Lessing’s Nathan the Wise implies a conception of a universal religion of reason which is typical of the enlightenment period. Even though, Lessing does not dismiss existing religions in his work, I will argue that his humanistic religion conflicts with the idea of identity that is necessary to define one’s humanity. Thus, Lessing’s understanding of religion is not feasible since it overlooks the basis of religion. First, I will state that the play refocuses our intention on manhood and humanity. Next, I will explain how Lessing tries to reconcile religious beliefs with his humanistic religion through reason and tolerance. Finally, I will demonstrate how such a reconciliation is not practicable and how Lessing’s conception of a universal religion of reason does not answer the questions at the basis of religion.
Nathan the Wise appears as a praising of humanity. Lessing insists on the grandeur of man and the scope of his actions. He critics men who associate heroic actions with divine miracles. Nathan is outraged by Recha’s perception of the Templar. Indeed, she compares the Templar to an angel and is thankful to God for saving her. Unlike Recha, Nathan insists on thanking the Templar only. According to him, there is no need to «call the angels into play» for it only results from human pride. Thus, Nathan is paralleling Nietzsche’s stance on genius. According to Nietzsche, attributing genius to others confirms our own vanity and pride. Indeed, it masks our incapacity to express such a talent by characterising it as abnormal. Likewise, to associate the Templar’s action to miracle disguises our own cowardice by connecting courage with divinity. Consequently, Lessing, through the character of Nathan, reaffirms human strength and ...
... middle of paper ...
...is not viable since it does not answer fundamental questions inherent to human beings: Why am I what I am? Why am I here?
In conclusion, Lessing’s Nathan the Wise argues in favour of a religion in which the focus is redirected on human beings. His conception of a universal religion of reason refers to a praising of human reason without ignoring existing religious beliefs. However, it appears that these two conceptions of religion cannot coexist. Moreover, Lessing’s conception of a universal religion of reason seems to fail to understand the nature of religion, which is to apprehend the causes of one’s existence.
Works Cited
Nietzsche, Friedrich. "Human, All Too Human by Friedrich Nietzsche: From the Soul of Artists and Writers." Classic Authors.net / Great Literature Online. Web. 18 Feb. 2011. .
In Nathaniel Hawthorne short story “Young Goodman Brown,” he takes us on a journey of the human heart, in which he would later coin the phrase that “there is a fund of evil in every human heart”. Though the story is filled with dark gloomy imagery, Hawthorne was able to keep us wanting to know more base on the fact its Salem village. With the uses of symbolism, the author incorporate nature such as the “deep forest”, and “Faith” the newly wife of young Goodman brown working hand in hand to illustrate the purpose of the story. Hawthorne shows us that our faith should not dictate base on the perception of others, as a result, would be compromised and weaken.
If all religions are designed to be a delivery system for dogmatic practices, then how is there true freedom, true free will to believe in one religion over another? Dr. Ronald Schechter of the College of William and Mary, an editor and translator of Nathan the Wise, wrote an introduction to the book in which he explains how Lessing “used the plurality of religious faiths to plant the seeds of doubt in the minds of readers about the superiority of Christianity” (Schechter 12), which is one of the primary reason this book was so contested in Germany. The concept of religious equality was important to Lessing, and so he created his characters to be religiously diverse and respectful of other religious cultures. Schechter compares Lessing’s work with those of other Enlightenment writers like Montesquieu and Voltaire, who Lessing claimed preached the equality of religions, but when it came to their writings, practiced another claim. Although he shared their ideals that religions should be written as equal, Lessing took it a step further and within his writing of Nathan the Wise actually invited “readers to doubt the superiority of their religion, [and] he showed considerably more respect for all three religions than Enlightenment writers typically did” (14).
Friedrich Nietzsche was a critic and a German Philosopher from the 18th century. Nietzsche was the father of psychoanalysis and he formulated several philosophical concepts that have greatly contributed to the understanding of human nature. Nietzsche ideas had been misinterpreted by many people over time specifically, due to his style of writing. Nietzsche style of writing was adopted to strengthen his arguments on various controversial topics. In this paper, I will discuss Nietzsche’s idea of naturalistic morality, master morality, self-mastery morality, and how they connect with the affirmation of nature and strength.
Solomon, Robert C., ‘Nietzsche ad hominem: Perspectivism, personality, and ressentiment,' in The Cambridge Companion to Nietzsche (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996), 180-222.
A. “The Church in the Age of Enlightenment and Revolution”. Verbal Conscience. March 2012. Web. The Web.
P. 38-39, Friedrich Nietzsche, “Beyond Good and Evil” Cambridge Texts in the History of Philosophy, translated by Judith Norman, Cambridge University Press, 2002
In 1887, two years before succumbing to utter madness, existential philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche writes his ethical polemic, On the Genealogy of Morals, in search of a man with the strength to evolve beyond humanity: But from time to time do ye grant me. one glimpse, grant me but one glimpse only, of something perfect, fully realized, happy, mighty, triumphant, of something that still gives cause for fear! A glimpse of a man that justifies the existence of man. for the sake of which one may hold fast to the belief in man! Nietzsche, 18.
Nietzsche, Friedrich On the Genealogy of Morals contained in: Nietzsche Basic Writings Of Nietzsche translated and edited Walter Kaufman. New York: The Modern Library, 1992.
In a time of religious upheaval in Europe, post-Lutheran theses and in the midst of political revolutions, Voltaire offers another option to the religious institutions of this time in his novel Candide: deism. He poses this option by satirizing organized religions to illustrate their corruption and hypocrisy.
On the other hand, Hume entertains the situation that “it is God himself, … which we erroneously attribute to our own power and efficacy” (47). Hume argues that “there must arrise a strong suspicion … (when we arrive at) conclusions so extraordinary, and so remote from common life and experience” (48). Further, Hume illustrates that no matter how ignorant we are “of the manner in which bodies operate on each other” we are equally ignorant of the supreme mind; we should reject the more unintelligible prospect (48).
For many years, the idea of what it means to have a “religious experience” has been greatly debated. Philosophers and great thinkers alike have grappled with many questions, such as what constituted a “religious experience” and the difference between that and a mystical experience. Part of this great debate involves two philosophers from a similar time period, William James and C.D Broad, who each saw these experiences, despite some similarities, as having different epistemic values. Broad offers that these religious experiences can provide strong validation of a higher existence, while James take more of a perennialist view, in which all of the religious traditions of the world have on common belief about the world; therefore, his idea of mystical experiences don’t truly support the idea of a supreme being. I believe that neither James nor Broad are completely correct and rather the epistemic value of religious experiences lies somewhere in between their views.
Nietzsche’s Genealogy of Morals can be assessed in regards to the three essays that it is broken up into. Each essay derives the significance of our moral concepts by observing
In Chapter 1 of Keith Ward’s, The Case for Religion, Ward discusses Wilfred Cantwell Smith’s concept of the term “Religion” and his definition of the term and critically responds to it. In one of Smith’s own books, The Meaning and End of Religion, he discusses both his interpretation of the term “religion” and his opinion that the term should no longer be used. Smith’s skepticism of the term, together with his attempt at defining it, creates a contradiction that Ward critically unpicks and responds to.
In today’s modern western society, it has become increasingly popular to not identify with any religion, namely Christianity. The outlook that people have today on the existence of God and the role that He plays in our world has changed drastically since the Enlightenment Period. Many look solely to the concept of reason, or the phenomenon that allows human beings to use their senses to draw conclusions about the world around them, to try and understand the environment that they live in. However, there are some that look to faith, or the concept of believing in a higher power as the reason for our existence. Being that this is a fundamental issue for humanity, there have been many attempts to explain what role each concept plays. It is my belief that faith and reason are both needed to gain knowledge for three reasons: first, both concepts coexist with one another; second, each deals with separate realms of reality, and third, one without the other can lead to cases of extremism.
This is not a valid argument and doesn’t help in any way for people to describe why we are the way we are. Although that might not be the role of philosophy, I would contend that it plays an important part in understanding a theory of how it is we should live our life.