Schelling, Bruno, and the sacred abyss
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 21788053 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Dale E Snow (Loyola University Maryland, corresponding author) |
| Year | 2024 |
| Volume | 34 |
| Issue | 1 |
| Pages | 203-212 |
| Publication date | 2024-01-02 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | No |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Intellectual History Review (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 1749-6977 • E-ISSN: 1749-6985 |
| Publisher | Informa UK Limited (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.1080/17496977.2023.2285246 |
| OpenAlex | W4389571578 |
| Language | EN |
| References cited | 8 |
Schelling's "Bruno" provides a provocative illustration of his conviction that early modern science has adopted a radically flawed and impoverished concept of matter, and therefore of nature. The "Bruno" has been read as a settling of scores with Fichte, with whom Schelling had recently quarreled, and as a critique of Kant's idealism. I propose to look at how the dialogue reveals Schelling's developing understanding of pantheism, as reflected in the arguments he borrows from Giordano Bruno and then transforms. "Bruno" is a dialogue with four interlocutors, and ranges widely. I will discuss two central sections, in which the two main roles are played by Bruno (Schelling) and Lucian (Fichte). Lucian begins by restating their agreement in an earlier section of the dialogue that when it is considered in the light of the supreme idea, the distinction of knowledge and being is untrue, a tantalizing claim. He then goes on to pose the question of how it can be possible to understand the departure of the finite from the eternal
Conviction · Epistemology · Idealism · Classical Philosophy and Thought · Kantian Philosophy and Modern Interpretations · Law · Philosophy · Seventeenth-Century Political and Philosophical Thought
| Citation velocity | historical |
|---|---|
| Highly cited | No |