KUD Logos

Pavle RakI would like to underline one question which was touched in two contributions during this afternoon and that is: what is /the/ faith and what does the almighty God want from us? Sometimes I have the strong impression that Shestov and maybe God with him want too much from us and that this /it/ is something that almost nobody can accomplish. This sort of absolute faith – sometimes I have the impression that if we demand that from ourselves – that then we are in a helpless position.Matjaž ČrnivecWell, in my opinion Shestov is a very radical ...

Federico Skodler

Istituto Internazionale J. Maritain, TriesteSummaryThis paper deals with the relation between Maritain and She-stov. Deep differences existed in the thinking of these two philosophers, who met in 1937 thanks to Benjamin Fondane. Maritain places Shestov in the wake of Kierkegaard, Barth, Berdjaev and Léon Bloy. In his opinion, Shestov must face deep inside himself a substantial antinomy: he makes philosophy against philosophy, his thought a contradictory, yet deep and powerful form of Jewish thinking, of the eternal Jewish protest. Shestov is a precious stimulus for the renewal of religious thought thanks to his...

Nicolas Monseu

Université catholique de LouvainRésuméCet article examine la place que Chestov accorde à la question de la religion dans son interprétation existentielle de la phénoménologie de Husserl et procède, pour ce faire, en deux étapes. Premièrement, il s’agit de comprendre le présupposé qui est au principe de la perspective herméneutique dans laquelle Chestov envisage Husserl et qui correspond à la distinction radicale de la qualité logique de la vérité et de sa qualité subjective. L’enjeu est de comprendre, avec Chestov, les limites de la théorie husserlienne de l’existence idéale de la vérité et ...

Gorazd Kocijančič

SummaryThe article attempts to analyse the text by Emanuel Levinas focussing on Shestov’s book “Kierkegaard et la philosophie existentielle (Vox clamantis in deserto)”, published in 1937 in Revue des études juives, II, July-December 1937, no. 3, pp. 139-141. It is argued that this text by Levinas reveals some basic tenets of Shestov’s and his own thought – and therefore also post-modern thought in general. It is further claimed that the grounding of Levinas’ objection to Shestov’s thought – his “fear” – could be summarized in the thesis that in his opinion philosophy could not be abandoned to the wild...