Imanence and Transcendence
Written by Dr Gordon E Carkner
In my earlier book, The Great Escape from Nihilism, I showed the serious impact of contemporary nihilism on our vision and our culture in the West—it often feels like a prison. It impacts every aspect of life resulting in many young people today having an existential identity crisis. Is there a way of escape from cultural nihilism?
In my recent publication, Towards an Incarnational Spiritual Culture, I compare two radically different ways of seeing and engaging the world (social imaginaries):
a. the epistemological approach (Gk. Theory of knowledge);
b. the hermeneutical approach (Gk. Science of interpretation).
I hold that here is a way out of nihilism and into higher, richer meaning, but we must navigate it carefully. We need a fresh vision for life in late modernity.
An impact of nihilism
… many young people today are having an existential identity crisis
a. The Epistemological Way of Seeing
The set of priority relations within this narrative positions it within a closed world system (CWS), or an immanent frame as Charles Taylor suggests (A Secular Age, 2007, chapter 15[i]). Its assumptions include proponents like Descartes, Locke, and Hume.
Taylor describes identity as the modern buffered self (ie. isolated and self-sufficient). We find this approach rooted more in Anglo-American philosophy. The connection between self and the world is an I-It relationship. Some call it the way of disenchantment or reduction of reality. Here are some of the key elements:
· Knowledge of self and its status comes before knowledge of the world (things) and others (cogito ergo sum).
· Knowledge of reality is a neutral fact, before the individual self-attributes value to it.
· Knowledge of things of the natural order comes before any theoretical invocations or any transcendence. Transcendence is often problematized, doubted or repressed—for example, in reductive materialism. This approach tends to write dimensions of transcendence out of the equation as a danger to wellbeing (superstition). Science is hacked by scientism.
· The meaning of being human is much harder to capture in this frame of reference—leading to disenchantment. Productivity is of the essence. It can cause alienation and lead to skepticism, promote disengagement from a cold, mechanistic, materialistic cosmos.
· Language is Designative (Hobbes, Locke, Condillac)—instrumental, pointing at an object, manipulating objects, and often in turn manipulating people as objects. This is a flattened form of language, which does not allow us to name things in their depth of context, their embeddedness. Poetry, symbol, myth are missing from its discourse. Scientific rationalism is dominant: evidence and justified belief (See Charles Taylor, The Language Animal). All is explained by causal relationships and empirical measurements, with nothing beyond.
· Power and violence hides under the cloak of knowledge and techne: colonization, imperialism, war, Patriarchy, environmental exploitation, Global North versus Global South, East versus West. Hubris, dominance and colonialism are endemic problems in this view.
· Ethics is left to the private sphere of individual values, and because of the fact-value dualism, moral subjectivism results. In turn, moral relativism emerges. This often leads to loss of moral agency and nihilism, partly due to the loss of a meta-narrative and the communal dimension of ethics.
· Human flourishing is a central concern within this immanent frame: reduction of suffering and increase of happiness. Health, lifespan, safety, entertainment, economic opportunity, consumer choice are all key cultural drivers. This results in a thin self, focused on rights, entitlements, opportunities to advance one’s own personal interests and agenda.
Self & the world
a world … shot through with meaning and discovery.
b. The Hermeneutical Way of Seeing:
The working assumptions of this approach includes proponents like Heidegger, Merleau-Ponty, Gadamer, the later Wittgenstein, Charles Taylor, and Jens Zimmermann. We find this approach rooted in Continental philosophy. The connection between the self and the world is an I-Thou relationship.
· Self in this case is not the first priority. The world, society, and the game of life come first. We only have knowledge as agents coping with the world, and it makes no sense to doubt that world in its fullness. Taken at face value, this world is shot through with meaning and discovery.
· There is no priority of a neutral grasp of things over and above their value. It comes to us as a whole experience of facts and valuations all at once, insights and desires interwoven.
· Our primordial identity is as a new player inducted into an old game. We learn the game of life and begin to interpret experience for ourselves within a larger communal context. Identity, morality, and spirituality are interwoven as parts of our identity. We sort through our conversations, dialogue with interlocutors, looking for a robust and practical picture of reality—leading to meaning, fruitful engagement, and purpose.
· Transcendence or the divine horizon is a possible larger context of this social imaginary—metaphysics is validated. Radical skepticism is not as strong here as in the epistemological approach. There is a smaller likelihood of a closed world system (CWS, closed to transcendence as a spin on reality or framework of seeing). In a sense, it is more humble, nuanced, embodied, socially and culturally situated within a history.
· Language usage is Expressive-Constitutive (Herder, Hamann, Humboldt, Gadamer). The mythic, poetic, ethical, aesthetic, and liturgical revives, offering cultural re-enchantment. Language is rich and expressive, open, creative, appealing to the depths and breadths of the human soul. Language is a sign rather than a mere instrument. (See Charles Taylor, The Language Animal).
· Moral agency is revived within a community (oneself as another) with a strong narrative identity, in a relationship to the good, within a hierarchy of moral goods and practical virtuous habits that are mutually enriching and nurturing. The Supreme Good is a motivation for constructive behaviour. One is more patient with the Other, the stranger: hospitality dominates over hostility.
· The focus of human flourishing is on how we can live well, within our social location—a whole geography of relationships that shape our identity, and which we in turn shape as well. This is considered a thick version of the self, open to strong transcendence, within a meaningful whole.
TJ - As the challenges of the 21st Century roll on, we need to ask, ‘which direction, immanent or transcendent, leads to a more grounded and resilient identity?’ Indeed, should we opt for both?!
Gord’s book, Towards an Incarnational spiritual Culture, is available on-line:
References
[i] Taylor explains the ‘immanent frame’ as the notion that everything is part of a natural order, understandable without reference to anything outside itself. Transcendence, therefore, is off limits.