Time do dance for the good
ANDREAS PELTZER WRITES:
People with extreme political views are noisy while the majority is quiet. The same in the religious sphere: Individual prophets get ecstatic while millions of faithful go to church calmly.
The understanding of tolerance we got in the era of enlightenment leads many to suffer silently. Since Kant (1781) criticized religious reasoning we regard faith as just an opinion.
The same in politics: As nobody knows the future politics seems to voice nothing more than a current opinion.
As we have different tastes of colours and clothes, freedom of speech seems to allow any extremist to voice the strangest of credo. But total choice and tolerance are not enough as a core of society.
Kant was criticized by Hegel (1816). In any case, to have a secular world of reason excluding metaphysics, religion and politics seems not as safe and sound as it appears.
There were concepts that may be more promising to address the modern challenges. Societies may not agree on a specific "God" but need to strive for the "Good". This pre-condition can’t be reasonably doubted.
But how do we know what is good? The answer isn’t in the books. Fixing matters in writing (norms) kills the freedom it wants to secure, ancient Plato already knew (The Statesman).
In our modern times words have lost their meaning, analysis is exhausted. Politics of sovereignty kills both politics and sovereignty.
Again with Plato we can only hint at the potential for a new politics, a politics of listening as a politics of music and dance. In dance we can see listening. The performance of movement moves us in itself.
Dancing the word in a "volcanic of stillness" (Dickinson) may unbound the silent majority to sing its own melody (Marx) and bring back meaning to society. African societies know how to dance. They are more advanced than many others think.
People with extreme political views are noisy while the majority is quiet. The same in the religious sphere: Individual prophets get ecstatic while millions of faithful go to church calmly.
The understanding of tolerance we got in the era of enlightenment leads many to suffer silently. Since Kant (1781) criticized religious reasoning we regard faith as just an opinion.
The same in politics: As nobody knows the future politics seems to voice nothing more than a current opinion.
As we have different tastes of colours and clothes, freedom of speech seems to allow any extremist to voice the strangest of credo. But total choice and tolerance are not enough as a core of society.
Kant was criticized by Hegel (1816). In any case, to have a secular world of reason excluding metaphysics, religion and politics seems not as safe and sound as it appears.
There were concepts that may be more promising to address the modern challenges. Societies may not agree on a specific "God" but need to strive for the "Good". This pre-condition can’t be reasonably doubted.
But how do we know what is good? The answer isn’t in the books. Fixing matters in writing (norms) kills the freedom it wants to secure, ancient Plato already knew (The Statesman).
In our modern times words have lost their meaning, analysis is exhausted. Politics of sovereignty kills both politics and sovereignty.
Again with Plato we can only hint at the potential for a new politics, a politics of listening as a politics of music and dance. In dance we can see listening. The performance of movement moves us in itself.
Dancing the word in a "volcanic of stillness" (Dickinson) may unbound the silent majority to sing its own melody (Marx) and bring back meaning to society. African societies know how to dance. They are more advanced than many others think.
Kommentaar
Republikein
Geen kommentaar is op hierdie artikel gelaat nie