| ||||||||||||||||||
Product Details
Would you like to update product info or give feedback on images?
|
|
Share your thoughts with other customers:
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Most Helpful Customer Reviews
28 of 29 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
Radical Trust between Cogito and Credo,
By A Customer
This review is from: Does God Exist: An Answer for Today (Paperback)
Kung takes the reader through the 'Modern Era's' most challenging intellects and prophetic voices as they wrestle with the 'Question of God'. Setting the stage with the duality of Descartes' 'cogito ergo sum' and Pascal's 'credo ergo sum', Kung charts a course between the intellect and the will, between emotion and reason, between the heart and the mind- and finds the core of 'Faith' in a 'radical trust' that is thoroughly rooted in reality, adressing what is most real, and in complete view of what is really urgent in the context of the hardcore reality of every day life- especially in the reality of life's often meaninglessness, hopelessness, empty, banal and valueless tragedies and crises. Kung works through the lives and works of Hegel, Feuerbach, Freud, Marx, and Nietzsche and along the way identifies the key issues and challenges in their thought and action. Kung is completely open to what is valuable and reasonable in their critique of Theology, Religion, Culture, and Philosophy, yet sharply critical to what is irrational and pathological in their messages and praxis. Kung reaches his climax following a brilliant and incisive analysis of Friedrich Nietzsche's radical critique of all things religious, and uses Nietzsche's struggle with 'nihilism' as his own foil against the response of atheism to the Modern Question of God. If Nietzsche is right, and nihilism is the case, then neither the atheist a la Feuerbach, Freud, Marx, or Nietzsche has a leg to stand on- nor does the theist. Rather, the human condition in the face of the threat of nihilism requires we all risk a choice of fundamental trust in the ultimate meaningfulness and value of life, reality, and existence. Radical trust in God as the ultimate source, foundation and goal of all reality is one response to the nihilistic threat, and Kung argues it is the best approach, for himself and many others. A great and challenging read and truly a treasure chest of ideas, quotes, and often inspirational.
28 of 33 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
Answer with a Question,
By catherine guelph "catrina_g" (milano, italy) - See all my reviews
This review is from: Does God Exist: An Answer for Today (Paperback)
Hans Küng (b1928) is thorough to a fault. From reading this book, I get the impression he could spend all day telling me the sun is out. ;-) I learned a great deal from this book. Nearly every philosopher and theologian from the time of Descartes receives mention, if not a critical exposition. It is difficult for me to recall an influential thinker during the past four millennia who is yet to be considered by Küng. The irony of such thoroughness is that Kung, in fact, leaves his own question unanswered. He does not state that God Exists much less offer a convincing proof. In some sense, I pity those who naively pick up this heavy material expecting the answer to the title to leap leap from one of the pages. That is not the intent of this exhaustive study. On the other hand, my own faith was strengthened by Herr Kung's argument which I would suggest is that it is equally reasonable and rational to believe in GOD as it is to believe in no god. Hans Küng methodically develops the reasonableness of faithing in the GOD of Abraham, and the Christ, Jesus. Based on the finding that it is reasonable to believe in the LORD, my GOD, I found new confidence in my spiritual relationship. My relationship with the LORD is based on a "fundamental trust", as Herr Kung calls it. In this way, I have learned to experience my spiritual relationship in a similar fashion to my valued friendships. Both are based on a growing trust. Although, I cannot prove my friend exists, I can prove that the relationship I have affects my life. In the view of Hans Kung, the grace of GOD plays an important role in this "fundamental trust". He explains, "But also like fundamental trust, trust in God cannot simply be decided on, willed, extorted or produced. I cannot simply create or produce ultimate certainty, security, stability, for myself. God -- as we saw -- is not an object of immediate experience; he is not part of existing reality, he is not among the objects available to experience; no intuition or speculation, no direct experience or immediate perception, can provide a 'view' of him. It is just because of this that belief in God is seen as a gift." In my experience it has required a bit of courage to move from the known to the unknown, however, that courage has been rewarded, in my case, with a strong spiritual relationship. If you are interested in the development of critical thought since Descartes with regard to our relationship with a diety, or if you are interested in learning about the function of fundamental trust in a faith experience which enhances a spiritual relationship, this book will be interesting to you.
31 of 40 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
God - The Ultimate Reality.,
By New Age of Barbarism "zosimos" (EVROPA.) - See all my reviews
This review is from: Does God Exist: An Answer for Today (Paperback)
In this book, which is at once brilliant and incredibly pretentious, Hans Kung attempts to show that it is reasonable to believe in God, even and especially in light of the modern world. The book is essentially a book of doubts, in which virtually every conceivable modern complaint and doubt about the necessity of God's existence is expressed and countered. The book is long, hard, extremely taxing (especially if you engage it properly) and terrifically complicated, so I won't even attempt to do anything like summarize it here. If you truly engage this book, you may find yourself both profoundly troubled and even perhaps experiencing the phenomenon of conversion, e.g. as happened to St. Paul on the road to Damascus. These are profound questions which have troubled the mind of man since he became conscious of himself. They are all the more difficult because there can be no "fence sitting". As Pascal says, "You must wager!"For what it's worth, which likely isn't much, here's what I get out of the book. The atheist position, which is the doubt of God's existence or even the actual denial thereof, has a certain instability to it. The problem with this position is that while the Christian may be wrong in saying that the life of the atheist is intolerable, there is a tendency in fact for the tolerable to become "unbearably tolerable" - i.e. meaningless. The atheist can easily slide into nihilism - extinction into boredom (nothingness). It is against this tendency that the atheist is constantly at odds. On the other hand, the theist position runs into problems in that the theist is perpetually confronting the potential of doubt and to overcompensate for this, he runs the risk of retreating into fanaticism. Obviously despite all the atheist "disproofs" to the contrary, belief in God's existence lives on. So we have reached an impasse. We might ask the question, Is fanaticism bad? Yes and no. As politically incorrect as this statement may be, I contend that fanaticism is not nearly as bad as the alternative. If nothing else it shows that one has indeed something to live for. If one considers the Socratic dictum, "Know thyself!" as a guiding principle to living one's life, then in fact isn't fanaticism precisely this knowing of one's self? Or put another way, fanaticism is the conscious recognition of what one does in fact believe and the upholding of that belief in the face of skepticism. It is for this reason, however that a return to the traditional Thomistic proofs for the existence of God may be necessary. While a confrontation with modernity need not be taken to absurd extremes, the alternative of being assimilated into a meaningless existence is far worse than any reaction to it. Fortunately, Kung does not fall into a naive pluralism but asserts the exclusivity of the Christian revelation. (This of course is a difficult, troubling, and even painful question in the light of other faiths, but one that must nevertheless be answered.) Where Kung does err, he errs on the side of not being dogmatic enough. (As an aside his capitulation to certain feminist beliefs about the "goddess" and a primitive matriarchy, which virtually all experts now claim did not exist, is appalling. But, I won't hold it too much against him.) Nevertheless the book is good, and it will provide countless arguments for apologists to use against the fans of Nietzsche or Freud for example.
Share your thoughts with other customers: Create your own review
|
|
Tags Customers Associate with This Product(What's this?)Click on a tag to find related items, discussions, and people.
|
|
This product's forum
Active discussions in related forums
Search Customer Discussions
|
Related forums
|