Hölderlin's Metaphysics (Lecture)

[@Andrew87394]

Thank you so much for this video.Not an easy listen,but essential for lovers of Holderlin not trained in philosophical discourse.

[@victorgrauer5834]

Thanks so much for this remarkably lucid summary of Holderlin's thought. What at first might seem obscure and even mystical turns out to be quite sensible. I also now understand better why Holderlin's poetry has disappointed me so much. Because, in my (admittedly minority) view, the problem with the poetry is that Holderlin is not really a poet after all, but a thinker attempting to express his thoughts in poetic form. And so in many cases the poetry can be appreciated only by someone who already is familiar with his philosophy. This explains also Nietzsche's and Heidegger's interest in his work. To me so many lines in his poetry fail to engage with language in a manner required by poetry but are simply attempts to express ideas and thus for me fall rather flat.

[@brunischling9680]

Could you give examples? What kind of language is required by poetry.? Take Rilke and Brecht for instance, who are both poets, but use completely different modes of expression

[@thomaslolll2]

Thank you so much :) Reminded me of Deleuze saying that the 'objective' of art is to reunite the sacred and the profane.

[@pigshitpoet]

what a great lecture! thanks for this! much enjoyed

[@johnmartin2813]

The defining characteristic of poetry is memorable wisdom. By which I mean that if it is memorable wisdom you are looking for you will only find it in poetry. Since philosophy is the love of wisdom then it follows that philosophy is intimately related to poetry. Poetry is giving us what philosophers say they are looking for. (Unless of course they are telling lies!)

[@donoflee]

Full Transcript: goo.gl/B7F8SR

[@thomassimmons1950]

Beautiful. Been reading Bulgakov: (The Tragedy of Philosophy). Very much the laymen philosophy student here; but it does strike me there are some resonances between Hölderlin and Bulgakov in the sense of the necessity of the copula..feels me?

[@edwardkanterian5113]

Thank you very much for this suggestion, I will make sure I will study Bulgakov's book.

[@thomassimmons1950]

@@edwardkanterian5113 Cheers!

[@katkent9582]

I am looking for a proper translation in English of 'Dichterberuf' . Any chance someone can help? Thanks in advance. Kat

[@jeanthill8555]

Beauty and knowledge are both part of the Nature of God. Thus, poetry is how God thinks...

[@garybaste3589]

this is one of my favorite qoutes on youtube. thank you so much! have you ever written a book?

[@AtheneNoctua7]

...and music is how he feels. Ich habe mich dem Werk Hölderlins immer in einem musikalischen Sinne versucht zu nähern.

[@anhumblemessengerofthelawo3858]

Top notch

[@aegrotuscarnifex3169]

In Jim Overbeck's The Autobiography of God Almighty, he discusses in detail how Hoelderlin's philosophy led to his madness.

[@3x4architecture77]

Aegrotus Carnifex I just downloaded it, what the hell is this?!

[@JimOverbeckgenius]

@@3x4architecture77 It's the super-genius of a deific human.

[@fairydoll.2052]

😮

[@matejasuban2393]

[@johansigg3869]

God is not, "at best, a regulative principal" for Kant. That is an atheist's fantasy Otherwise, this is a great lecture!

[@edwardkanterian5113]

B608: Wenn wir nun dieser unserer Idee, indem wir sie hypostasiren, so ferner nachgehen, so werden wir das Urwesen durch den bloßen Begriff der höchsten Realität als ein einiges, einfaches, allgenugsames, ewiges etc., mit einem Worte, es in seiner unbedingten Vollständigkeit durch alle Prädicamente bestimmen können. Der Begriff eines solchen Wesens ist der von Gott, in transscendentalem Verstande gedacht; und so ist das Ideal der reinen Vernunft der Gegenstand einer transscendentalen Theologie, so wie ich es auch oben angeführt habe. Indessen würde dieser Gebrauch der transscendentalen Idee doch schon die Grenzen ihrer Bestimmung und Zulässigkeit überschreiten. Denn die Vernunft legte sie nur als den Begriff von aller Realität der durchgängigen Bestimmung der Dinge überhaupt zum Grunde, ohne zu verlangen, daß alle diese Realität objectiv gegeben sei und selbst ein Ding ausmache. Dieses letztere ist ein *bloße Erdichtung*.

[@edwardkanterian5113]

B596: Was uns ein Ideal ist, war dem Plato eine Idee des göttlichen Verstandes, ein einzelner Gegenstand in der reinen Anschauung desselben, das Vollkommenste einer jeden Art möglicher Wesen und der Urgrund aller Nachbilder in der Erscheinung.

[@edwardkanterian5113]

The text is pretty clear.

[@johansigg3869]

@@edwardkanterian5113 1) The point here, naturally, is to show off your German and your knowledge of the First Critique, but I don’t quite understand why you would limit yourself TO the First Critique. I’m sure you understand that Kant’s thought developed much further past the First Critique, especially as he himself admitted that the project wasn’t entirely successful. I will be reproducing from the English. From the Second Critique: “now, a being capable of actions in accordance with the representation of laws is an intelligence (a rational being) in the causality of such a being in accordance with this representation of laws is his will. (…) …there is enough, not nearly the warrant but also the necessity, as I need connected with duty, to presuppose the possibility of this highest good, which, since it is possible, only under the condition of the existence of God, connects the presupposition of the existence of god inseparably with duty; that is, it is morally necessary to assume the existence of God.” (5:125 - 5:126)

[@johansigg3869]

@@edwardkanterian5113 2) From Religion Within the Boundaries of Mere Reason: “Morality, thus inevitably leads to religion, and through religion, it extends itself to the idea of a mighty moral law giver outside the human being, and who is will the final end (of the creation of the world) is what can, and at the same ought to be the final human end.” (Preface, 6:6) “This idea of a moral ruler of the world as a task for our practical reason. Our concern is not so much to know what he is in himself (his nature) but what he has for us as moral beings… [further down] Now, in accordance with this need of practical reason, the universal, true religious faith is faith in God as the Almighty, Creator of heaven and earth, i.e. morally as holy law giver; as the preserver of the human race, as its benevolent ruler, and moral guardian; as the administrator of his own holy laws i.e. as just judge.” (6:139- 6:140)