarianism, as claimed by Karl Popper, darkened Plato's philosophical reputation until the end of 20th century. We find some echoes of this particular intellectual climax in Arendt's treatment of Plato. Second, we will examine the themes and motives of arendtian reading by scrutinizing a selection of Arendt's books, essays, drafts, and notes from the Denktagebuch, and excerpts from the Platonic dialogues that informs her reading. Arendt deconstructs, transforms, distorts and uses these texts in order to show that our tradition of political thought was founded on a contempt for politics that finds its source in Platonic thought. This contempt culminates in Marx's thought and totalitarianism. But Arendt's reflections on thinking, judgment and conscience, and her treatment of Eichmann's case suggests that she sometimes appropriates Plato. Some comparisons with other German Émigrés thinkers who also reads Plato and the Greeks to inform their political thought, Leo Strauss and Eric Voegelin, will enhance our understanding of Arendt's Plato.

This diploma thesis "The Place of Truth by Ernest Gellner and Eric Voegelin" compares two major thinkers in the field of discourses of truth, faith, modernity, and democracy. Eric Voegelin represents unorthodox conservative views of the abstract place of truth, which is in close connection with the existence of individuals and with close relation to transcendent basis of being. Liberal thinker Ernest André Gellner is an advocate of individualism and rationalism, which significantly impact the very concept of truth. Attention is mainly focused on how these two different points of view define relation between domain of truth to modern democracy and totalitarian movements represented by ideologies, which were hegemonizing sphere of truth in society.