WarandSac

rifi
ce:Compar
ingJ
anPat
očka
andRenéGir
ard

Wo
lf
gangPa
lav
er
Uni
versi
tyofInnsbr
uck*
wol
fgang.
pala
ve r
@uibk.
ac.
at

ABSTRACT.Thi se ssaycompar esJ an Patoč ka’

sc hallenging refl
e cti
onson
warand s acrif
ic ewi thRe néGi rard’
sc ul tur
alant hropology .Bot ht hese
thi
nke rs que stione d the us ual unde r s
tanding of t heset e rms and
emphas izedhow s t
ronglyconfli
ctsdomi natehumanl i
fe.Conc erningwar ,
bothr ecognizedt hedange rsofs eeki
ngs ecuri
tyandc omfortonl y.The se
parall
e l
sint hewor kofPat očkaandGi r
ards houl d,howe ver,notbl urt he
diff
erencest hem.The mos ti mpor tant di f
ferences te
ms f r om t he i
r
att
itudest owardsMa rt
inHe i
degger.De spitethef actthatPatoč kat r
iedt o
surpassHe idegge r,hewass ti
llcommi ttedtohi sbas icframe wor k.Li ke
He i
de gger,Pat očka c ri
ti
cized onto-theology and t reated dea th as an
unsurmount able bar ri
erc lose butnoti denti
calt o He idegge r’s being
towardsde ath.Cont rarytoPat očka,Gi rarddi s
tanc edhi mselfr epeatedly
andc ontinuous lyf r
om He idegger,whom hes aw asar epresentativeoft he
archaicsac r
edwi thitsrootinviolence.

KEYWORDS.War
;Sac
rif
ice
;Pat
očka;Gi
rar
d;He
ide
gge
r.

* Corr
espondenc
e:Wolf
gangPalaver–De par
tmentofSystemat
icThe
ology
,Uni
ver
sit
yof
Inns
br uck,Kar
l-
Rahner
-Pl
atz1,6020I
nnsbruc
k,Aust
ria.

MetodoVol.6,n.2(
2018)
DOI
:10.
19079/metodo.
6.2.
41
42 Wo
lf
gangPa
lav
er

Jan Pat očka ’sr ef l

ec t
ionson warand s a cri
ficec hal le nge t he us ual
We stern at titude t hatr ejectsbot h oft he m f orgood r easons ,j ust
lookingatt hevi ole nthi storyoft het we ntie t
hc ent ur y,whi chPat oč ka
1
j
us t
lyc a l
led«t hec rue lwor l
doft wowar sandt erribler evolut ions ».
Ther e j
ectionofwara nds ac r
ificef oundpopul are xpr es sioni nal ineof
JohnLe nnon’ sfamous1 971pe acehymn« Imagi ne »,whi chl ongsf ora
wor ldinwhi cht he r
ei s« nothi ngt oki llordi efor ».J ür genHabe rma s
expr essed as ome whats imi l
ari ns ight ,al beitmor ephi losophi cally
,
whe nhemai ntaine dt hatmode rn«r ationalmor alityput si tss ealon
2
the a bolit
ion ofs acrifi
c e
». Pat oč ka ’swor ka nd l ife que stion s uc h
premat ur er ejectionsofs ac r
ifi
ce .Heunde rstoodt hatame aningf ula nd
truthfullifemi ghtde mandt hes acrificeofone ’
sl i
fe ,andi tma ybet he
onlywa youtofc ont ri
but i
ngt ot hec ontinuat ionofwar .Inhi ss truggl e
forf r
e edom i nCze chos l
ovaki a,hebe cameamar tyranddi edast he
spoke spe r
s onofChar ta77s hor tlya f te
rapol ic
ei nt errogat ioni n19 77.
VáclavHa ve lc l
aime dj ustlythatPat očka’ss acrifi
c eofs elfr epre sents
ana ttit
udei nwhi chwec anf indamor ality,whi chi sne cessaryf ora l
l
3
politi
c si n our t ime s. Eve n mor e puzz li
ng t han how Pat oč ka
unde rstandss a cr
i f
icear ehi sre flectionsonwara ndpe ac e,inwhi chhe
clai
mst hatt heree xi stsal ongi ngf orpe acei nourmode rnwor ldt hat
gene r
ate sagai ns titsownc lai
msnot hingbutwar .
Todi scus st hes trengt hsandwe akne ssesofPat oč ka ’
sc onside rations,
thise ssayc ompar e sthe m wi thRe néGi rard’sc ultur ala nthropol ogy.
TheFr ench- Ame ricana nthropol ogi stde altt hroughouthi slifewi tht he
diff
icultpr obl em ofs acrifi
ce,be ginni ngwi tht hear chai cor iginsof
humanc ultur eandaddr essi
nga l
sohow t hemode r nwor l
dr el
at est o
sacrif
ice.Hes tartedwi thamor el ibe ralattitudeatt hebe ginningofhi s
wor k,re j
ec tingt het erms acrificef orJ esus ’
sgi vingofhi sl if
eont he

1 PATOČKA 2007,63.
2 HABERMAS1993,34.
3 HAVEL 1985,29:«’Therearesomethingswor
ths uf
fer
ingfor’
,JanPat
očkawrotes
hortly
beforehisde ath.It
hinkthatChar
tist
sunder
standthisnotonlyasPat
očka
’sle
gacy,but
als
oast hebe stexpl
anati
onofwhyt heydowhattheydo».

Me
todoVol
.6,n.2(
2018)
Wa
randSa
cri
fi
ce 4
3

cross .Onl yl aterdi dhemovet oamor ec ompr ehe nsiveunde rstandi ng

oft het e rms acr i
ficet hatc ompr ise st hear c haics acrifi
ceofot her sa s
we lla st hes elf-sacrifi
c et hata voi dss acrif
icingot he r
s.Gi r
ard’ sl ater
wor ksunde rline dt hene ces sityt odi stingui shbe t
we e nt hes acrifi
c eof
othe rsa nd s elf-sac r
ifice,a di sti
nc tion t hati sof ten ove rlooke d by
4
de alingonl ywi thGi rard’se arlierwor k. Hea lsounde rs t
oodt hatt he
compl ete abol ition ofs acr i
ficei si mpos sible,and t hata Chr i
s ti
an
appr oa chhast oa im att het rans f
or mat ionoft hear chai cs acrif
ic eof
5
othe rsint os elf-
gi ving.Gi rard’sl ate runde r
s tandingofs acri
ficec ome s
closet oPat oč ka’svi ew.
The r
ear eal sos t
rikingpar allelsbe twe enthe set wot hinke rsinr e gar d
towar .Pat očka ’ss idingwi tht hee xpe riencesoft heni ghte mphas ize d
thepr eponde r
anc eofc onf lict,insis tedont hene edofana wake ning
from «s pirit
ualc omf ort and c yni cism»,and c ame c l
oset ot he
symbol ism ofChr is
tian r e sur rection – a « new myt h» – whe re he
clai
me dt hati ti st rutht hatc annotbeove rcomeby de ath and a l
l
6
«inne rwor ldlyf orceofde struction».Wec ane asilyf i
ndc ount erpar t
s
tot he sei ns i
ght si n Gi r
ar d’swor k.Hi sl astbook Ba tt
lingt ot h
eEnd
takest het he oryofwarofCar lvonCl aus ewi tzasas t
ar ti
ngpoi ntt o
studyt hehi stor yofwarf rom Napol eont ot het woWor ldWar s ,global
7
terror i
sm,a ndt hewaraga i
ns tt error. LikePat očka,Gi rarddoe snot
seea ne asywa youtoft hes tateofwarbutdi scove rsa ne scalationt o
8
extre me st hatgove rnst hemode rn hi st
or yofwar . Girarde xplic i
tly
9
call
e dhi sla stbookan« apoc alypt icbook».Theapoc alypt i
cismt hat
char acterizesGi rar d’swhol ewor ki sduet ohi sobs ervationofhow
easily mi me ticr ivalry be t
we en human be i
ngse ndsup i n vi ole nc e.
Gi r
ar df ort hisve r yre asonc ritici
ze ds oc ialsc ie
nc esfors e ei
ngc onf l
ic t
s

4 GIRARD 2007b,1001,GIRARD 2008,215,GIRARD & F ARGE 2017,211.HAGEDORN 2015,115,

overl
ooksGi r
ard’slaterpositi
onwhe r
ehec lai
mst hatthegi f
tofone ’
sownde at
h«ge ts
ful
lylostinGi rard’
sappr oach».
5 PALAVER2 014.
6 PATOČKA 1996,PATOČKA 2002,84,PATOČKA 2016,178-
9.
7 GIRARD 2010.
8 Cf.PATOČKA 1 990,286:«Lec onfl
itn'estri
e ndenouve audansnot r
emonde ,mai silest
portélààl ‘
extrême.».
9 GIRARD 2010,ix.

Me
todoVol
.6,n.2(
2018)
44 Wo
lf
gangPa
lav
er

10
onlya se x ce ptionsa ndnotasaqui tenormals tateofhumanr elations .
Patočka l onge df orme ani ng i nl i
fet hathe c ons ide redf armor e
impor tantt hanmor al
ity.Si mi lar l
y ,Girarddi dnotr ec omme ndr e cipes
to ove rcome t he c risi
soft he mode rn wor ld buti ns i
s ted on t he
impor tanc eofme ani ng.I nhi sbookThi ngsHi ddens inc et heFo und ation
oftheWo rld,hewr ot e:«Re c ipe sar enotwhatwene e d,nordowene ed
11
tober ea ss ur ed–ourne edi st oe scapef r om me ani ngl essnes s». We
candi sc ove rhe r
eanat titudet hatove rcome st hel ongi ngf ors e cur it
y
andc omf or t,anat titudet hatPat oč kac ritic
ize da st hes ubmi ttingt o
the forc esoft he da y.Gi rard’ sl astbook e ndswi th ac allf ora n
awake ni ng t hatc hi me swe llwi th Patoč ka ’
sat titudeofas hat te ring
awake ni ng:«Weha vetowakeupours l
ee pingc ons cie nces .See ki ngt o
12
comf orti sa lwa yst oc ont ribut et ot hewor st». Pat oč ka’shopet hat
truthwi llbeabl etor esistt hef orce sofde s t
ruc tionf indsapar alle lina
13
quot efrom Pas calt hatt rut hwi llf i
nallybevi c t
or iousove rvi ol enc e.
A f inali mpor tant par a l
le lbe t
we en Pat oč ka and Gi rardc an be
discove redi nt heira ppr ec iationoft hewor kofDos toyevs ky.Gi rard
de al
tal readyi nhi sf ir
stbookwi tht heRus sianwr iterandde dic ated
14
the se cond book t o hi swor k. Patočka t ur nedi n hi sanal ys isof
Ma saryk’ sphi losophy ofr eligion t owar dsDos toye vs ky i n or de rt o
15
surpas sHe ide gger.
The semany par allel
si nt hewor k ofPat oč kaa nd Gi rar ds houl d,
howe ve r,notbl uri mpor tantdi ff
er encesbe t
we ent het wot hi nke rs .The
mos ti mpor tant di f
fere nc e s tems f rom t he ir at tit
ude t owar ds
He idegge r.De spitet hef ac tt hatPat očkat riedt os ur pas sHe i
de gge r,he
was s tillc ommi tted t o t he ba sicf rame wor k of t he Ge r man
philosophe r.Thi sismos tobvi ousi nhise ssayonMas ar yki nwhi c hhe
call
e d He ide gge r «a gr eat c ont empor aryt hinke r», pr aise d t he

10 GIRARD 2001,10-1.
11 GIRARD 1987b,446.
12 GIRARD 2010,217.
13 GIRARD 2007a,7.I ntheEngl ishtransl
ati
ont hemott
otakenfrom Pasc
alismi ssi
ngand
t
he rei
sonl yas hortenedvers i
onofi tt
hatisdis
cus
sedinthebookits
elf
:GIRARD 2010,80.
14 GIRARD 1966,256-89,GIRARD 2012.
15 PATOČKA 2015,cf.WARREN 2015.

Me
todoVol
.6,n.2(
2018)
Wa
randSa
cri
fi
ce 4
5

1
6
Intr
oduc t
iontoMe t
aphy s
ics,andr e
ferr
edtoot he r«masterfule ssays».
LikeHe i
degger,Patočkac riti
cize donto-
the ol
ogy ,t
reatedde atha sa n
unsur mountablebar ri
erc losebutnoti dent i
caltoHe ide gger ’
sbe i
ng
towar dsdeath,anddi dnotbe l
ie veinres
ur recti
onorl i
feaf te
rde athi n
17
thetraditi
onalChristi
ans ens e.
Cont r
aryt o Patočka,Gi rard di st
anced hi ms e
lfr epe at
e dly and
continuouslyfrom He i
de gge r
,whom hes a
wa sar epres
e ntativeoft he
archaics acr
ed withi tsr ootedne ssin violence.He wase speci
ally
cri
ticalofHe i
degger’sIntroducti
o ntoMe t
aphy s
ics:

Themor eIr ead Heide gge r,themor eIam c onvi

ncedt hat
He racli
tus ’
sc oncept of pól emos ,t he fathe
r and king of
everythi ng,is a pagan quas i-reve
lati
on ofan or i
ginalor
foundi ngmur der.He ide gge rhad an inkl i
ngoft hi
s,buthe
associatedi t wi t
h ac tuali nstances of Nazivi ol
ence .He
cons i
de redthene o-paganc harac t
erofNazi sm asame asureof
18
health, perhapsalsoofr eligiousr enewal.

Theimpor t
antc hapteronHöl derli
ni nGirard’sla s
tbooki sadi rec
t
att
emptt of r
eet he German poe tf r
om He ide gger’
si nterpretati
on,
1
9
whiche xc
luded alll at
e hymnson Chr ist
. Gi rarda ls
o di stanced
himselffrom ac r
iti
queofont o-theol
ogyt hatnol ongera llowe d an
understandingofbe inginthetradit
ionalChrist
ians ense
.Al thoughhe
share
dt he cri
ti
que a nd surpassi
ng ofHe i
degge rby t hinke rslike
Emmanue lLévinasandJ ean-
LucMar i
on,hesa wt hema sstil
lt ooc l
ose
totheGe rmanphi l
osopherandwa ntedtoremai nc l
osertoAugus t
ine
andThoma sAqui nas:

Both Le vinas and Ma r

ion a re too uncondit
ional
ly
He i
degger
ian in the
irc oncept
ion of be
ing. Hei
degger'
s
concept
ionofbeingisins
ightf
ulwithregar
dt oourage,but

16 PATOČKA 2015,125-6.
17 HAGEDORN 2011,257.
18 GIRARD 2014,83.
19 GIRARD 2010,120-35,c
f.O'
REGAN 2017.

Me
todoVol
.6,n.2(
2018)
46 Wo
lf
gangPa
lav
er

should notbei ndi sc

riminat
elyprojec
ted backontot hepast,
eveni f we do not ne ces
sari
lya gree with Thomas and
Augustineon e ver yt
hing.He i
degger'
sbe ing,Ithink,isthe
sacr
ed,t he violents acred.HisI ntr
oductio
nt o Metaphy
sic
s
20
showsthisclea
r l
y.

Gi rard al s o be li
eve d i n t he t radi ti
ona l Chr i
stian c oncept of
resur recti
on,ast hee ndingofhi sf i
rstbooke xpre ssedi twi t
haquot e
from Dos toyevs ky’snove lTheBr othersKa r amazov,hisfirstbookde aling
wi tht heBi bl
ee nde dbyquot i
ngEze kiel’sde s
criptionofr esur
rection
int heva lleyoft hede ad( Eze kiel73:1- 10),andhi se ssayont heBo okof
21
Jobe nde dbyhi ghl ight i
ngr esur r
e ct
ion. Whe re
asPat očkac amec lose
tounde rs
t andingl ifea st hef r
ui tofde ath,Girardr eferre dtoJ esus
Chr i
stt or ej
ecta llc onc ept st hatc l
ai m a nindi ssolublec onnection
22
be t
we e n de ath and l ife. Gi rards ide d wi t
ht radi t
ionalChr i
sti
anity
23
andi t
sc onvi cti
ont hat« de athi sc onque redbyt heChr ist».
Themor epr obl emat icas pe ctsi n Pat očka ’
swor kde pe nd tos ome
de gree on hi sc los ene s
st o He idegge r und hi s puzz ling a t
tit
ude
towar ds Chr istiani ty.I nt he f oll
owi ng,I wi ll di scus s Patočka ’
s
reflectionson s a crificeand warwi tht hehe lp ofGi rard’ smi me ti
c
the ory.Ia m,ofc our se,muc hmor ef ami liarwithGi rard’swor kthan
wi thPat očka ’
sphe nome nol ogy;andbe i
ngaCat hol icthe ologiananda
longt i
mes tudentofmi me tict heory,Ia m alsoc l
os ertot heFr ench-
Ame ricanant hropol ogist.De spit
et he sel imits
,It hinkIc anr ais
es ome
24
impor t
anti ss
ue sr e gar dingt heset wos e minalthi nke r
s. Iwi l
ls t
art
wi tht hemor epuz zl ings idei nPat oč ka’swor k–hi sat temptt of i
nd
solut i
onsf orourc ont empor arywor ldi nGr eekmyt h–a ndwi l
lthe n
reflectont heque stionofs e l
f-givingandhi ssacri
ficeofl ifei nasecond
step.
20 GIRARD 1996,283.
21 GIRARD 1966,314,GIRARD 1987b,447,GIRARD 1992,207.
22 GIRARD 1987b,231-2.
23 GIRARD 1992,207.
24 Contrarytomyownat tempt ,HAGEDORN 2015,pr esent
edinhise
ssayacri
ti
calr
eadingof
Girar
d’st heoryf r
om ape rspect
ivec l
osertoPat očka.Itrytoshow,however
,thatthe
dif
ferencesbetwe enGirarda ndPatočkami ghtbes mallert
hanHagedornass
ume s
.

Me
todoVol
.6,n.2(
2018)
Wa
randSa
cri
fi
ce 4
7

1.AbouttheFatherofAl
lThi
ngs
:Pat
očkaandGi
rar
d
onHeracl
itus
’spóle
mos
Patočka’si rritating e ss
ay «War s of t he Twe nti
eth Ce ntur y and
Twe ntiet
h Ce ntur y asWar »c ontainsr e markabl ei ns i
ght sint ot he
globalc ivilwart hatha sbeens preadingi n ourmode rn wor l
d.He
reminde d usoft het wo World War s,oft heCol d Waraf te
r war ds,
whi ch hea l
soc all
ed a« smoldering war »,and oft hosee conomi c
deve l
opme ntst hatha veledtothe«de epe ninggapbe twe ent heb les
s e
d
havesandt hos ewhoar edyingofhunge ronapl anetr i
chi ne ne rgy»
25
andc onc ludedwi ththeclai
mt hatthisint ensi
f ie
st he« stateofwar ».
Itissignific
antt hatPatočkadidnott hinkt hatt hisintensifyings tateof
wari st her esul tofa nope nwar monge ring,butt ot hec ont r
ar y,the
conseque nceofapur suitofpeace.Patočkame nt i
one dt hef orcesoft he
day,life
,a ndpe acea stheact
ualcaus esoft hispe rpe t
ualwa r:

How do t he da y,l i
fe,pe ace,gove rn alli ndividuals,t he i
r
bodie sands ouls?Byme ansofde ath;byt hr eat
eningl if
e.Fr om
the pe rspective of t he da yl if
ei s,f or alli ndividual s
,
everyt hing,t hehi ghe stvaluet hate xi
stsf ort hem.Fort he
forc
e s oft he da y,c onve rsel
y,de a th doe s note xist
,t he y
functionasi ftherewasnode ath,or ,asnot ed,theypl ande ath
impe rsonal l
y and s tatis
tic
all
y , as i fi t we re me r
e l
y a
reassignme ntofroles.Thusi nthewi l
ltowar ,dayandl i
fer ule
witht hehe lpofde at
h.Thewi l
lt owarc ount songe nerat
ions
yetunbor n,c onceiving itspl ansf r
om t he irviewpoi nt.So
peacer ulesint hewi l
lt owar .Thos ewhoc annotbr e
akf reeof
ther ul eofpe ace,oft heda y,ofl if
ei namodet ha texclude s
deathandc losesitseye sbeforeit,canne ve rfreethe mselvesof
26
war.

25 P
ATOČKA 1996,132-
3.
26 P
ATOČKA 1996,129.

Me
todoVol
.6,n.2(
2018)
48 Wo
lf
gangPa
lav
er

Iti
st heunde r st
andi ngofpurelif
east hehighestva luet hat,accor
di ng
to Patočka,le adst o war.Thisinsightaddr essesapr oblem ofour
mode rn wor ldt hati ndeed has t
o be t akens eriously.Es peciall
y
mode rnt hi
nki ng thati n di
sti
ncti
on f or
m ar c hai
ca nd t radit
iona l
socie
tiess uppr essestheproblem ofde athors ac r
ifi
c etendst owar ds
deadlyaggr e
s sionsass oona sitissudde nlyconf ronted wi ththe m.
The I t
alian phi l
osopher Robert
o Cal ass
oc l
ear l
y hi ghlightedt hi
s
problemi nr egar dtothewarsofthet wenti
ethce ntury:

TheAzt ecswe r epe r

petual l
yatwar ,butnotoutofde s i
refor
conque st.Fort he m,warwasmai nlyade vicebywhi cht hey
procur ed prisone rs,who t hen be came s acri
fi
cialvi ct
ims .
Twe ntyt housandaye ar,ac c
ordingt othec al
culat
ionsofs ome
scholars.Inre l
a ti
ont osac ri
fic
e,warwasaby- product.Whe n
sacri
ficec easedt o be an i nsti
tution,itwi thdrew i ntoi t
s
subordi natepowe r:war.InAugus t1914,thee nti
reliturgic
al
appar atusofs ac r
ifi
ce wasonc e again unpac kedf rom t he
trunks .Thebl oody image swe redus ted offand madet he
centerofat t
e ntion in home sand ne ws papers.Dur ing the
Second Wor l
d War ,inc ontrast
,itwase nought of oc
usona
27
singlewor d:«hol ocaust
».

Simil
artoCal asso’sobs ervati
ont hatthe«e cl
ipseofs acrif
ice
»t urnsthe
worldi nto a «gr eats acrif
ici
alwor kshop»,Pat oč ka unde rlinesthe
28
ines
capabili
tyofwari ftheforcesoftheda y,li
fe,andpe acedomi nate.
GeorgeW.Bus h’swaragai nstterror,especia
llythewaraga instI
raq
in2003,we r
ei ndire c
tlya lsoconseque ncesofthemode rnsuppr essi
on
ofdeath.Thet erroristattacksof9/11s uddenlyc onf rontedtheUni t
ed
Stat
esa nd atl eastt hewhol eWe stern world wi tht hepr oblem of
human mor tali
ty,t hat i ncreas
e dt he de mand f or an aggr essi
ve
reac
tion.Terrormanage me nttheory,apol it
icalps yc hologyfol l
owing
these minalwor koft hec ult
uralant hropologistEr nestBe cker,was
ablet o de mons tratet hat the s udde n a war e
ne ss of mor ta
lit
y

27 CALASSO 1994,136.
28 CALASSO 1994,138.

Me
todoVol
.6,n.2(
2018)
Wa
randSa
cri
fi
ce 4
9

29
cont ributedt ot hewart hatf ollowe dt het er roristat ta
c ks.
Pat očka’si ns i
ght si ntot hewar -
pr onec ons eque nc esoft hef or ce sof
theda yde s er veours pe cialat te nt i
on.I nt uitivelywemi ghts i
dewi th
them,notr eal izing how muc h wet he r
e forec ont ri
but et o war .We
mi ghtr efe rt o ot he rt hinke rs who,l ike Pat oč ka,unde rstand t he
dange rsfol lowi nganunde rstandi ngofl ifeast hehi ghe stval ue .I van
Ill
ich,aCat hol i
cpr i
estands oc ialphi los ophe r
,c rit
ic i
ze dthef et
is hizing
ofl ifewhi c hnol onge rt ake sc ar eofc onc retepe rsonsbutc onc erns
its
e lfonl ywi thabs t
rac tl ifej us tifyingani ncreas ing«or ganhar ve st
»
30
wi thout a ny doubt s. Eve nc los ert o Pat očka ’si nsight i nt ot he
entangl e
me ntoft hepe rspe ctiveoft heda ywi th wari sEmmanue l
Lévi na s,whounde rstood how di fficul ti ti s« tobewi thoutbe i
nga
31
mur de rer
». I tist hepe rsiste nc ei nbe ing,whi c
hheal soc a l
ledbe ing’s
inter est
,thatr esultsi nwar :«Be ing' si nte restt ake sdr amat icf ormi n
egoi sms s truggl ing wi th one a not he r
,e ach agai nsta l
l,i nt he
mul ti
plici
t yofal lergice goi s mswhi c har eatwarwi t
honea not he ra nd
aret hust oge ther .Wari st hede ed ort hedr ama oft hee ssenc e'
s
32
inter est
». Al though Sl avojZi zek di stanc e d hi ms elfc ritical
lyf rom
Lévi na s,hej us tl
yc all
e d hi se thic als tanc e«r adi call
ya ntibiopo li
tica»
l
bec aus efort heJ ewi shphi l
os ophe r«e thicsi snotaboutl ife,butabout
33
some thingmo r ethanl i
fe ».
De spit
et he sei mpor tanti ns i
ght s,Pat oč ka ’ss ugge steds olutionsar e
probl e matic .Byf ollowi ngMar tinHe idegge r,het ur nedt owar dst he
myt hicalwor ld oft hepr e-Soc ratict hi nke rs,e spe ci
allyt owar dst he
wor ld of Anaxi mande ra nd He raclitus ,whe re he di scove redi n
distinc t
ion f r om t hef or ce soft heda yand pe acean at titudeoft he
nightt hatdi d notne gle ctde ath.Ac cor di ngt oPat oč ka,He rac li
tus ’
s
famouswor dsaboutwarbe longe xplic i
tlyt ot hepr eponde ranc eoft he
night :

29 PYSZCZYNSKI,etal
.2008,cf.BECKER1997.
30 I CH 1
LLI 991,230,I CH & CAYLEY1
LLI 992,126.
31 LÉVINAS1990,99.
32 LÉVINAS1998,4.
33 ZIZEK 2005,149-
50.

Me
todoVol
.6,n.2(
2018)
50 Wo
lf
gangPa
lav
er

Att heda wnofhi stor y,He rac l

itusofEphe susf ormul ate dhi s
ide aofwarast hatdi vinel aw whi chs us t
ai nsal lhumanl ife.
Hedi dnotme ant he re bywarast hee xpans ionof«l i
fe»butas
thepr eponde ranc eoft heNi ght,oft hewi llt ot hef r
e edom of
riski nt hea rist
e i
a,hol dingone 'sownatt hel i
mi tofhuman
pos sibi
liti
eswhi c
ht hebe stc hoos ewhe nt heyoptf orl asting
famei nt heme mor yofmor talsi ne xchangef orane phe me ral
pr olongationofac omf ort
ablel ife.Thi swari sthef at
he roft he
lawsoft hepo l
isasofal le l
se :itshowss omet obes lave sand
othe rstobef r
ee ;yete ve nfreehumanl if
es tillhasape akabove
it.Warc an show t hatamong t hef rees omear ec apabl eof
be cominggods ,oft ouc hingt hedi vinityoft hatwhi chf or ms
theul t
imat euni t
yandmys te r
yofbe ing.Thos e ,though,a r e
theone swhounde r stand thatpo lemo sisnot hingone -side d,
thati tdoe snotdi vi debutuni te s,tha tadve r
s ariesa reonl y
see minglywhol e,tha tinr ealit
yt heybe l
ongt oe achot heri n
thec ommon s haki ng oft hee ve ryda y
,t ha tt hey ha vet hus
touc hedt ha twhi chl astsine verythingandf oreve rbec aus ei t
34
ist hesour ceofal lbe ingandi sthusdi vine.

LikeCa lass
o,whos ec r
it
icalvie w ofmode rnityledhi mt or ecomme nd
are turnt otheol dt r
aditi
onsofs a
c r
ifi
ce,Patočkar ecogni zedi nar cha i
c
myt hane scapef rom themode rns t
ateofwar .Be caus eHe rac l
it
us ’
s
wardi dnotai m att heexpans ionofl i
febutl eadstoge t
he randgat hers
–a sHe idegge rclaimed–e nabl i
ngt heref
or eat ruepe ac eandar eal
recogni t
ionofe nemiesthatc ompr ise
se venthel oveofe ne mi es.
Conc retel
y,Pat očkabe l
ieve dthathedi sc
ove redine xpe rie
nc e sthat
TeilharddeChar dinandEr nstJünge rsuff
ere ddur i
ngWor l
dWarIan
unde r
standingoft henightasi twa srecognizedbyHe racli
tus .Int he
trenchesofWor l
dWarI–i nt he«uphe ava lbyt hef rontl ine »–t he
3
5
forcesoft heda yha vetogi vewa yt otheexpe rie
nc eoftheni ght :

34 PATOČKA 1996,136.Cf.HERACLITUS1987,25[B29]
:«Thebestc
hoos
eonet hi
ngi
nplac
eof
allothert hings – ever
-fl
owi ng glory among mort
als
.The major
ity
,howeve
r,glut
themselves(or:aregl
utted)–likecattl
e».
35 PATOČKA 1996,125.

Me
todoVol
.6,n.2(
2018)
Wa
randSa
cri
fi
ce 5
1

Thegr andi ose,pr of ounde xpe ri

e nceoft hefrontwi thi t
sl ine
off irec onsistsi ni tse vocationoft heni ghti nal li tsur ge ncy
and unde niability.Pe ace and t he da y ne cess arilyr ule by
sendi nghumanst ode athi nor de rtoas sureo thersada yi nt he
futur ei nt he f or m ofpr ogr ess,ofa f ree and i ncre asing
expans i
on,ofpos sibiliti
est heyl ac kt oda y.Oft hos ewhom i t
sac rif
icesitde mands ,by c ont rast,e nd urancei nt hef ac eof
de ath.That i ndic ates a da rka war e ne s
st ha tl if
ei s not
eve rything,t ha titc ans acri
ficei tself
.Thats elf-sac rif
ice,t hat
sur rende r
,i swhati sc alledf or.I tisc alledf orass ome thing
relat i
ve,r elatedt o pe ace and t ot he da y.The f ront -l
ine
expe r
ience,howe ve r,i san a bsoluteone .He r
e ,as Te ilhard
shows ,thepar t
icipant sar eas saul ted by a na b solutef reedom,
free dom from al lthei nterestsofpe ace ,ofl i
fe,oft heda y.That
me ans:t he s ac r
ifice of t he s acr i
ficed l os esi tsr e l
at i
ve
signi fi
cance,i tisnol onge rthec ostwepa yforapr ogr am of
de ve l
opme nt ,pr ogr ess,intens i
fication,ande xte ns ionofl i
fe'
s
36
pos s i
bil
iti
es,r ather,itiss ignifi
cants o l
elyi nits
e l.
f

Onlyt hee xperie

nc eint het renchese nabledt hes hake ntoe s
capet he
perpetuationoft hes tateofwar .Ac c
or dingtoPat oč ka,thi
sexpe rie
nce
madet hem «capabl eofc onve rsi
on,ofme tanoi
a»f rom «me rel
if
e,bar r
en
andc hainedbyf e ar»t oa«l if
ea tthepeak,lif
ethatdoe snotplanf orthe
ordinaryda ysofaf uturebuts eesclearlythatthee veryday,i
tslif
eand
3
7
it
s‘peac e,
’havea ne nd».
Asac onsequenc eoft hi schangeofpe rs
pective,t heloveofe nemi e
s
repl
a cesallstr
ivingsf orpe acethatal waysr esultint hee l
iminationof
ana bsoluteadvers ary:

Theenemyi snolongertheabsolut
eadvers
aryinthewa yof
thewilltopeac
e;hei snothe r
eonl ytobeeli
minated.The
adver
saryisafel
low par
tic
ipantinthesamesit
uat
ion,fel
low
dis
covere
r ofabsolut
ef re
edom wi th whom agr
e e
me ntis

36 P
ATOČKA 1996,129-
130.
37 P
ATOČKA 1996,134.

Me
todoVol
.6,n.2(
2018)
52 Wo
lf
gangPa
lav
er

possi
bleindi f
fere
nce,afell
ow pa r
tici
pantintheuphe a
valof
the day,ofpe ace,and ofl i
felacking allpeaks .He re we
encountertheabysmalrealm oft
he‘ praye
rforthee nemy,’t
he
phenome nonof‘ l
ovingthosewhohat eus’–thes oli
dari
tyof
38
theshakenforallthe
ircontr
adict
ionandc onfl
ict
.

Forane xampl eoft

hischangeofpe rspec
tiveinr e
gardt otheenemy,
Patočkar ef
erstoapa ss
ageinEr nstJünger
’s1 922bookDe rKampfal
s
inner
es Er l
ebnis.Accor
ding toJ ünger,the c ombatantsexperi
enc
e
thems e
lvesi nana t
tacka sfus
ingi ntoas inglybodyt hatnolonger
all
owsas eparati
ngenmity:

Intoas i
ngl
ebody–anoddc omparison.Whoeve
runde r
stands
itaff
irmsbothsel
fandt heene
my ,li
vesatonceinthewhol e
andi nthepar
t.Thatpe
rsoncanthinkthegodswhol e
tsthese
color
e dthr
eadssli
p bet
we e
nt he
irf i
nger
s–wi th asmi l
ing
39
face.

Patočka beli
evedt hat our world withi tsradicalunleas
hing of
war mongeri
ngf orce
sne ededtheexper
ie nc
eofthes hake
ni norderto
reali
zepeace.Itis
,howe ver
,tel
li
ngthathet ookhisconcr
eteexamples
onlyf r
om Wor ld WarIand t hathef inal
lyasked himsel
fwhyt he
experienc
esofc onvers
ionthroughoutthosetwol ongworldwar sdid
notr es
ultinat urntowardsthenightthatwoul dha vec
ausedat rue
peace:

Whyhast hisgr andioseexperie

nc e,al
onec apableofl eading
humankindoutofwari ntoat ruepe ac e,nothadade cis
ive
ef
fecton thehis t
ory ofthet we nt
iethc entur y,event hough
humansha vebee nexposedtoitt wiceforf ourye ar
s,andwe re
tr
ulyt ouc
he d and t r
ansformedt her
e by? Why has i tnot
unfol
deditssavingpotenti
al?Whyhasi tnotpl ayedandi snot
playi
nginourl ivesar ol
es ome how anal ogoust ot hatoft he

38 PATOČKA 1996,131.
39 Quotedi n:PATOČKA 1996,136-
7.

Me
todoVol
.6,n.2(
2018)
Wa
randSa
cri
fi
ce 5
3

40
f
ightf
orpe
aceaf
tert
hegr
eatwaroft
het
went
iet
hce
ntur
y?

Ac c
ording to Pat oč ka,t hisque s
tion c annotbeans were de a sil
y.He
ulti
mat el
ybe li
e vedt hatt heuphe avalc aus edbye xpe ri
enc i
ngt hefront
li
ne involved onl y af ew s ingle pe opl e who s oon be came agai n
overwhe lmedbyt hef orcesoft heda y.Inor de rtoa chieveat ruepe ace
a« sol
idarit
yoft hes hake n»isne cessar y.Onlys uchas olidar i
tywoul d
enablear ealconve rs ion.
Thisans wers eemst obet oonar rowl yc ons i
de reda ndr esultsfrom
Patočka’sa l
ignme ntwi th archai
cmyt h.Fort hisr eason i tiswor th
discussi
nghi sc ons ide rationsfrom thepe rspectiveofGi rard’smi me ti
c
theory.First
,howe ve r,onehast ohi ghl ightt hef actthatGi rar da l
so
unde rs
tandst hei ll
us ionsf ol
lowingt hef orcesoft heda y,andt hatthe
French-Ame rican ant hr opologistma y be s ee n asa t hinke roft he
«night»,too.Onec a npr ovet hiscl
a i
m byr e
ferringt oGi rard’sc rit
ique
oftheus ualbe l
ittl
e me ntofc onfli
ctandvi olenc eint hesoc i
a lsciences:

The mime t
icnat ur
e ofde s
ire accountsf orthe fr
agilit
y of
human r elat
ions. Our s oci
al s ci
e nce
ss hould give due
consi
deration to a phe nome non t hatmus tbe cons i
dered
norma,but t
l hey pe r
sis
ti ns ee
ing c onfli
ct as s
ome t
hing
acci
dental,andc onsequentl
ys ounfor esee
ablethatres
e arc
he r
s
cannotand mus tnott akei tinto accounti nthei
rs tudy of
41
cult
ure.

Girard’sc oncernfor the nighta l

sol ed hi m earl
y on t o Mar ti
n
He idegge r,withwhom hes haredtheattent i
onfort hePre -Socrati
cs,
espe c
iall
yf or Anaximande r and He raclit
us.I t wa s He idegger’
s
re
c ogni t
ionoft hediffe
rencebe t
wee nthel ogosofHe r
acl
itusa ndt he
42
l
ogosi nt hegos pe
lofJohnt hatGirardappr eci
atedmos t. Butatt his
pointt hec ommonal i
tie
sbe t
we enGi r
arda ndHe ideggerend,be c ause,
i
nGi rard’se ye
s,He i
deggerreprese
ntedt hef ut
il
ea t
temptt or et
ur nto

40 PATOČKA 1996,131.
41 GIRARD 2001,10-1.
42 GIRARD 1987b,264-70.

Me
todoVol
.6,n.2(
2018)
54 Wo
lf
gangPa
lav
er

thewor l
d oft hes acred viol enceofar chaicmyt hswi thoutr e ali
z i
ng
thatthebi blicalr e velati
onof fersa nal t
ernativet hroughi tsunc over i
ng
oft hehi dde n vi olencei n myt h.Whe reasPat oč kar ecogni zed wi t
h
He i
de ggeri nt he f ragme nt s ofHe r
aclit
us t he f oundat ion oft he
politi
cala nd phi los ophic all i
fet hatbot h diff
e rpos i
ti
ve lyf rom t he
43
mode r
nf orc esoft heda y ,t hePr e-Socrati
csr e present,a ccordingt o
Girard,pr ec iselyt he s ys t
e m oft houghtr oote di nt he scape goat
4
4
me chanism. Warast hef athe rofal lthingsc anbei dent i
fiedwi t
ht he
mi me t
iccrisisr oot edi nt hemi me ticrivalri
esbe twe e ntheme mbe rsof
apr imordialgr oupt hatwoul dul timatelyleadt oi tss e
lf-de s
truc t
ioni f
itcouldnotmi me ti
cally–l ikeinapr ocessofs e lf
-organi zati
on–a nd
sudde nlyt ur nt hevi olenc e ofe veryone aga ins te veryone i ntot he
violence agai nsta c ommon s cape goatc reati
ng by t hi spe ac e and

43 PATOČKA 1 996,43:«Po lemo sisatt hes amet imet hatwhi chc ons titutest hepol isandt he
primor di ali nsightt hatmake sphi losophypos sible.Po l
emo sisnott hede structivepas s i
on
ofawi l
dbr igandbuti s ,rat he r
,t hec reatorofuni ty.Theuni tyi tfoundsi smor epr of ound
thana nye phe me rals ympat hyorc oalitionofi nter ests;adve rs ariesme e tint hes haki ng
ofagi ve nme aning,ands oc re ateane w wa yofbe inghuman–pe rhapst heonl ymode
thatof fe rshopea mi dt hes torm oft hewor ld:theuni tyoft hes hake nbutundaunt ed».
44 GIRARD ETAL2002,23:«Thatf a mouss ayingofAnaxi mande r,whi chHe ide gge rl abe lsthe
mos tanc ients ayingi nWe sternCul t
ur e,is‘ from t hepl acewhe real lt hingsor iginat e,
theret he ywi llre turn.Andt hi spl acef rom whe real lthi ngsor iginat efr om ot he rt hi ngs ,
weknow t hati t'
st hewor da pe iron’.I nGr eeka peironc anbet rans latedask aos,whi c hc an
bet rans lat edasundi fferent iati
o n.‘ From t hepl acewhe r eal lthi ngsor iginat e,the ywi llall
gobac k,puni s
hi nge achot he rf ort heirme anne ssa ndhos ti
litya ccordingt ot heor de rof
ti
me ’
.Thi spuni shinge ac hot he rformei ssa cri
ficialc risis.The re f
or eitisac yc l
icvi e w of
societywhi chc ome soutofc haos .I tdoe s
n'ts aywhy ,butt he ywi llgobac kt oc haos ,as
the pe ac et hatwast he re att he be ginni ng t urnsi nt o vi ol enc e:r eciproc alvi ol ence
puni shi nge ac hot he ra cc ordi ngt ot heor deroft ime .Soyouc ans eet hatwi t
hs ayingsl i
ke
He rac l
itus 's on vi olenc e ,po lemo s :‘ conf l
ictor f i ghting i st he f athe r and ki ng of
everyt hing’ .Theor iginofc ultur ei st hat .Ifyout aket hes ayi ngsofAnaxi mande ra nd
He rac l
itus ,youha vemywhol es ys tem,whi chyouc anvi ew asa ni nte rpre t
ationoft he
pre-Soc ratics .That 'swhyI '
m ve ryi nter est
edi nHe ide gge r,whowa sgoi ngbac kt ot hese
thingsa ndi nterpr etingt he mi naki ndofNaziwa ya sar es ur genc eofvi olenc e .Soi t'
s
both ve r y powe rfuland ve ry di sturbi ng,be caus ei nt he I nt r
o ducti
o nt oMe t aphy sics
He ide gge risi nf a vorofvi ol enc e.Thewor stHe ide gge ri st hemos tinte resti
ng,be c ause
he'st heonewhos aysweha vet omovebac kwa rdst owar dt hepr e-Soc r
at icphi los ophe rs,
andIs ayweha vet omovee ve nf ur the rbac kwar d,t owar dmyt hol ogyandr eligion.So,
event houghmyc onc l
us ionsa ret ot all
ydi ff
ere ntf rom t heHe idegge ri
anone s,t he rea r
e
aspe ctsof20t hc e nturyi nt ell
e ctuall ifet hata rebot hve ryf a randve ryclos etome ».

Me
todoVol
.6,n.2(
2018)
Wa
randSa
cri
fi
ce 5
5

culturalor der,whi cht hroughi tss oc ialdi fferenti

at ionspr e ve nt sthe
outbre akoff urthe rmi me ticr ivalries.He ide ggera ndPat očkaar er i
ght
whe nt he yunde rlinethatwarors trif
ei nthef ragme ntsofHe raclitusi s
directedt owardsor derandpe ac e.He r aclit
usnotonl ymai ntaine dt hat
«whatoppos esuni tes»,a«bac k-turningc onne c
tion»ort hepar adoxi cal
unityofj ust
iceands tri
febutal sot hepar adoxi calf atherhoodofwar
thatisnotapur ede stroye rofal lpe acebutt ot hec ont raryal ife -giving
sour c
eofc ul t
ur e :« Wari sf athe rofa ll,and ki ngofal l.Her e nde rs
some gods ,ot he rs me n;he make ss ome s lave s,ot her sf r e».5
e 4

Ac cordingt oGi rard,He rac l

itus ’
sf ragme ntaboutwars ummar ize sthe
46
violentf oundat ionofc ul ture.I tise xa ctl
yt hiss emi nali nsightt hati s
mi s
s i
ng i n He ide gge rand Pat očka.Be caus et he y di d notr eflect
prope rlyont hedar ks i
deofpe ac estemmi ngf rom ar c hai
cmyt hs–t he
scapegoatwhos ede athe nabl esuni tyi nt hegr oupofhi spe rse cut ors–
theya lso unde r esti
mat e dt he dange r goi ng a long wi th mi me tic
discordors tri
fe( eri
s)whi c hwa smyt hicallyboundandt ame dbyt he
47
foundi ngmur de r. Asmuc hast hes cape goatme chanis mi sa bleto
containmi me t
icr ivalri
e si tlikewi s
et ame se nmi ty,too.Thes c ape goat
me chani smr esul tsint het ami ngofe nmi t
yaswec anobs ervei ti nthe
4
8
archaicwor ld. I nt hisr egar d,Gi rar di sagai ni n ac cordanc ewi th
Patočka.
45 HERACLITUS1987,15 -
6,37-8,50[ B8,B51,B80,B53] .
46 GIRARD 1977,88,144,148,256.
47 Cont r
ar ytoHe i
de gge rorPatoč ka,ARENDT 2005,16,unde rstoodt heda nge r
sf ollowing
int
ens ifi
edmi me ti
cr ivalr
y:«Soc ratestri
edt omakef riendsoutofAt he ns 'citi
ze nry,and
thi
si nde ed wasave ryunde rs t
andablepur pos einapol i
swhos el if
ec ons i
sted ofan
int
ens eanduni nterruptedc ontestofallagainstal l
,ofa e
ia risteuein,c eas elesslys howing
oneselftobet hebe stofal l
.Int hisagonalspiri
t,whi che ve ntual l
ywast obr ingt heGr e
e k
cit
y-statestor uin be causeitmadeal li
ancesbe twe ent he m we ll
-ni gh i mpos sibl eand
poisone dthedome sti
cl i
feoft hec it
izenswi t
he nvyandmut ualhat r
e d( envywast he
nati
onalvi ceofanc ientGr eece),thecommonwe alt
hwasc ons tant l
yt hr eatene d».
48 PALAVER2 005,40 -1,cf.GIRARD 1987a,94:«Themor esoc i
ally‘e ffi
c ie
nt ’s c
ape goa t
ingi s,the
mor ec apableiti sofge nerati
ngapos i
ti
vet r
ansfigurationoft hes cape goat ,aswe llasthe
negativet r
ans fi
gur ationoff eara ndhos ti
li
ty.Thepos it
ivet rans figur ationi ss ti
llpr esent
inthef eudala nde ve nt henationaltraditi
onsofmi l
itarywa rfare .Thee ne myi sre spect
e d
aswe llasint e
ns elydi sli
ked.Thi spos i
ti
veas pectwe ake nsmor ea ndmor eint hemode rn
world,asc ivila nd ide ol
ogicalc onfli
ctstend topr e domi nat e.Thec l
as se ne myoft he
mode r nrevolut i
onar yne verbe come sri
tuali
zedasagood,e ve ns acrede nemy».

Me
todoVol
.6,n.2(
2018)
56 Wo
lf
gangPa
lav
er

Thepr obl emat ics i

deofPat očkai st hathedi dnotr ec
ogni zecle arly
enought hef oundi ngmur dert hatishi dde ni nar chaicmyt h.Iti sfor
thisreas ont hatheal s
oove rlookedt hee ssent i
aldi f
ferenc ebe twe en
archaic myt ha nd t he J ude o-Chr isti
an r eve l
ation.Thi s be come s
obviousi nhi si nte rpretationofSophoc l
es ’trage die
sonOe dipus .In
Patočka ’
s e ye s t he f at e of Oe di pus r e veals the «mys terium
49
tremde ndum»ofa« guilt»c omi nga longwi thbe ingitsel
f. Atf ir
st,we
canr ealizehow c losePat oč kac amet oGi rard’sunde rst
andi ngoft he
Oe di
pusmyt h.Pat očkade scribed Oe dipusa s«t heve ryl as
tofa ll
outcasts»,a ss ome onewho« leavesbani she df rom t hec ommuni t
y»
50
andwhoi s«bot hda mne dands acr
ed». Heal soe mphasize di nre gard
to Oe dipus ’c hildhood t hat« thisc hilds houl d notbe ;i tist o be
51
annihilated». Mos tcertainl yPat očkawa sa war eofGi r
ar d’swor kon
Oe di
pus ,whom heunma skeda sas cape goatofhi sc ommuni tyi n
52
arti
clespr iort ohi s19 72book Vi olencea ndt h
eSa c
red. Her efer r
ed
indirectl
yt oGi r
ar d’swor ki nwhi chhet alke da boutane ws oci
ologi cal
inter
pr etati
onoft heOe dipusmyt h:

Mode rns ociol

ogy showsthatt he Oe dipalmyt h or
iginally
be l
ongedamongt hemythsthatwe rec onne ctedt opa
r ti
cular
culti
cde ali
ngs,wi t
h whattheFr enchc alll eboucémi ss
air,
e
whi chme ansthebe i
ngontowhom c ertains oci
eti
est
r ansfer
,
whi chtheywe ighdownwi ththe i
rownmanyandr eals i
ns,
theirown di ff
icul
ti
esand which,s o bur dene d,isbani s
he d
53
from thi
ssocietyand,i
nthi
swa y,purif
iesi t.

Pat
očka,however,expli
cit
lydidnotf ol
low t
hisi
nterpr
etat
ion,which
wouldhaveenabledhi mtounc overt
hehiddentrut
hofar c
haicmyth.
Her e
ma i
nedinsidet hemyt hi
cf r
amepr ovi
dedbySophoc les
,about
whom he state
d «i n Sophocl
e s
’versi
on the t
houghtoft he bouc

49 PATOČKA 1987,106-
15,c
f.P
ATOČKA 2002,55.
50 PATOČKA 2002,49.
51 PATOČKA 2002,55.
52 GIRARD 2004.
53 PATOČKA 2002,54.

Me
todoVol
.6,n.2(
2018)
Wa
randSa
cri
fi
ce 5
7

5
4
émi s
sairei snol onge re ntir
ely pur el
ye xecut
e d». I
tisal sofort hi s
reasont hatPatočkadi dnotque s
tiont hemyt hicac cusationsaga ins t
Oe dipusofmur deri
ng hi sfathera nd mar rying hi sown mot he r.5
5

Agai na nd again,Pat očkai nterpreted Oe dipusasbe ing «b li

nda nd
wa nderng»,dr
i awi ngf rom thist hephi losophicalc onclusiont hat«t h e
5
6
bl
indwa nd e
ringofma ni saf undame ntaltratpr
i ope rtomanass uch».
Cont raryt o Patočka,Gi r
ardr ej
ectedt hemyt hi cala c
c usationsof
homi c
ideandi nc es
tt hatwe rebr oughtf orwar d aga i
nstOe dipus.I n
orde rtodot hi
s,howe ve r,hehadt oleavet heframe workofSophoc l
e s’
tr
age die s,which,de spiteimpor tanti nsightsintot hehi dde ntruthof
myt hs,c ouldnotr eallys eparatethe mse l
vesfrom t he i
rarc ha i
cor i
gi n.
Ast hel aterwor kofGi rards howe d,i twast hel ightoft heBi bl
ic al
revelati
on t hata l
lowe d himt oe xpos eOe di
pusast hes cape goatof
The bes:

Allmyt hi
caland bi blic
aldr amas,i ncl
udi ng the Passi
on,
repres
entthes amet ypeofc ol
lect
iveviolenceagainstas i
ngle
vict
im.Myt hss eet hi
svi ct
im asgui lt
y:Oe dipushasr eal
ly
kil
led hi
sf ather and ma r
rie
d hi s mother.The Bi bl
e and
Gospelsse
et hesesamevi cti
msasi nnocent,unjustl
ymur dered
byde l
udedlync he
r sandpe rsecut
ors.J
e s
usi stheunjust
ifi
ably
57
sacr
ifi
cedlambofGod.

We do notknow whe therPat očka woul d have turnedc los

ert o
Girard’si
nter pr
etati
onofOe dipusifhewoul dhavebe e
na bletostudy
thelaterwor koft heanthropologisti
nwhi c
hhi sChrist
ianpe r
spective
became muc h mor ee xplicit
. Patočka recognized the diffe
renc e
betwe enPlatonis
m andChr i
s ti
anit
y,butbye mpha si
zingthemy st
erium
tre
me ndum forthel att
erhei ndi c
atedt hathesa w Christ
iani
tystil
li n
58
thevicini
tyofar chaicmyth.
I
nr egardt othewar soft heT we nti
ethc e
nturyandt hedange rofa

54 PATOČKA 2002,55.
55 PATOČKA 2002,49,56.
56 PATOČKA 2002,49,57.
57 GIRARD 2001,1;cf.107-
15.

Me
todoVol
.6,n.2(
2018)
58 Wo
lf
gangPa
lav
er

globa lc ivilwar ,Gi rar d’svi ewl eadst oadi f

fer entl ineofde ve l
opme nt
thanPat očka ’sa ppr oa ch.Mi me t
icr i
val rie sands t rife( eri
s)t hatwe re
myt hic allyc ons traine d–He rac l
itus ’p ó l
emo s–be c amer eleas edbyt he
de myt hol ogiz at ionandt hede sac ralizat i
ont hatc amea longwi t
ht he
Biblicalr e
ve lation.Fora ne xampl e ,wec ant aket hemode rnf reei
ngof
economi cc ompe tit
ion.Ac cordingt oGi rar d,«t hes pi ri
tofe nt er
prisei n
ane conomy ,i saby- pr oduc toft hepr of ound a c tion oft heGos pel
5
9
text». Theunc ove r ingoft hes cape goatme chani sm nol onge rall
owe d
thet ami ngofr ival riesaswec anf indi ti nGr eekmyt hs .Iti sfort his
reasont hatt heunf ol di ngoft hos edange r ouspot e nt i
alitiest hatc ame
aboutwe rede s cribe dbyPat oč kawi the xpr essionsl ike« expone nt ial
6
0
growt h» and «r el
e a sing ofFor ce ». The f orces oft he da y we re
indirec tlyunl eas he dt hr ought hei nf l
ue nc eoft hebi blicalr eve l
ati
on.I t
isadange rouspe rve r sionofChr is t
iani tyi nt hes e nseofac orrup ti
o
6
1
optimipe ssi
ma . Ar etur nt ot hewor l
doft hemyt hi cni ght ,a sPatoč ka
seeme dt obel ongi ngf or ,isnol onge rpos s ible.Wear el ivingi nan
objective ly a poc alypt ic wor l
d i n whi ch, ac cor ding t o Gi rard’s
interpr etation ofCl aus e wi t
z’st he ory ofwar ,mi me t
icr ivalri
esar e
62
caus i
ng a n «e scalat ion t oe xtre me s ». I
n Gi rard’ se ye s,onl ya
conve rs iont owar dst hes pi r
itoft heSe rmonont heMount ,withi t
s
emphas isont hel oveofone ’se ne mi e sa ndnonvi olenc e,c ans aveus
from c ollective s elf- de structi
on.Pat oč ka hi ms elfr e f
e rredt ot he
apoc alypt ics tat e of our wor ld, t oo, whe re he me ntioned t he
«Hi ros himac ompl e x»t hatheunde rstoodasa«c onc i
s es ummar yof
theware xpe rie nc e,t hee xpe ri
e nc eoft hef rontl i
ne ,i nt hes pecta
c ular
6
3
intensit yofade struc tivee ndoft hewor ld». Hi sobs e rvationt hatwe
arel i
vi ng«i nt het imeoft her e l
e asingofFor ce»i sal s
ohi ntingi nt hat

58 Othe rinterpreter
s ofPat oč
ka see hi
m muc hcloserto Chr i
sti
anit
y and espe
c i
all
y
emphas izehisde epunde rst
andi
ngofk eno
si:HAGEDORN 2011,258
s -
61,HAGEDORN 2014,
KOCI2017.
59 GIRARD 1986,204-5.
60 PATOČKA 1996,135.
61 Cf.I CH & CAYLEY2
LLI 005.
62 GIRARD 2010,1-25.
63 PATOČKA 1996,132.

Me
todoVol
.6,n.2(
2018)
Wa
randSa
cri
fi
ce 5
9

6
4
direction.
How s houl dweunde rst
andPat očka’
se xampl esfrom Wor l
dWarI ?
AsIa lr
eadyme nti
one dabove ,itiss t
rikingt hathedi dnotr eferto
exampl esf r
om Wor l
dWarI I.Thisc ouldbea ni ndirectprooft hatthe
tami ng ofe nmi t
y provide d by t hear chaics acre
d hass lowly been
we ake nedandt hattherewe reonlys omet r acesofi tlef
tdur ingWor ld
WarI .Suc hani nte
rpretat
ionc anbec onfirme dbyt hef a
c tthatthere
areonl ys omet rac
esoft het ami ng ofe nmi ty asweknow i tfrom
He raclit
us ’unde rst
andingofp ól
emo sobs e
r vabl eduringWor ldWarI ,
whi ch wasa tthes amet imea l
soe xe
mpl aryf ori t
sa bsoluti
zing of
enmi tyasi ti stypicaloft hepe rs pect
iveoft heda yinge neral
.The
It
alianhi s
tor i
anEmi lioGe nt il
ere cognizedt hatWor ldWarIbr ought
alongwi thi tasignifi
cant«s acral
izationofpol iti
cs»whi chf orthefirs
t
ti
mei nhumanhi st
oryl edwi thitse normouswarpr opagandat oa n
6
5
«ima geofthee nemyast heinc arnati
onofEvi l».

2. The Perspec
tive of t
he Vi
cti
m: Pat
očka and
Antipol
it
ics
Thes econdpartoft hi
se ss
aya ddr ess
e sPatočka’
simpor tantr ef
le cti
ons
thatturnedhimi ntothemor alme ntoroft heinforma lcivicinitiati
ve
Charter7 7i nc ommuni stCze choslovakia.Int hisr egar d,Pat očka
seemst obemuc hc l
osertothes pi
ritoft heBiblethant oGr e
ekmyt h.
Contrarytoar chaicmyt hsre presentingt heview oft hepe rs
e cutors,
theBibles i
deswi t
ht hevictimsofpe r
secuti
on.Thi salignme ntwi t
h
vict
imsc haract
erizesalsothet ypeofa ntipol
it
icsasi twa sde ve l
ope d
bydi ss
identsli
keGyör gyKonr ádorVá c l
avHa vel.Konr áde xpl ici
tl
y
6
6
defi
ne d« anti
politi
cs» as«t he victim’s pointofvi ew». Si mi lar
ly,
Václav Ha vel,t he di ssi
de nt,c alled hi s politi
cal c once pt an

64 PATOČKA 1996,135.
65 GENTILE2006,32
66 KONRÁD 1988,17,cf.KONRÁD 1990,19.

Me
todoVol
.6,n.2(
2018)
60 Wo
lf
gangPa
lav
er

6
7
«
antipol
it
icalpoli
ti
cs»orapoli
tic
s«from below». Havelconne
cte
d
t
hisunderstandi
ngwithPat
očka
’s«sol
idar
ityofthes haken»:

Whe nJanPat oč kawr oteaboutChar ter77,heus edt het e

rm
«soli
darity oft hes haken».Hewast hinking oft hos ewho
daredr esis
timpe r
sonalpowe randt oconf r
onti twi tht heonly
thing att hei
rdi sposal,the irown humani ty.Doe snott he
perspecti
veofabe tterfutur ede pend on s ome t hingl i
kean
internat
ionalc ommuni t
yoft heshake nwhi ch,i gnor i
ngs t
ate
boundar ies,pol it
icals ystems ,and powe r bl oc s
,s tanding
outsidet hehighgameoft raditi
onalpol i
ti
c s
,as piri
ngt ono
tit
lesandappoi ntme nts,willseekt omakear ealpol it
icalf
orce
outofaphe nome nons ori
di cule
dbyt het echniciansofpowe r
68
thephe nome nonofhumanc onsci
e nce
?

Indeed,Patočka repre
s e
nted ar adi
calsidi
ng wi
th vi
cti
ms.This
becomesmos tobviousinhisessa
y«He roe
sofOurTime»inwhic
hhe
emphas i
zed with Hannah Ar endt the i
mport
anc
e of tr
uththat
defi
nite
lymus tal
soincludethevict
ims:

Ani nteres
ti nt r
uth[ …]i spur ewhe nitist heinterestofthe
repr ess
ed,t her evil
ed,t hehumi li
at ed,thede ad;whe nbl ood
thatc arr
iesanobl i
ga ti
onwi thitclingst ot hem.Itisnoti nthe
l
e asti nt he s piri
tofr evenge buta wi lltot r
uth,and i t
pre suppose ss everalal most" mys tical" atti
tudes.I tis,for
i
ns tance,pr eci
s e
lywhatweal lfeel,butdi mlyandal mos tas
some t
hing unr e
al:t hatthe de ad,t he humi li
ated,and t he
de feat
edha vetruthont he i
rside;thatt hepowe rf
ul,therulers
,
themas tersnotwi llbebuti nfacta lr
e adya redamne d;thatthe
de ad notonl y mus tno tbebuti nf acta reno ta mat terof
i
ndi fferencet ous ;thatwea rehe rei norde rtoa sumewhat
s
69
the yare;tha ti
nt hiswa ytheya eus
r .

67 HAVEL1991,271.
68 HAVEL1991,271.
69 PATOČKA 1981,13-
4.

Me
todoVol
.6,n.2(
2018)
Wa
randSa
cri
fi
ce 6
1

Int he sewor ds ,wec anr ecogni zeana llianc ewi thvi ctims ,asi ta lso
char acte rizest heJ ude o- Chr i
s ti
anr eve l
ation.I ndi rectl
y ,thisal s
os hows
thatde s pitehi sc los ene sstoHe ide gge r
,Pat oč kadi ffe reds ignificant ly
70
from hi m aswe l
l. Pat očkar epres entsahumani st
ice thi cthati smor e
strongl yi nflue nc ed bySoc ratest hanbyHe ide gge r
.Li keAr endt ,he
appr e ciate dSoc rate s’
sat t
itudet hat« itisbe ttert os ufferwr ongt hant o
71
do wr ong». Thi sat titudeofSoc ratesi n par ticulari sc loset ot he
72
biblica ltradi ti
on. Ast hee xampl eofSoc rat esde mons tr
at es,ane thical
lif
ema yr equi ret hegi vingofone ’sownl i
fe.Pat oč kae xpr essedt his
insightpr ecisely whe n he unde rli
ne dt he ne cessityt os i
de wi th
victims .Andr eiSakhar ovaswe lla sAl eks andrSol zhe nitsynar ef or
Patoč kat wo –a lbe itdi ff
ere nt–e xampl e sofs uch awi l
lingne s st o
73 74
sacr i
fice . Pat oč ka ’sownmar tyrdom f ollowe dt he see xampl es.I nt his
regar dwec anc l
e arlyr e cogni zeapar all
e lwi thGi rard’ sunde rstandi ng
75
ofChr istian s elf-givi ng a shede ve lope di tin hi slat erwor k. Ina
wor ldf ullofvi olenc eiti softe nne c essaryt os uffervi ol e
nc ei nor de rt o
ove rcomei tsdomi nanc e.Jesus ’de at hont hec rossi soneoft hemos t
out standi nge xampl e sofal ifede dicatedt ononvi olenc et hate nde di n
mar t
yr dom.Whoe ver be l
ieve st hat one c an e scape s uffering i n
princ iplemos tl i
ke l
ys uppr e ssest hef actt hatt ryingt oa voids uf fering
by any me ansof tenf or c
e sot he rst os ufferi ns tead.Vác lav Ha ve l
,
followi ng Pat oč ka,wa sve r
y we lla war et hata voidi ng a llr i
s ksf or
one se l
fma yl eadt ot hes acrificeofot he rs.Fore xampl e,her eferredt o
thepol ic yofa ppe as eme ntin1 93 9:" Thei nabi li
tyt or isk,ine xt remi s,
eve nl ifei tselftos avewhatgi vesi tme ani ngandahumandi me nsion
leadsnotonl yt ot hel os sofme aningbutf inallyandi ne vitablyt ot he
lossofl ifea swe ll–a ndnotonel i
feonl ybutt hous andsa ndmi l
lionsof

70 TUCKER1992,FINDLAY2002.
71 ARENDT2003,144,c f
.PATOČKA 2002,50,128,PATOČKA 2007,49.
72 GIRARD 1986,199,cf.PATOČKA 2002,149,KOCI2017,17-
9.
73 CHVATIK 1993.
74 TUCKER1992,MELANÇON 2013,599- 600.
75 GIRARD 2014,33-45,cf
.P ALAVER2013,231-46.

Me
todoVol
.6,n.2(
2018)
62 Wo
lf
gangPa
lav
er

76
lives." Thi sins i
ghtc ome sc l
os et oas imi larobs e rvat ionbyt heFr e nc h
phi losophe r and mys t
ic Si mone We il,who wr otet he f ollowi ng
comme nta boutpac ifismc loset ot hee ndofhe rl i
fe :«Pac ifi
smi sonl y
capabl eofc ausinghar m whe nac onf us ionar i
s esbe twe e nt wos ortsof
77
ave rsion:t hea ve rsiont oki ll
,a ndt hea ve rsiont obeki lled». Wec an
inte rpre tthi sre mar kwi tht hehe lp ofPat očka.Eve rypa ci
fismt hat
avoi dss acrifi
cesbya llme ansr emai nse nt rappe dbyt hef orcesoft he
da yandt hereforenur ture s–de spiteal lope npr ote stat i
ons–war .A
pac ifismc ont r
ibut i
ngt oat r
uepe acec annote x cludes elf-
sacrificeby
de fault.I nourWe sternwor l
d,Soc ratesandJ es uswe r et hee xe mpl ar y
mode l
si nt hisre gard.Pat oč kas eemst oha vef ol lowe dt hispat h,c los er
,
howe ve r,t o Soc rates,who c ould bemor ee as i
lya ligne d wi tht he
thought sofHe racli
tus .
Pat očkawasve rywe l
la war eoft heof ten-ove rlooke ddange rsoft he
forc esoft heda y.The rei s,howe ver,al soadange rt hatc ome sa long
wi tht heni ghta si twa sunde rst
ood by He rac litus .Er azim Kohák
expr e ssedt hispr obl emi nhi sj uxtapos itionofa n«ont ologi calpr imac y
ofpo l
emo »asHe
s rac li
tusma i
nt ainedi ta ndt hatPat oč kat ranslate da sa
«s t
ruggl e,fight,andwar »andan«ont ol ogic alpr ima cyofl ove »,aswe
7
8
canf ind i ti nPat oč ka’spr e cur s
or sCome ni usand Tomá sMas aryk.
Thes amei st r
uei fonec ompar esPat oč kawi thLe vina s.LikeGi rar d,
Le vina sdi stance dhi mselff rom He raclitus ’p olemo si nf a vorofamor e
79
bibl i
c ale mphas isonpe ace . ForLe vinast he ree xi stsan«a nteriorityof
theGood ove rt her adicalityofe vil,t hatpr e ve nt st heps ychef rom
80
agr ee i
ng t o war s as i ft hey we reaf ata l
ity». I fwe c hoos et he
ont ologi calpr imac y ofl ove ,wec an r efert o he roe sl ikeMahat ma
Gandhia ndMar t
inLut he rKi ngJ r.,whobe l
ie ve di nt hepr i
mac yof
81
lovewi thouts uc cumbi ngt ot hef or cesoft heda y. It hi nkt hatRe né
Gi rardbe longst othi ss econdgr oup,t oo.Li kePat oč ka,hewasa war e

76 HAVEL1991,311.
77 WEIL2002,157.
78 KOHÁK 1989,95
79 LÉVINAS1979,21-
2.
80 CHALIER2002,43
81 KOHÁK 1989,135.

Me
todoVol
.6,n.2(
2018)
Wa
randSa
cri
fi
ce 6
3

oft hedange rsoft heda ywhe nheunde rli

nedhow c onfl
ictualhuman
relationsar e.I n Gi r
ard’ seyes,human c onfl
ict
sr e
sultmai nlyf rom
mi me t
icde si
ret hate asil
ybe come sr i
valrousandvi olentift hede si
re
fort hes ameobj ect
sc a nnotbes hared.Somec ri
ti
csaccusedGi rardof
repr esent i
nga nont ologyofvi olencebe causehes eemedt os eenowa y
outofa n automat ism t hatl e
adsdi rectlyform mi me t
icde s
iret o
viol enceand wa r.Suc hac c
usations,howe ver,over
lookt hef ac tthat
Gir arddoe snotmai ntaina nontologyofvi olenceinregardt ode sir
e.
Int heve r
ys amebooki nwhi chhee mphas izedthene ce
ssityt of ocus
onhumanc onflict
shea l
soclai
me dt hat«mi me ti
cdesir
eisi ntrinsical
ly
8
2
good». Wi t
houtgi ving int ot hel uresoft heday,wes hould not
idol i
zet henighte ither.
Thes olidari
tyoft hes hakeni snotpos s
ibleaslongast hes ingle
indi viduali st hreatene d by de ath wi thouthope f orr esur recti
on.
SimoneWe ilunde rstood ve r
ywe llthee xtr
emee xcepti
onal ityofa n
empat hywi thot herswhe nonei sconf r
ont edwi t
hone ’
sde struction.

Torespe c
tl i
fei nsome bodye l
sewhe nyouha vehadt ocast rate
yourselfofal lye a
rningf oritde mandsat rulyhe art
bre aking
exert
ion oft he powe rs ofge ne rosit
y.Iti si mpos siblet o
imagineany ofHome r'swar riorsbe i
ng capableofs uch an
exert
ion,unl es sitist hatwar riorwhodwe l
ls,in ape c
ul iar
way,a ttheve r ycentreoft hepoe m –Ime anPat roclus,who
«knew how t obes wee ttoe ve r
ybody»,andwhot hr oughout
theIli
adc ommi tsnoc rue lorbr ut alact
.Butt he nhow many
me ndoweknow,i ns ever alt
hous andye ar
sofhumanhi story,
whowoul dha vedi splaye dsuc hgod- l
ikege nerosi
ty?Twoor
83
thr
ee?–e vent hisi
sdoubt ful.

Acc
ordi
ngtoWe il
,onlyi
nve ryexc
eptionalcase
scansoli
dari
tyoccur
whenconf
rontedwithdeat
h.Patočka,ont hecont
rary
,beli
evedthat
t
rut
handme ani
ngbecomea ppar
entint he« de
epes
tfors
akennes
sof

82 GIRARD 2001,15.
83 WEIL1965,21- 2,c
f.CHALIER2002,42.

Me
todoVol
.6,n.2(
2018)
64 Wo
lf
gangPa
lav
er

84
night». Thisi smos te xpl i
citlye xpr essedinhi sunde r s
tandingoft he
crucifi
xi on in whi c
h her e f
er stoChr is
t’
sc ryoff ors akenne ss« Why
hastt houf orsake nme ? »85 I
ti si ne xtr
emef or s
ake nne s
st hatPat očka
recogni ze d t he r e sur recti
on of me aning wi thout , howe ver,
unde rstandi ngt hisint het r
adi ti
onalChr i
stians e nse.Pat očkadi dnot
wantt o di mi nisht he«t ragice l
e me nti n human l ife» by c ynical
ly
86
promi singi mmor ta
lity. Girards har e
dt os omede gr eet hisempha si
s
on f orsake nne ss whe re he r eflecte dl i
ke Si mone We i
lon J esus’
s
despe ratec ryont hec ros s.Hec riticizedthe ologianswhoc lai
me dt hat
«Jesusr etai
ne dc ompl etemas te
r yofhi ms e
lf»andma intainedont he
cont r
aryt hatt he«nat ur alist
icc har ac t
eroft hisde athi sunde rli
ned,
87
togethe rwi thhumanpowe rl
e ssne s
sbe f
orede ath». Gi rard,howe ver,
doe snott hinkt hatthi sr adic alfac i
ngofde at hispos siblewi thoutt he
expe ri
e nc e of t he r esur rection t hat i s at c ent er of Chr ist
ianity.
Some t
hi ng « uns hakeabl e »al lowsust ofac ede athi n al lit
sr adi ca
l
destruc tiveness:«To t ake upon i ts e
lfs or adica l
lyt he natur al
isti
c
characte roft hede ath,t hegos pe lt extmus tbef ounde d upon t he
uns hakabl ec ertaint
yofaf orm oft ranscende nc et hatle avesthisde ath
88
compl e telybe hind».

Ref
erenc
es

ARENDT,H.2 00
3.Respo
nsibi
li
tyand J
udgme .Ne
nt w York:Schocke
n
Books.
—2 00
5.ThePromis
eofPo
lit
ic.
sNew Yor
k:SchockenBooks
.
BECKER,E.199
7.TheDeni
alofDeah.Ne
t w York:Si
mon&Sc hus
ter.

84 HAGEDORN 2011,253.
85 PATOČKA 1990,310-1,HAGEDORN 2011,261.
86 PATOČKA 1990,299,HAGEDORN 2011,257.
87 GIRARD 1987b,232.
88 GIRARD 1987b,233.

Me
todoVol
.6,n.2(
2018)
Wa
randSa
cri
fi
ce 6
5

CALASSO,R.19 94.TheRui no fKa sch.Tr ans .byW.We ave r&S.Sar tare l

li
.
Cambr idge , Ma. :TheBe l
knapPr essofHar vardUni ve rsityPre ss.
CHALI ER, C. 20 02. "OnWarandPe ace ".Pa rall
ax,8/3, 3 4-44.
CHVATIK,I . 19 93. " Solidar i
tyoft heShake n".Telos,/94, 163-6.
FINDLAY,E.F .20 02 .Ca ringf o rtheSo uli naPo stmo der
nAg e:Po l
it
icsAnd
Phe nome no log yi nt heTh oughto fJa nPa t
ocka.Al bany:St ateUni ve rsity
ofNe w Yor kPr ess.
GENTILE,E.20 06 .Po li
ticsasRe li
gion.Tr ans .byG.St aunt on.Pr inc eton:
Princ et onUni ve rsi
tyPr ess .
GIRARD,R.19 66 .De ce
it,De sirea ndt heNo vel
:Se lfandOt heri nLit erary
Struc tur e.Tr ans .by Y.Fr eccero.Ba l
timor e:The J ohnsHopki ns
Uni ve rs i
tyPr es s.
—1 977.Vi olenc ea ndt heSa c red.Tr ans .byP .Gr egor y.Ba ltimor e:The
JohnsHopki nsUni versityPr ess.
—1 986.TheSc ape g oat.Tr ans .by Y.Fr e
c cero.Ba ltimor e:TheJ ohns
Hopki nsUni ve rsit
yPr e ss .
—1 987a." Ge ne r ativeSc ape goating" .I n R.G.Hame rton- Kell
y( e d.)
,
Vio l
entOr i
gi ns .Wa l
terBur k ert
,Re néGi rard,andJ o
na tha nZ.Smi tho n
Ritua lKi lli
nga ndCul t
ur a lFo rma ti
o n.St anford:St anf ordUni ve rsity
Pre ss, 73 -10 5.
—1 987b.Thi ngsHi dde ns inc etheFo und ati
ono ft heWo rld:Re s earch
und erta keni nc o l
labora t
ionwi t
hJ .
-M.Oug hourli
a na ndG.Le f
ort.Tr ans.
byS. Bann&M. Me tt
ee r.St anford:St anfordUni ve rsit
yPr ess.
—1 992." JobAsFai l
edSc ape goat ".InL.G.Pe rdue& C.Gi lpin( e d.)
,
TheVo icef ro mt heWhi rl
wi nd:Int erpretingt heBo oko fJob.Nas hvi lle
:
Abi ngdonPr e s s
, 185-207 .
—1 996.TheGi ra rdRe ader.Edi te
db yJ ame sG.Wi l
liams .Ne w Yor k:The
Cr ossr oadPubl ishingCompany .
—2 001.ISe eSa tan Fa l
lLi k eLi ghtni ng.Tr ans.by J .G.Wi lliams .
Mar yknol l, NY: Or bi sBooks .
—2 004.Oe dipus Unb ound:Se l
ected Wr i
tings on Ri valrya nd De sir.
e
Stanf or d: Stanf or dUni ve r sityPr ess.
—2 007a.Ac he ve r Cl aus ewit z.Ent retiens a vec Be noît Cha ntr.Par
e is
:
Car ne tsNor d.

Me
todoVol
.6,n.2(
2018)
66 Wo
lf
gangPa
lav
er

—2
007b.
Del
avi
ol
enc
eàl
adi
vini
té,
Bibl
iot
hèqueGr
ass
et.Par
is:
Ber
nar
d
Gr asset.
—2 008.Ev o lutio na ndCo nv ersion:Di a l
ogue so nt heOr i
gino fCul t
ur e.
Wi t
h Pi er paolo Ant one l
loa tJ o ão Ce zard eCa stro Ro cha .London:
Cont inuum.
—2 010.Ba ttlingt ot heEnd:Co nv ersat
ionswi t
hBe no îtCha ntre .Tr ans .by
M.Bake r,St udi esi nvi ole nce ,mi me si
s ,andc ul t
ur e.Eas tLans ing,
Mi ch.:Mi c higanSt ateUni ve rsityPr ess.
—2 012.Re sur rect i
o nf r omt heUnd erground:Fe o dorDo stoe
v sky.Tr ans .by
J.G.Wi ll
ia ms ,St udi esi n vi ol e
nc e,mi me sis,a nd c ul ture .Eas t
Lans ing:Mi c higanSt ateUni ve rsit
yPr ess.
—2 014.TheOneb yWho m Sc anda lCo me s.Trans .byM.B.De Be voi se,
Studi esinvi ole nc e ,mi me sis,a ndc ulture.Eas tLans ing:Mi chi gan
StateUni ve rsityPr ess .
GIRARD,R.& S.BENVENUTO & M.MELONI.2 00 2." Ps ychoanal ys i
sa nd
Mi me tic The or y:Di ffere nc ea nd I de ntit
y .A Conve rs ation wi t
h
Sergi oBe nve nut oi nc ollabor at ionwi thMaur izioMe loni ".Jour na lof
Eur opeanPs yc hoa na lysis,14, 3-25.
GIRARD,R.& P .F ARGE.2 01 7." 'Iwoul dl iket obeyourage …' ".The
Philosophica lJo ur na lo fCo nf licta ndVi olence,1/2, 220-3.
HABERMAS,J .19 93.J us t
ificatio na ndAp plicati
o n:Re ma rkso nDi scour s
e
Ethics.Trans .byC. Cr oni n.Ca mbr i
dge ,Ma s s.
:MI TPr ess .
HAGEDORN,L.2 01 1." Be yondMyt ha ndEnl ight enme nt:OnRe li
gi oni n
Patoč ka’
sThought " .InE.Abr ams& I .Chvat í
k( ed.),JanPa toč kaa nd
theHe r
it
a geo fPhe no me no l
o gy:Ce ntenaryPa pers .Dor drec ht:Spr inge r
Scienc e,24 5-6 1.
—2 014. " Ke nos is. Di e phi losophi sche Anve rwandl ung e ines
christli
che nMot ivsbe iJ anPat očka" .InM.St audi gl& C.St ernad
(ed.), Fi gur en d e r Tr ans zendenz . Tr ans forma ti
o ne n e ines
phäno meno logi sche n Gr und begr i
ffs. Wür zbur g: Köni gs haus en &
Ne umann, 34 9- 366.
—2 015." Re néGi rar d’ sThe or y ofSa crifice,or :Whati st heGi f
tof
De ath?".J our na lfo rCul tur ala ndRe l
igiousThe ory ,15 /1, 105 -18.
HAVEL,V.1 98 5." ThePowe roft hePowe rless" .Int ernationa lJ ourna lo f

Me
todoVol
.6,n.2(
2018)
Wa
randSa
cri
fi
ce 6
7

Po
li
ti
cs15
, /3
-4,
23-
96.
—1
991.Op
enLe
tte
rs:Se
lec
tedWr
it
ing
s,1
965–
1990.Tr
ans
.byP
.Wi
lson.
Ne w Yor k:Knopf .
HERACLITUS.19 87 .Fr a gme nts.Tr ans .by T.M.Robi nson,Phoe ni x
Suppl eme nt aryvol ume . Toront o:Uni ve rsityofTor ontoPr ess.
I CH,
LLI I.19 91.I nt heMi rroro fthePa st:Le ct
ur esa ndAddr es
ses19 78-19 90.
London:Mar ionBoyar sPubl is he r
s .
I CH,
LLI I.&D.CAYLEY.1 992. InCo nv er
s at
ion.Tor ont o:Anans i.
—2 005.TheRi v ersNo r tho ftheFut ur e
:TheTe stame nto fIvanIlli
cha sto ld
byDa v i
dCa yley .Fore wordb yCha rlesTa ylor.Tor onto: Anans i.
KOCI,M.20 17." Sac ri
fic eforNot hing:TheMove me ntofKe nos isinJ an
Patoč ka'sThought ".Mo de rnThe ology,33 /4, 594 -
617.
KOHÁK,E.V.19 89 .JanPa tock a
:Phi lo so
ph ya ndSe lectedWr it
ings.Chi cago:
Uni ve rsityofChi cagoPr ess.
KONRÁD,G.19 88.St i
mmungs bericht.Tr ans .byH. -H.Pae tzke.Fr ankf urt
am Ma in:Suhr ka mp.
—1 990." TheVi ewpoi ntoft heVi c
tim" .Ca rd ozoSt udiesin La wa nd
Literature ,2/1, 9-19.
LÉVINAS,E.19 79.To talitya ndI nf i
ni ty:AnEs sayo nExt eri
oriy.Tr
t ans .by
A.Li ngi s
,Mar ti
nus Ni j
hof fphi l
os ophy t e xts.The Hague :M.
Ni j
hof fPubl ishe rs.
—1 990.Di ff
icul tFr e
e do m:Es sayso nJ ud aism,J ohnsHopki nsJ e wi sh
studie s.Ba l
t imor e:JohnsHopki nsUni ve rsityPr es
s .
—1 998.Ot he rwi set ha nBe ing,o r,Be yondEs sence.Tr ans.byA.Li ngi s
.
Pittsbur gh,Pa. :Duque sneUni ve rsityPr es s.
MELANÇON,J .20 13." J an Pat oč ka ’sSac r i
fice :Phi l
osophy a sDi ssent "
.
Co ntinent alPhi losoph yRe viw,4
e 6/4, 57 7-6 02.
O'REGAN,C.2 01 7." Hӧl der li
na nd He i
de gge r:Whi ch God Wi l
lSa ve
Us ?".I nJ .Al ison & W.Pal ave r( ed.) ,ThePa l
graveHa ndbooko f
Mi me ticThe or ya ndRe li
gi on.Ne w Yor k:Pa l
gr aveMac mi l
lanUS,37 1-
7.
PALAVER,W.2 00 5." Enmi tya nd Pol iticalI de nti
ty:Fr iend-Ene my-
Pat t
er nsa ndRe l
igion" .J nana de epa:PuneJ ourna lofRe l
igi
o usSt udies,
8/1, 35 -49.

Me
todoVol
.6,n.2(
2018)
68 Wo
lf
gangPa
lav
er

—2
013.Re
néGi
rar
d'sMi
met
icThe
or.Tr
y ans
.byG.Bor
rud,St
udi
esi
n
viole nce,mi me sis,and c ul t
ure .Ea st Lans ing:Mi c
hi gan St ate
Uni ve rsit
yPr e ss.
—2 014." Abol ition orTr ansfor mat ion?ThePol iticalI mpl icati
onsof
Re neGi rard' sThe or yofSac rifi
ce" .InS.Cowde ll& C.Fl emi ng& J .
Hodge( ed.),Vi ol
e nce ,De sire,andt heSa cred.Vo l
ume2:Re néGi rar
d
and Sa crifi
c ei n Li fe,Lo vea nd Li tera tur e.London:Bl ooms bury
Publ ishing, 17 -
29.
PATOČKA, J.1 98 1." He roe sofOurTi me " .Int erna tiona lJournalo fPoliti
cs,
11/1, 10-15.
—1 987.Kuns tundZe i
t.Kul t
ur philosop hischeSc hr if
ten.St uttgart:Kl et
t-
Cot ta.
—1 990.Li b e
rtée ts a c
r if
ice:Éc ritsp ol
itique s.Tr ans .byE.Abr ams ,Kr isi
s.
Gr enobl e:J .Mi llon.
—1 996.He r
e t
ic alEs s aysi nt hePhi losop hyo fHi story .Chi cago:Ope n
Cour t.
—2 002.Pl at
oa ndEur ope .Trans .byP .Lom,Cul turalme mor yint he
pre sent.St anf ord,Cal if.
:Stanf ordUni ve rsityPr ess.
—2 007. Livingi nPr o
b lema tici
ty,Oi kúme né .Pr aha: OI KOYMENH.
—2 015." OnMa sar yk’ sPhi l
os ophyofRe ligi on( 19 77)",inL.Hage dorn
&J .Dodd( ed.) ,Re ligion,Wa ra ndt heCr isiso fMo der
nity:A Spe c
ial
IssueDe dicatedt ot hePhi l
osophyo fJ anPa toč ka.Ne w Yor k:Rout l
e dge,
95-13 5.
—2 016.TheNa tur alWo rlda saPhi losop hica lPr oblem,Nor thwe ster
n
Uni ve rsit
ys tudi esi n phe nome nol ogy & e xistentialphi l
osophy .
Evans t
on,I ll
inoi s:Nor thwe sternUni ver sityPr e ss.
PYSZCZYNSKI,T.A.& J .GREENBERG & S.SOLOMON.20 08.Int heWa keo f
9/11:Th ePs ych ol
o gyo fTer r
o r.7 e d.Wa shi ngt on,DC:Ame ric
an
Psyc hol ogic alAs soc iation.
TUCKER,A.19 92." Patoc kavs .He idegge r:TheHumani sti
cDi ff
erence".
Telos,/92, 85- 98.
—1 992. "Sa cri
f i
c e:Fr om I saact oPat oc ka" .Te los ,/9 1, 117-124.
WARREN,N.d.2 01 5." TheGi ftofEt erni ty" .InL.Hage dorn& J .Dodd
(ed.),Re li
gi on,Wa ra nd theCr isiso fMo der nit
y :A Spe ci
alI ss
ue

Me
todoVol
.6,n.2(
2018)
Wa
randSa
cri
fi
ce 6
9

DedicatedtothePhiloso
phyo fJanPatoč
ka.Ne w York:Routl
edge,161-
80.
WEIL,S.1 965."TheI l
iad,orthePoe m ofForce".Chic
agoRevi
ew,18/2,5-
30.
—2 002.TheNe edforRo ots
:Pr el
udetoaDe cl
a r
ati
ono fDuti
estowards
Ma nkind.Trans.byA.Wi l
ls.London:Rout l
edge.
ZIZEK,S.20 05."Ne i
ghbor sand Ot herMons t e
rs:A PleaforEt hic
al
Violence".In S.Zi zek & E.L.Sant ner& K.Re i
nhard(ed.
),The
Neighbor:ThreeInquiri
esinPo l
iti
calTheo
logy.Chicago:Univer
sityof
ChicagoPr e
ss,134-190.

Me
todoVol
.6,n.2(
2018)