man of faith, reason, and especially the existence of God between Christianity and philosophy .
One of the greatest philosophers of our age that blends classical thought - Plato, Aristotle, Augustine, Thomas - modern thought - especially the French and German philosophy - taking the challenge of the latter, showing items critics and trying to pass through it and overcome it in the name of a "return to reality." Sees in philosophy a form of "institutionalized naivety" and includes the horizon as a Christian is a healthy challenge to reason. Robert Spaemann, professor emeritus of philosophy at the Ludwig-Maximilians University of Monaco of Bavaria, has been defined at the same time, "Defender of human dignity" and a "skeptical guide for our time", irreducible to any philosophical and cultural fashion, performs its operation in relation to philosophical dialogue with great thinkers of Western philosophy. In this interview gives an overview of some focal points of his thought: the original interpretation given to the concept of Christian philosophy, the relationship between philosophy and Christianity in modern times and beyond, the concept of person, to attempt to formulate a rational demonstration of ' existence of God appropriate to our time ...
.
1. Professor Spaemann cultural directions in the West has taken is of great significance to the encounter between Christianity and revealed religion, and philosophy. At various times the dialogue or dialectic between the two bodies has certainly led to the formulation of a specific conceptual horizon and value and at the same time wished to be universal. In modernity the relationship between philosophy and Christianity has declined in a particularly interesting. It then emerged the idea of \u200b\u200ba Christian philosophy?
.
I think the great Christian era was not aware of the concept of Christian philosophy, St. Thomas Aquinas has not claimed that his was a Christian philosophy. The elements essential elements of his philosophy are borrowed from Aristotle and the Church Fathers had previously taken many cues from the philosophy of Plato. Both, the Aristotelian philosophy is that the Platonic philosophy is not Christian. One could therefore say that the conception of a Christian philosophy arises only in the modern era because modern thought, in an interesting way, with subjects that until now had its own theology. Philosophy, for example, became interested in the depth of the person, not only raises the question of virtue, but also its deepest meaning. Christian theology would say that the proper foundation of virtue was love: caritas est virtutum form. Of this before discussing theology. In modern times, however, we find that Kant's philosophy is to bring to this problem, or Hegel, whose whole philosophical endeavor is an attempt to reconstruct Christianity from a philosophical point of view. Rousseau tries to explain how mankind is evil and evil as it is transmitted by inheritance - why would echo the theme of original sin - the proper theological theme. In modern theology's arguments come to philosophy. In this we can say that a part of modern philosophy has tried to rebuild a Christian philosophical considering himself a Christian philosophy.
.
2. It thus appears that Christianity, in a sense, is emptied of its very nature of revealed religion. A reduction should also be proven by the experience of certain Enlightenment that has not entirely closed the dialogue with religion, but that was perhaps designed within the limits of philosophical reason?
.
Yes, the Age of Enlightenment, the idea of \u200b\u200ba religion naturelle, a natural religion that is inherently a religion without revelation, Jesus, for example, for the enlightened believers - there are obviously those atheists - is a great master, to Rousseau and Kant is indeed the master most important of natural religion. This can be explained as the Enlightenment, the moral consider a very important thing is to devise a Christianity without detection mainly to the recall of behavior in its particulars. The ingredients such as worship, for example, they disappear. For the Enlightenment in France, then, as well as for Hume, philosophy is seen as a worldview alternative to Christianity.
.
3. There was also someone who tried to go beyond the moral transforming truths of the faith, the main Christian mysteries in necessary truths of reason, and in this example could be the immediate Hegelian philosophy. I think, for example, to attempt to formulate a theory of original sin, which is in the theological dogma, then something is not provable by human reason ...
.
As said the whole philosophy of Hegel is the attempt to formulate a Christian philosophy. In Rousseau, in his philosophy, not all the mysteries of the faith they had found the place. Hegel tries to take this step and the theory of original sin is one example. He wants to get rid of the distinction between dogmatic theology and philosophy. In the wake of the reflections of Rousseau, who influenced much of German historical-philosophical speculation - and even Marx - Hegel sees original sin as a necessary step towards freedom, and then from that step runs the possibility for man to become, through a dialectical process, more human. Peccatum out of the original as the original natural and the reawakening of freedom become indistinguishable. However, we must remember that the biblical text says something else and then that leads to different consequences. This interpretation has been possible thanks to the changing concept of original sin that put forward by Protestant theology, then, philosophy has found several formulations in Rousseau, Hegel, Marx and Heidegger in.
.
4. With end of modernity and the advent of post-modern, it is possible that Christianity and philosophical reason to some extent return to dialogue and under what conditions this new meeting might take place?
.
ancient times, the relationship between philosophy and Christianity was competitive in the Middle Ages theology with the philosophy established a hierarchical relationship in the modern integration was attempted in the philosophy of the Christian faith. I think that in the post-modern theology and philosophy can coexist in an effort not predetermined methodically, on common issues. This does not mean opening the gates to irrationalism. The effort quota shows that it is always at stake is the truth. Faith does not explain all the paradigms of the world and sees itself as the ultimate truth, the philosophy on his part should not try to embrace the faith in its category, nor to interpret it authentically, but may be open to faith without providing a closed system hermeneutics of the world. As long as the model of Socrates philosophy is you can not turn our gaze to Christ.
.
5. Professor, one of the cornerstones of his thought is the vision of man as a person who is in a mixture, in a balance, so to speak, between nature and reason. The concept of person is as old as the meeting between philosophy and Christianity, you do it just underlines a key element. What?
.
The definition of man as a person is an anthropological theory, means a person to be conscious, be conscious of himself, he knows his own being and from my point of view, what is important and that the person is a being who can develop a distance from himself, a being whose nature is not like the one in which the animal (Natur ist), but a being who possesses a kind (hat eine Natur). The person then can act with its own nature in different ways may wish to be different from what you may want to have a better character. A drug addict, for example, may not want to take more drugs, having the desire, the urge to take, but he has the desire to not have this desire, this is what Harry Frankfurt calls secondary Volition, that is their own will Being someone who is capable of establishing a distance between being and nature.
.
6. In this sense, then, we can draw two concepts that you have detailed how their attitudes of the person: the promise and forgiveness?
.
Yes course. We can make two examples: one is precisely that of the Promise. I do not know how and what to think about tomorrow, I do not know what will be my feelings, but I can now make a promise, so I am independent of the same mood that I will have tomorrow. I promise that I will come to see you tomorrow, and do nothing if you're puzzled about my promise, I repeat that you have promised. This is typical of the person. The other example that we can make about forgiveness. Forgiving someone does not say to another surface: "yes you're right," you can not do anything in that regard, "but says" no, you do not want to be-so "," you would have wanted do not do it, "" look as if you had not done ", ie the man allows another man to distance himself from his well-being.
.
7. In view of man as a person, including the reference to the concept of nature and the origins of this concept can be traced not only in classical philosophy, but also in Christian theology, we think that it might not be a fundamental metaphysical background. Then the concept of person who plays the role of metaphysics?
.
Although my approach is primarily anthropological and metaphysical, I can say, however, that without a theory of the Absolute, then without a metaphysics, of course, the concept of person is something that can not be sustained. We lost something like "human dignity". Someone can pretend to ignore this concept and say, "is a good person, I will smash your head and is no longer a person." If the person has no dignity, why should we respect it? So, here comes into play something unconditional (unbedingt), which lies in a metaphysical horizon, while the metaphysical science of the Absolute and not of man as a person.
.
8. People are placed in a historical and cultural context, we now live in multiethnic societies and globalization has placed serious issues such as integration and coexistence in a society of groups of different ethnicity, culture and religion. You will never find a common ethical horizon capable of identifying rules shared by all?
.
There are common rules that are related to the nature of man. All men have a human nature, it is what allows to establish ethical principles from which the basic rules of coexistence. Nature, therefore, can not be ignored, it has a normative character: we can not think of doing something unnatural is of no consequence and does not say anything. Without a legislative nature of the act of cannibal of Rotenburg - who killed and ate horribly another person with his consent - not generate moral objections, even before legal action. I believe they see in nature a divine will and so it is easier to grasp the normative orientation, ethics would be unthinkable without metaphysical foundation. Dostoyevsky is right when he says: "If God does not exist, everything is permitted."
.
9. We come just like that the question of God, which seems to have been confined to the present day context of faith, or rather the faiths. In particular, a science that stands as the only explanation of reality, not least the possibility of a compendium of authorities in the world, but from the description you provide to us the reality of evolution has drawn a road, beyond the scientism, to reach God ...
.
Yes we can advance an argument in relation to evolution. I believe that the Evolution, the science of human evolution is compatible with Christian revelation better than the Aristotelian doctrine about the eternity of the world and of all natural species. Today we know that species have a source. The critical issue is the fact, however, that modern evolutionists say that there are random mutations and then select useful for survival. They are interested more in the selection of the mutation and to say that if you make up the human interiority and subjectivity and "shock" and "emergency" are words which show a jump from non-living to life. So we are not faced with a continuous evolution, but before jumping from bare life to self-awareness. This jump, in my opinion, it can hardly understand - As the world would become unintelligible - if we do not think that these jumps arise and will depend on a creator: God This argument can be considered a variant of the classical theological arguments about the existence of God
.
10. She has also tried to bring a proof of God, appropriate to our time, with the aim of overcoming modernity, Nietzsche also calls into question that had marked the "death of God" what is it?
.
One argument that I think it was first conceived by me is what I call the argument from grammar (Die Argumentation aus der Grammatik), and may be as follows: if we, here, now, we conduct these discussions in the future will always be so, that we have now brought this conversation . If today we were here we will be here tomorrow. It would not make sense that someone would say: "these discussions have never been there." It would deny a reality. So all that was left in this as something that was. But what does this mean? What does this have been? The footprints, the tracks we leave sooner or later will vanish and the memory and then there will be more precisely for this reason must have a set Be Aware Absolute in which everything is stored: all pain, all joy. If not, if there had this to say you should be aware therefore that the past is extinguished, but for us it is a thought not possible. So if someone says, "is no longer true that once we were sitting here," then you should say that his "hour" is not real. The classic demonstration of the existence of God all imply something: that human reason is particularly capable of truth and thus is a person. If a man denies the truth of their capacity - such as scientism would require thinking the only reason as an organ of adaptation - can not easily demonstrate the existence of God from the empirical reality. This can only do so under the premise that reality has a rational structure and that our reason is capable of truth. If we do not accept what we can not prove the existence of God Now Nietzsche has shown that the ability of human truth again depends on the existence of God the two truth conditions the other. Self-assertion of man as a person and the existence of God are two concepts that do not give one without the other.
Sandro Botticelli, The Birth of Venus 
Four hundred and one years after the first observation of the Moon performed by Galileo, it's time to "break his spell." It is not a neo-inquisitor to explain, but the opposite is Stuart Kauffman, a biologist and complexity theory, a perfect example of celebrities made in the USA. She wrote "Reinventing the Sacred 'and colleagues propose a conceptual earthquake, based on the theorem of a scientific pantheist god, identified with the impetuous metamorphosis of everything from microbes to galaxies. 
Theologians say that the universe has many traits "quotas." They mean that the phenomena has to be explained with reference to something else, with external causes of the universe. Certainly the existence of human beings, like almost everything that we can observe in the universe, is, in this sense, contingent. 
Catholic University of Sacred Heart 
"Today, the cultural aspect of Christianity is not to establish themselves as civil religion, but exercise and practice of encounter and of listening." Mauro Ceruti, professor of genetics at the University of Bergamo epistemology, raised in the 'secular' the secularization of the Christian message to reach a fruitful dialogue. 
Now, some traces of inscriptions engraved on the cloth of the Shroud as evidence in the light re-emerge, according to researcher Barbara Frale, which dates back to the old shroud beginning of the first century and had been wrapped a man named Jesus of Nazareth. 
Today, in Western Europe, nothing has become the horizon of our culture, whose passions are dying so exasperated. This nihilism has deep roots here that some people tend to Mostar. In particular, they have necessarily led to the blank messianic history. The temptation to reduce the man they are calling for total war, totalitarian regimes, the annihilation of part of the Third World. 
ROME - Those who thought that the era of the Enlightenment had given his best in the eighteenth century, must think again after reading the interview Thursday, February 4 by Professor Umberto Veronesi Sky TG24. 
SQUILLACE - An effective portrait of a crucial figure in European history, Cassiodorus. Franco Cardini submit it with his latest book, "Cassiodorus the Great. Rome, the barbarians and monasticism ", published by Jaca Book, edited by the Institute Cassiodorus Cassiodorus Cultural Center Association, the City of Squillace and the region of Calabria. 
"Why, brethren, we are not anxious to seek opportunities for mutual salvation, and we do not lend mutual aid where we see most needed, bringing fraternally one another's burdens? Loving us remember this, the `Apostle says:" Bear one another's burdens, and so fulfill the law of Christ "(Gal 6: 2). And elsewhere: Bear one another in love (cf. Eph 4, 2). This is undoubtedly the law of Christ. 
The eternal Father, with liberal and mysterious design of his wisdom and goodness, created the universe, has decreed to raise men to share His divine life, and when they fell in Adam, not abandoned them, but has always provided the necessary help for salvation in the light of Christ the Redeemer, "who is the image of God, the firstborn of every creature" (Col. 1, 15). All the elect from eternity by the Father "in his prescience known them and them predestined to be conformed to the image of His Son, that he is the firstborn among many brethren "(Rom 8, 29). Believers in Christ wanted them to convene in the holy Church, which, already foreshadowed since the beginning of the world, wonderfully prepared in the history of the people of Israel and in the old covenant and established "in recent times" was manifest in the Spirit and will have glorious completion at the end of time. Then, as stated in the holy fathers, all right, starting with Adam, "the righteous Abel to the last elected," will be reunited with the Father in the universal Church. 
After a long hibernation, due to the widespread belief that religion, at least in the West, it was finally withdrawn in very little relevant private individual, the Islamic terrorism as we have awakened with a start and problem of the public dimension of religion has become one of the hottest contemporary cultural debate. Whether you talk about fundamentalism or European identity, of a secular state or bioethics, the latter is still controversial relationship between politics and religion that is. And although some signs suggesting the contrary, we must necessarily expect that taking advantage of this new awareness that politics is religion. 
It would take just a God "Now only God can save us," said Heidegger. But the God of Jesus Christ does not lend itself too easily be manipulated. It is the main condition that made possible the emergence in the West dell'irripetibile uniqueness of each person, but does not let you decline this uniqueness in terms of modern individualism, enhances the desire for happiness in the heart of every man but to those who do good, at least on this earth, promises the cross sees politics as the art more noble to serve the "common good", but on political power (also on the church) sees the lurking "beast" that rises from the depths; assigned as a right to live according to the usages and customs of their community, but to those who acted as a fetish of the identity of this or that culture (including Western) said that, after Christ, can be only the identity of the human family, as for those who would like resacralisation the world, they are reminded that Christ still use strong words of René Girard, "defeated revealing sacred violence." 
For the reasons some of which I have already mentioned, there is certainly a sort of irreducible tension between Christianity and politics. The Christian is in the world without being of the world, and this tension exists in every age, so even in modern times. But not for this we are forced to decline in a modern secular anti-Christian and anti-modern Christianity so. Christianity is not reducible to politics, the policy indicates some "limits", of course. But this is precisely its most important contribution to a policy that should be truly liberal and democratic, without falling into clericalism, either in Secularism, two temptations lurking. It is precisely these "limits"-for example, the inviolable dignity of every person, the rights to life and freedom that we carry with us by birth, not for political concessions, to be the largest bank to possible misuses "autarkic" or worse even "totalitarian." 
What I mean is that, far from constituting the foundation of a liberal culture and democratic relativism constitutes the disease, the antechamber of the most radical functionalism. When we say any truth, from the simplest ones, like "snow is white", to more complex ones, like "Luigi is a true friend," we do not do with the mental reservation that what we say may not be true or that it is true simply because we are convinced. Rather we believe it is true, precisely because we see that snow is white and that Louis is a true friend. Without this confidence in a truth that ultimately is revealed to us, which we are not masters, we can accept or not accept, but which is otherwise unavailable, even our politicians have great values \u200b\u200bconsistency. Pluralism, tolerance, majority principle, the idea of \u200b\u200brule of law would end inevitably be confused with the demagoguery and the struggle for power's sake. Thanks to the truth, however, the public debate is forced to keep alive as an instance of objectivity and unavailable, which I consider valuable, especially in front of the risk of confusing pluralism and relativism, rights and desires, tolerance and indifference, and that the much-vaunted dialogue between cultures is transformed into a kind of abstract ritual, where everyone has the same reasons , as he would like the ideology of multiculturalism. 
One of the greatest philosophers of our age that blends classical thought - Plato, Aristotle, Augustine, Thomas - modern thought - especially the French and German philosophy - taking the challenge of the latter, showing items critics and trying to pass through it and overcome it in the name of a "return to reality." Sees in philosophy a form of "institutionalized naivety" and includes the horizon as a Christian is a healthy challenge to reason. Robert Spaemann, professor emeritus of philosophy at the Ludwig-Maximilians University of Monaco of Bavaria, has been defined at the same time, "Defender of human dignity" and a "skeptical guide for our time", irreducible to any philosophical and cultural fashion, performs its operation in relation to philosophical dialogue with great thinkers of Western philosophy. In this interview gives an overview of some focal points of his thought: the original interpretation given to the concept of Christian philosophy, the relationship between philosophy and Christianity in modern times and beyond, the concept of person, to attempt to formulate a rational demonstration of ' existence of God appropriate to our time ... 
"We are witnessing the spread of a knowledge model that aims to be more accurate and rigorous as empirically verifiable or falsifiable. 
"The dream of the night did not belong to us. It is our good. It is, for us, a kidnapper, the most puzzling of the kidnappers kidnapped our being. The nights, the nights do not have a history. Not coalesce with each other. And when you have lived a lot, when you have lived twenty thousand nights and more, you never know which night in far, far away we started to dream. The night did not happen. There are, no doubt, of all nights will not be merged in the day when our lives enough to manipulate his memories. 
