Jargon, Bullshit, sinnlos

Theodor W. Adorno’s Jargon of Authenticity (1964) is one of the bestknown, but also most controversial works of Critical Theory. Many philosophers, writers and editorialists have attacked the text in recent decades and accused Adorno of cultivating his own “jargon”. In his book, Adorno develops a critique of metaphysical and theological language, which he observed in Germany from the 1920s up to the 1960s. In my paper, I argue that the mode of critique Adorno deploys is still relevant today, even if its object has largely disappeared. This becomes clear in comparison to the language criticism of the analytical tradition, namely logical empiricism or Harry G. Frankfurt’s critique of “bullshit,” which are comparably more widespread today in academic debates. While Adorno examines linguistic expressions in terms of their social content and places them in a historical constellation, the critique of “bullshit” following Frankfurt remains constrained to a personal approach. In the language criticism of logical empiricism, on the other hand, the possibility of understanding linguistic phenomena as expressions of social conditions is still present. From this comparison, much can be learned for an up-to-date language criticism.

Should we Dispense with the Idea of Personhood? The Impoverishment of Philosophical-Theological Language

«Who is a person?» is a question with moral, theological and even legal consequences, but it seems now apparently entangled in intractable puzzles; therefore, it has become frequent to suggest that we should entirely dispense with the idea of «personhood». This essay argues that the notions of «person», and rational «nature» which are essential in theological exploration, cannot be easily discarded from the philosophical vocabulary either. The paper argues that the preferred route of access should preserve the noetic heterogeneity of beings, because it is the current «scientistic» straitjacket that has made very articulation of the question fruitless and impoverished.

Introduction

The debate between Luther and Erasmus was basically about to what degree, if any, a sinner can freely prepare him/herself for the reception of divine grace. When rejecting the bull of Pope Leo X, Luther had used an exaggerating deterministic or necessitarian theological language which alarmed Erasmus. Erasmus concentrated on the application of God’s grace into the human situation “from below”; Luther, on the contrary, focused on the theocentric nature of grace “from above.” Erasmus promoted the commonly accepted rational view of Late Medieval Catholic soteriology: “to those who do what they can God does not deny his grace,” God’s justice requires that he necessarily grant grace to anyone who freely prepares him/herself to receive it, while Luther spoke the language of Biblical realism: Although human will is free in relation to the natural world, the human being is captivated by the overwhelming power of unfaith, sin, and Satan, being incapable of changing his/her ultimate psychic orientation. In his criticism Luther rehabilitated Augustine’s teaching on the radical limits of human freedom and on the Pneumatological dynamism of divine grace, the view neglected in Medieval theology. Research on Luther’s The Bondage of the Will has not recognized the strong Pneumatological and Trinitarian accent of his theology. Instead, the contradiction between Luther and Erasmus has been explained in philosophical terms such as free will, determinism, necessity, and predestination; this has not revealed the true nature of the profoundly theological conflict between the two “forms of Christianity.” The work at hand makes critical comments on Luther research of the last hundred years and launches the task of a detailed and thorough systematic-theological analysis of the major treatise of Luther.

What is truth? A Johannine theological epistemology

This essay begins with Pilate's question – ‘What is truth?’ – and notes the way it sets us up to long for a second-person experience of Jesus. I argue that this longing is met in the literary function of the Beloved Disciple, which prepares us for our own second-person encounter with Jesus. This raises some puzzles: can the Spirit convey to us a second-person encounter with Jesus? How do we know we have been so addressed by Jesus? Given John's above/below dualism, what does such an encounter mean for our theological language? I answer these questions in turn.

The Prophet and the Poet: Richard Shaull and the Shaping of Rubem Alves’s Liberative Theopoetics

This article explores the intersection between history, mission, and theology in Latin America by shedding light on the encounter between North American missionary Richard Shaull and Brazilian theologian and poet Rubem Alves. It examines Shaull’s impact on Alves as Alves became, first, one of the founders of Latin American liberation theology and, later, one of its challengers as he moved away from normative theological language towards theopoetics. In this article, I underscore particular snapshots of Alves’ vast work, noting that the images of the poet and the prophet that permeate much of it are not mutually exclusive. I argue that Rubem Alves’ provocative work remains an important resource for a theory of action that takes subjectivity and beauty seriously. Throughout this article, Shaull and Alves are presented as different but complementary thinkers, representative of Alves’ prophetic and poetic types. It is argued that a closer look at the similarities and complementarities in the works of this duo may provide us with new insights through which Rubem Alves’ poetic voice and Richard Shaull’s prophetic persistence can come together as resources for the reimagination of our hopes for a more beautiful and just world.

Interpretations of Spinoza in early Russian Marxism

The roots of the controversial readings of Spinoza during Soviet times date back to the history of Russian Marxism. Spinoza was a most influential figure whom different Marxist currents and thinkers wanted to have on their side. This article examines the most relevant interpretations. First, it sketches some fundamental traits of Plekhanov’s understanding of Spinoza’s ontology and epistemology, from his critique of German revisionism at the end of the 1890s to his polemics against empiriocriticism and its Russian impact. Spinoza was a particularly relevant and authoritative thinker for the so-called “Machists” as well, and some of their different interpretations are analyzed as representing their critical approach to Marxism. Finally, Lunacharskiiʼs discussion is considered as a peculiar alternative to Plekhanov’s orthodox understanding not only of Spinoza but of Marxism itself. While Plekhanov judged Spinoza’s “theological” language a relic of his epoch, Lunacharskii maintained that it was precisely his “religious” feelings that made Spinoza a forerunner of Marxism.

The Word Refreshed

This chapter takes its cue from the vision of music adumbrated by the previous three essayists: in which music is seen as depending on a ‘faith in an order of things that exceeds the logic of statement and counterstatement’, arising from an embodied dwelling in the world which is pre-conceptual, pre-theoretical. As such, music has the capacity to free us from the kind of alienating relation to our physical environment that an over-dependence on instrumental language brings, and free us for a more fruitful indwelling of it that has been largely lost to modernity. This resonates with broadly biblical-theological view of humanity’s intended relation to the cosmos, as exemplified in the concept of New Creation in Christ. This essay returns to language, considered in this light: how can music, and thinking about music, enrich language? Specifically, how might music facilitate a deeper understanding of the way ‘God-talk’ operates? It is argued that music can offer a powerful witness to the impossibility (and danger) of imagining we can grasp or circumscribe the divine (the antithesis of human freedom). More positively, it can greatly enrich our use (and understanding) of existing theological language, and generate fresh language that enables a more faithful perception of, and participation in the realities it engages.