Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

INTRODUCTION: IMPLICATIONS OF AMBIVALENCE

INTRODUCTION: IMPLICATIONS OF AMBIVALENCE Page 37 PEACE AND MIND Seriatim Symposium on Dispute, Conflict, and Enmity Part 4: Secret Accomplices Jeffrey M. Perl, Linda Hutcheon, Roxanne L. Euben, William Weber, Rom Harré, Nikki Slocum, Manfred Frank, Christopher Jones, David Nirenberg INTRODUCTION: IMPLICATIONS OF AMBIVALENCE Atheism in France is no special interest of mine, but Atheism in France is, and has been since its publication in 1990. Volume 1 of Alan Charles Kors’s study is subtitled The Orthodox Sources of Disbelief, and its contention—that the learned culture of Catholic orthodoxy generated “its own antithesis, the possibility of which it always had carried within”— impressed me as only too plausible. I had myself written, some years before, about romantic and modern aesthetics as a function, effect, or even objective of the internal logic of classicism (an upshot of this redescription being that romantics and classicists could be adversaries only cluelessly or in retrospect). That theologians and atheists of the Enlightenment were natural enemies seemed, as Kors’s book showed it to be, an idea too lucid to be likely. Catholic learning in seventeenth-century France was Thomist, hence Aristotelian; every thesis, in Aristotelian dialectic, entails a well-defended antithesis; assertion, therefore, of belief in God demanded an http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Common Knowledge Duke University Press

INTRODUCTION: IMPLICATIONS OF AMBIVALENCE

Perl, Jeffrey M.
Common Knowledge , Volume 9 (1) – Jan 1, 2003
Download PDF
5 pages

Loading next page...
 
/lp/duke-university-press/introduction-implications-of-ambivalence-0u4hWz2MTR
Publisher
Duke University Press
Copyright
Copyright 2003 by Duke University Press
ISSN
0961-754X
eISSN
1538-4578
DOI
10.1215/0961754X-9-1-37
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Page 37 PEACE AND MIND Seriatim Symposium on Dispute, Conflict, and Enmity Part 4: Secret Accomplices Jeffrey M. Perl, Linda Hutcheon, Roxanne L. Euben, William Weber, Rom Harré, Nikki Slocum, Manfred Frank, Christopher Jones, David Nirenberg INTRODUCTION: IMPLICATIONS OF AMBIVALENCE Atheism in France is no special interest of mine, but Atheism in France is, and has been since its publication in 1990. Volume 1 of Alan Charles Kors’s study is subtitled The Orthodox Sources of Disbelief, and its contention—that the learned culture of Catholic orthodoxy generated “its own antithesis, the possibility of which it always had carried within”— impressed me as only too plausible. I had myself written, some years before, about romantic and modern aesthetics as a function, effect, or even objective of the internal logic of classicism (an upshot of this redescription being that romantics and classicists could be adversaries only cluelessly or in retrospect). That theologians and atheists of the Enlightenment were natural enemies seemed, as Kors’s book showed it to be, an idea too lucid to be likely. Catholic learning in seventeenth-century France was Thomist, hence Aristotelian; every thesis, in Aristotelian dialectic, entails a well-defended antithesis; assertion, therefore, of belief in God demanded an

Journal

Common Knowledge – Duke University Press

Published: Jan 1, 2003

There are no references for this article.