DELIVERED TEN MINUTES INTO THE SHOW AS A THREE MINUTE SPEED LECTURE

So, the last 1000 years of western philosophical thought in three minutes. Pay attention at the back.

Reason is the starting point.

Prior to the 13th century and a guy called Thomas Aquinas, a monk of all things, in a nutshell, God knows everything and we know nothing. The domination of the Roman Catholic Church on all things, Spanish inquisition etc. etc.

Then after Aquinas, a fundamental break in knowledge occurs. A paradigm shift, if u will: Aquinas said, hold on, we’ve been blessed with minds; maybe we can use them to understand ourselves and our universe better.

This eventually leads to the point where Man BECOMES AUTONOMOUS in his thinking. We can trace this through Descartes, Hegel and Kant (who was a right Kant), each one trying to find a unified field of knowledge, a set of rules, that explains everything. Till we get to the existentialists.

Now they are really important, because they are the ones that first recognized where all this thinking ends. They hated the speculative philosophy, they called it, of Hegel and Kant. They thought that this concentrating on trying to define the "essence" of man was totally wrong, because it ignored the most important thing: Existence. That’s the first thing we are aware of. Then, maybe, why we are here. That comes after. They reverse Descartes, I think therefore I am, and say instead, I am but I’m not sure I think. We exist, but our essence, who we are, what we are, why we are is up for debate. It is permanently in question.

And they say all this because they feel philosophy, by the 19th century has only shown that there is an END TO REASON. It doesn't explain everything. Reason takes us to the edge, but beyond that, there is the unknown, the beyond, the unexplainable, the void. The abyss. This is the term they used. And if one stays at the edge, without leaping into the abyss, and thereby face it and try and cross it, essentially the only conclusion to draw is that life is essentially meaningless. Nihilism, in other words. Now, the two grandfathers of existentialism were Nietzsche and Kierkegaard and both, in identifying this abyss, sought in their own way to cross it, bridge it. But they came at it from totally different perspectives. One believed in God, and one felt that we had killed God. So we have Kierkegaard and his "leap of faith" and an effort to return to God and Nietzsche’s superman, (note how these two terms are so familiar to u), the Nietzchean quest  for man to "overcome himself", become who he is, transcend the abyss in himself, and become the ubermensch. One ended up mad, the other suffered from chronic depression all his life. It ain't always what it’s cracked up to be, being a philosopher.

Now, to bring us totally up-to-date, we come to the post-structuralists, or what they are usually referred to as the post-modernists. People like Baudriallard, who’s the guy that the Wachowski Brothers plagiarized in The Matrix, with his idea of the simulacra. The simulacrum is like the matrix. Explained. And what they do is simply lock us in the tomb, deeper and deeper into the abyss and throw away the key, by dismantling the very means of escaping: Truth itself.

How? Through demonstrating that there is no guarantee of meaning in language anymore. And that’s a bitch because of our obvious dependency on it. The vicious cycle of legitimization: who says the truth is the truth? U say its one thing, I say its another, but we can’t both be right. However, who legitimizes the word “truth”, when this same word is the very thing in question. Round and round we go, then, until essentially we reach the conclusion that universal truths, meta-narratives in post-modern language, are no longer possible anymore. There doesn’t appear to be anyway of knowing anything. Nihilism defined as the belief that life is essentially meaning-less.

Deeper and deeper into the abyss, then, with reason clearly no longer able to catch us...

 

 

 ,