The Arrival of the Death of God

2021 ◽  
pp. 50-67
Author(s):  
Bruce Ledewitz

While there are many sincere religious believers, this culture no longer believes in God. That is why the Covid-19 pandemic did not raise serious issues of theodicy publicly. Friedrich Nietzsche’s Madman announcing the Death of God in 1882 concluded that he had come too early. His time is now. The Death of God unfolded through the disenchantment described by Max Weber and arrived with full force with the New Atheists in the early part of this century. Sam Harris announced the end of faith, which turned out to mean, in its denial of binding authority and objective justification, the death of truth. Now we each judge everything ourselves. The New Atheists also undermined human solidarity in politics. The breakdown in public life is the final flowering of the Death of God.

Author(s):  
Bruce Ledewitz

There has been a breakdown in American public life that no election can fix. Americans cannot even converse about politics. All the usual explanations for our condition have failed to make things better. Bruce Ledewitz shows that America is living with the consequences of the Death of God, which Friedrich Nietzsche knew would be momentous and irreversible. God was this culture’s story of the meaning of our lives. Even atheists had substitutes for God, like inevitable progress. Now we have no story and do not even think about the nature of reality. That is why we are angry and despairing. America’s future requires that we begin a new story by each of us asking a question posed by theologian Bernard Lonergan: Is the universe on our side? When we commit to live honestly and fully by our answer to that question, even if our immediate answer is no, America will begin to heal. Beyond that, pondering the question of the universe will allow us to see that there is more to the universe than blind forces and dead matter. Guided by the naturalism of Alfred North Whitehead’s process philosophy, and the historical faith of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., we can learn to trust that the universe bends toward justice and our welfare. That conclusion will complete our healing and restore faith in American public life. We can live without God, but not without thinking about holiness in the universe.


2021 ◽  
pp. 89-106
Author(s):  
Bruce Ledewitz

America is now in the Age of Evasion. Our public events are scripted and phony. Our political rhetoric is filled with lies. Our symbols are fake. Our proposals are unreal. Virtue signaling has replaced reflection. We avoid deep questions, such as, in the abortion controversy, when life begins. Cancel culture has drowned rational debate. Politics are narrow and frozen. We long for more in our public life but feel that it is out of reach. We evade out of fear of the consequences of the Death of God. We do not want to acknowledge how alone we feel. We need a new story.


2021 ◽  
pp. 30-49
Author(s):  
Bruce Ledewitz

The usual explanations of the breakdown in American public life fail to account for our current condition. They do, however, point to an underlying national spiritual crisis. The economy has not actually performed that badly. Big money is not that influential. The pathologies of social media are symptoms of our problems, not sources. Even racism is only a part of our national distress. Both sides claim the unreasonableness of the other side is the problem. These opponents have weakened the institutions of government. Some observers have given up trying to explain our condition, pointing to human nature, when human nature should be constant, or to historical cycles that simply occur. Our crisis is part of the failure of the Enlightenment and capitalism to sustain meaningful human life in secular society. The problem is the Death of God.


Edmond Halley was a Londoner born and bred, he married into a London family and lived most of his life in or near London: London made his life and work possible. Halley’s public life is generally well known and documented, yet there are important gaps in the record. One was his survey and fortification of harbours in Dalmatia in 1703, at the direct command of Queen Anne, and his consequent election to the Savilian chair of geometry in 1704. 1 More generally, it has been recognized that Halley could not have done many of the things he did without influential support from powerful patrons. 2 In this article I suggest that the source of his patronage is to be found in his London connections. Halley moved in very influential circles from his schooldays at St Paul’s. He was in the party that chose the site of the Royal Observatory at Greenwich in 1675. 3 King Charles II himself promoted his expedition to St Helena and, on his return, Halley received the AM degree from Oxford at the command of Charles. It was Halley, rather than Pepys, the close associate of James II and President of the Royal Society, who presented Principia to the King. Halley seems at first to have come under suspicion from William III but had the support of Queen Mary for his later Atlantic and Channel cruises, on which, although a civilian, he was in command of Paramore and commissioned as a post-captain in the Royal Navy. His Adriatic surveys were at the direct command of Queen Anne. I believe that to understand how Halley could rely on such support we must look at his London background and connections, and in this article I consider his extended family, his links with the Tower and his associations with the London trading companies, in the early part of his life before he went to Oxford in 1704.


2018 ◽  
Vol 65 (2) ◽  
pp. 17-54
Author(s):  
Marek Maciejewski

The subject of this paper is political elitism (or the existence of political elites) and the shaping of that concept from the ancient times to the 20th century, on the example of the views of its main creators from Plato, through Claude Henri de Saint-Simon, Georges Sorel, or Max Weber to Czesław Znamierowski. Particular focus has been put on the ideas developed at the turn of the 19th century, including those of Robert Michels, Gaetano Mosca and Vilfredo Pareto, which the author considers to be the fullest and most original. All those ideas have been based on the presumption that the existence of elites is an obvious and indispensible fact since people are different and the natural inequality among them must be maintained to comply with intellectual, moral, or religious premises. Although, practically, all concepts of elitism have been critical of the Marxist theory or any other form of socialist ideology, most theorists hold an opinion that political elites should not isolate themselves in a closed circle, but allow at least some representatives of the other parts of society to join in. Only such ‘circulation’, they claim, can ensure durability of the elites and their survival. Some more recent concepts of political elites go further and propose that interests and aspirations of social masses be taken into account as broadly as possible. This view is a consequence of a conviction that elitism understood as a manner in which political structures function has disappeared and we are currently dealing with an objective process where different types of elites are emerging to create ‘lesser elites’, which – as the process of democratisation of public life continues – results in a gradual departure from the idea of government composed of excellent minds and personalities.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document