니체의 기독교 비판과 세속적 신정론 (Nietzsche’s Critique of Christianity and Secular Theodicy)

서지정보

· 발행기관 : 서울대학교 종교문제연구소
· 수록지 정보 : 종교와 문화 / 26호 / 23 ~ 53페이지
· 저자명 : 권정기

초록

In his historical-psychological diagnosis of the history of the humanity and in an effort to get near the essence of Christianity ‘beyond good and evil,’ Nietzsche has exposed the falsity of unsubstantiated presumption of truth and its concomitant claims of epistemological approachability to truth, and in turn presented his own genealogical exegesis of the Western moral philosophy. Concerned with elucidating in all truthfulness the reality of would-be truths, he has attempted to reveal those ‘truths’ fraught with falsities of homogenised histories and contingencies beyond violence, as were exemplified by the occasions of the ‘faith’ confessed within the frame of dogmas and institutions plundering the ‘practice’ of historical Jesus as a free spirit.
Initially a treacherous social emotion of the inferior underclass, Nietzsche tells us, the moral sentiment of ressentiment has been refurbished into an effective weapon of survival in the course of transvaluation by the Judaism and early Christianity of two millennia or so ago. Nevertheless the theodicy of Christianity as a tool of its will to power has ended up having its men and women tied up weak and powerless and willing more pain, only to foster the will to equality geared to revenge rather than strengthened capability. To get matured through spiritual perseverance, however, they are advised to repudiate the theodicy of this ‘religion of pity’ and embrace the ‘order of rank.’ In so doing the ascetic ideal of Christianity constitutes the most realistic, if not the ideal, condition for the best existence, for it leads them to self-overcoming that is none other than the affirmation of life and the will to power.
Nietzsche observes that for the modern masses armed with the theodicy of asceticism suffering and its derivative ressentiment serve as a stimulant astute enough to protect their existence from constant challenges from within and without and lead them to an affirmation of life. However, contrary to his belief that ressentiment is just an individual disposition of pathology, whether positive or negative, this moral sentiment seems to be rather a modern phenomenon associated with social structure. At all events, the secular theodicy of Nietzsche himself is to desist any transcendental meaning or justification for suffering, and accept it positively, that is the affirmation of life as it is, or amor fati. Then it would follow that amor fati is, for Nietzsche, the ‘archpriest of pious unbelief,’ a relevant soteriological experimentation for the post-theistic modern era.

영어초록

In his historical-psychological diagnosis of the history of the humanity and in an effort to get near the essence of Christianity ‘beyond good and evil,’ Nietzsche has exposed the falsity of unsubstantiated presumption of truth and its concomitant claims of epistemological approachability to truth, and in turn presented his own genealogical exegesis of the Western moral philosophy. Concerned with elucidating in all truthfulness the reality of would-be truths, he has attempted to reveal those ‘truths’ fraught with falsities of homogenised histories and contingencies beyond violence, as were exemplified by the occasions of the ‘faith’ confessed within the frame of dogmas and institutions plundering the ‘practice’ of historical Jesus as a free spirit.
Initially a treacherous social emotion of the inferior underclass, Nietzsche tells us, the moral sentiment of ressentiment has been refurbished into an effective weapon of survival in the course of transvaluation by the Judaism and early Christianity of two millennia or so ago. Nevertheless the theodicy of Christianity as a tool of its will to power has ended up having its men and women tied up weak and powerless and willing more pain, only to foster the will to equality geared to revenge rather than strengthened capability. To get matured through spiritual perseverance, however, they are advised to repudiate the theodicy of this ‘religion of pity’ and embrace the ‘order of rank.’ In so doing the ascetic ideal of Christianity constitutes the most realistic, if not the ideal, condition for the best existence, for it leads them to self-overcoming that is none other than the affirmation of life and the will to power.
Nietzsche observes that for the modern masses armed with the theodicy of asceticism suffering and its derivative ressentiment serve as a stimulant astute enough to protect their existence from constant challenges from within and without and lead them to an affirmation of life. However, contrary to his belief that ressentiment is just an individual disposition of pathology, whether positive or negative, this moral sentiment seems to be rather a modern phenomenon associated with social structure. At all events, the secular theodicy of Nietzsche himself is to desist any transcendental meaning or justification for suffering, and accept it positively, that is the affirmation of life as it is, or amor fati. Then it would follow that amor fati is, for Nietzsche, the ‘archpriest of pious unbelief,’ a relevant soteriological experimentation for the post-theistic modern era.

참고자료

· 없음