You are on page 1of 1

Cameron Freeman

18 de mayo a la(s) 21:23 Adelaida (Australia) Editado

A brilliant lecture today, unfortunately the time zones (it was 3-5 am in Australia) meant that I wasn't
able to make the live discussion. I want to examine here the stakes of this post post-modern reading
of Hegel for critical theology and invite some further discussion for those who are interested ( Carl
Raschke, Aaron Murphy). In this attempt that Creston C Davis mentioned to move beyond
propositional God-language (with it's pre-given theological assumptions) in my own research I've
taken the language-events of Jesus in the early gospel traditions as a point of departure. The
parables and sayings of Jesus provide us a source of evidence for what might, just perhaps,
constitute the voice-print of God. Anyway, after listening to this lecture, it seems pretty clear the
narratives and language-events of the historical Jesus dovetail with this new reading of Hegel in
being structured by a paradoxical shock/rupture that explodes our assumptions about the Real and
calls out the failure of the subject to establish its own self-knowledge with any kind of dialectical
synthesis or closure. So in the same vein as Professor Randi Rashcover's reading of Hegel outlined
today, the paradoxical narratives of Jesus also leave us with an empty space of knowing without a
fixed or stable center of meaning (e.g. God, Essence, Being) and an invitation to action that
acknowledges the impossibility of living in a world that will ever verify our assumptions about it. I still
have a couple of questions/comments though: 1) the parables of Jesus remain within a narrative
structure that deploys dialectical opposition (without synthesis) to what extent does Hegels Science
if Logic (e.g. Being Nothing Becoming) work itself out while also presuming some kind of
dialectical difference at it's core (identity/difference, subject/substance, essence/accident) seems
inescapable at some level? 2) In relation to Zizeks reading of Hegel and Christianity, in what sense
is the self unplugged from or at odds with the network of relations that the self is coming to know in
the process of it's emancipation? 3) Thinking for Hegel is enslaved by the emotions or affects insofar
as we are bound by our material interests and only liberated in clear self-reflection. But can this
continual rupturing of our assumptions about reality that the Science of Logic unpacks ever be
unencumbered by emotions or affects? Sure this process puts into question our material interests
and passions, but is this shattering of our assumptions about he world not also a profoundly
emotional upheaval?