by John Paul II
Following is an abridged excerpt from the Encyclical Fides et Ratio, Chapter VII, where the Holy Father tackles the Philosophical errors
that characterize the post-modernism of our times. As always, the original numbering has been retained for ease of reference, and subheadings added to facilitate reading.
Importance of philosophical tradition
85. I believe that those philosophers who wish to respond today to the demands which the word of God makes on human thinking should develop their thought on
the basis of these postulates and in organic continuity with the great tradition which, beginning with the ancients, passes through the Fathers of the Church and the masters of Scholasticism and includes the fundamental
achievements of modern and contemporary thought. If philosophers can take their place within this tradition and draw their inspiration from it, they will certainly not fail to respect philosophy's demand for autonomy.
In the present situation, therefore, it is most significant that some philosophers are promoting a recovery of the determining role of this tradition for a right approach to knowledge. The appeal to tradition is not a
mere remembrance of the past; it involves rather the recognition of a cultural heritage that belongs to all of humanity. Indeed it may be said that it is we who belong to the tradition and that it is not ours to dispose
of at will. Precisely by being rooted in the tradition will we be able today to develop for the future an original, new and constructive mode of thinking. This same appeal is all the more valid for theology. Not only
because theology has the living Tradition of the Church as its original source, but also because, in virtue of this, it must be able to recover both the profound theological tradition of earlier times and the enduring
tradition of that philosophy which by dint of its authentic wisdom can transcend the boundaries of space and time.
86. This insistence on the need for a close relationship of continuity between contemporary
philosophy and the philosophy developed in the Christian tradition is intended to avert the danger which lies hidden in some currents of thought which are especially prevalent today. It is appropriate, I think, to
review them, however briefly, in order to point out their errors and the consequent risks for philosophical work.
86. The first goes by the name of eclecticism, by which is meant the
approach of those who, in research, teaching and argumentation, even in theology, tend to use individual ideas drawn from different philosophies, without concern for their internal coherence, their place within a system
or their historical context. They therefore run the risk of being unable to distinguish the part of truth of a given doctrine from elements of it that may be erroneous or ill-suited to the task at hand. An extreme form
of eclecticism appears also in the rhetorical misuse of philosophical terms to which some theologians are given at times. Such manipulation does not help the search for truth and does not train reason--whether
theological or philosophical--to formulate arguments seriously and scientifically. The rigorous and far-reaching study of philosophical doctrines, their particular terminology and the context in which they arose, helps
to overcome the danger of eclecticism and makes it possible to integrate them into theological discourse in a way appropriate to the task.
Historicism and Modernism
87. Eclecticism is an
error of method, but lying hidden within it can also be the claims of historicism. To understand a doctrine from the past correctly, it is necessary to set it within its proper historical and cultural context. The
fundamental claim of historicism, however, is that the truth of a philosophy is determined on the basis of its appropriateness to a certain period and a certain historical purpose. At least implicitly, therefore, the
enduring validity of truth is denied. What was true in one period, historicists claim, may not be true in another. Thus for them the history of thought becomes little more than an archeological resource useful for
illustrating positions once held, but for the most part outmoded and meaningless now.
On the contrary, it should not be forgotten that, even if a formulation is bound in some way by time and culture, the truth or the
error which it expresses can invariably be identified and evaluated as such despite the distance of space and time.
In theological inquiry, historicism tends to appear for the most part under the guise of "modernism".
Rightly concerned to make theological discourse relevant and understandable to our time, some theologians use only the most recent opinions and philosophical language, ignoring the critical evaluation which ought to be
made of them in the light of the tradition. By exchanging relevance for truth, this form of modernism shows itself incapable of satisfying the demands of truth to which theology is called to respond.
Positivism, Neo-positivism and Scientism
88. Another threat to be reckoned with is scientism. This is the philosophical notion that refuses to admit the validity of forms of knowledge other than
those of the positive sciences; it relegates religious, theological, ethical and aesthetic knowledge to the realm of mere fantasy. In the past, the same idea emerged in positivism and neo-positivism, which considered
metaphysical statements to be meaningless.
Critical epistemology has discredited such a claim, but now we see it revived in the new guise of scientism, which dismisses values as mere products of the
emotions and rejects the notion of being in order to clear the way for pure and simple facticity. Science would thus be poised to dominate all aspects of human life through technological progress. The undeniable
triumphs of scientific research and contemporary technology have helped to propagate a scientistic outlook, which now seems boundless, given its inroads into different cultures and the radical changes it has brought.
Regrettably, it must be noted, scientism consigns all that has to do with the question of the meaning of life to the realm of the irrational or imaginary. No less disappointing is the way in which it
approaches the other great problems of philosophy which, if they are not ignored, are subjected to analyses based on superficial analogies, lacking all rational foundation. This leads to the impoverishment of human
thought, which no longer addresses the ultimate problems which the human being, as the animal rationale, has pondered constantly from the beginning of time. And since it leaves no space for the critique offered by
ethical judgement, the scientistic mentality has succeeded in leading many to think that if something is technically possible it is therefore morally admissible.
less dangerous is pragmatism, an attitude of mind which, in making its choices, precludes theoretical considerations or judgements based on ethical principles. The practical consequences of this mode of thinking are
significant. In particular there is growing support for a concept of democracy that is not grounded upon any reference to unchanging values: whether or not a line of action is admissible is decided by the vote of a
parliamentary majority. The consequences of this are clear: in practice, the great moral decisions of humanity are subordinated to decisions taken one after another by institutional agencies. Moreover, anthropology
itself is severely compromised by a one-dimensional vision of the human being, a vision that excludes the great ethical dilemmas and the existential analyses of the meaning of suffering and sacrifice, of life and death.
90. The positions we have examined lead in turn to a more general conception that appears today as the common framework of many philosophies which have rejected the meaningfulness
of being. I am referring to the nihilist interpretation, which is at once the denial of all foundations and the negation of all objective truth. Quite apart from the fact that it conflicts with the demands and the
content of the word of God, nihilism is a denial of the humanity and of the very identity of the human being. It should never be forgotten that the neglect of being inevitably leads to losing touch with objective truth
and therefore with the very ground of human dignity. This in turn makes it possible to erase from the countenance of man and woman the marks of their likeness to God, and thus to lead them little by little either to a
destructive will to power or to a solitude without hope. Once the truth is denied to human beings, it is pure illusion to try to set them free. Truth and freedom either go together hand in hand or together they perish
From rational immanentism to irrationalism
91. In discussing these currents of thought, it has not been my intention to present a complete picture of the present state of
philosophy, which would, in any case, be difficult to reduce to a unified vision. And I certainly wish to stress that our heritage of knowledge and wisdom has indeed been enriched in different fields. We need only cite
logic, the philosophy of language, epistemology, the philosophy of nature, anthropology, the more penetrating analysis of the affective dimensions of knowledge and the existential approach to the analysis of freedom.
Since the last century, however, the affirmation of the principle of immanence, central to the rationalist argument, has provoked a radical requestioning of claims once thought indisputable. In response, currents of
irrationalism arose, even as the baselessness of the demand that reason be absolutely self-grounded was being critically demonstrated.
The age of post-modernity
Our age has been termed by
some thinkers the age of "post-modernity". Often used in very different contexts, the term designates the emergence of a complex of new factors that, widespread and powerful as they are, have shown themselves able to
produce important and lasting changes. The term was first used with reference to aesthetic, social and technological phenomena. It was then transposed into the philosophical field, but has remained somewhat ambiguous,
both because judgement on what is called "post-modern" is sometimes positive and sometimes negative, and because there is as yet no consensus on the delicate question of the demarcation of the different historical
One thing however is certain: the currents of thought which claim to be post-modern merit appropriate attention. According to some of them, the time of certainties is irrevocably past, and the
human being must now learn to live in a horizon of total absence of meaning, where everything is provisional and ephemeral. In their destructive critique of every certitude, several authors have failed to make crucial
distinctions and have called into question the certitudes of faith.
This nihilism has been justified in a sense by the terrible experience of evil that has marked our age. Such a dramatic experience has
ensured the collapse of rationalist optimism, which viewed history as the triumphant progress of reason, the source of all happiness and freedom; and now, at the end of this century, one of our greatest threats is the
temptation to despair. Even so, it remains true that a certain positivist cast of mind continues to nurture the illusion that, thanks to scientific and technical progress, man and woman may live as a demiurge,
single-handedly and completely taking charge of their destiny.
Current tasks for theology
92. As an understanding of Revelation, theology has always had to respond in different
historical moments to the demands of different cultures, in order then to mediate the content of faith to those cultures in a coherent and conceptually clear way. Today, too, theology faces a dual task. On the one hand,
it must be increasingly committed to the task entrusted to it by the Second Vatican Council, the task of renewing its specific methods in order to serve evangelization more effectively. How can we fail to recall in this
regard the words of Pope John XXIII at the opening of the Council? He said then: "In line with the keen expectation of those who sincerely love the Christian, Catholic and apostolic religion, this doctrine must be known
more widely and deeply, and souls must be instructed and formed in it more completely; and this certain and unchangeable doctrine, always to be faithfully respected, must be understood more profoundly and presented in a
way which meets the needs of our time".
On the other hand, theology must look to the ultimate truth that Revelation entrusts to it, never content to stop short of that goal. Theologians should remember that
their work corresponds to a dynamism found in the faith itself and that the proper object of their inquiry is the Truth that is the living God and his plan for salvation revealed in Jesus Christ. This task, which is
theology's prime concern, challenges philosophy as well.
The array of problems that today need to be tackled demands a joint effort--approached, it is true, with different methods--so that the truth may
once again be known and expressed. The Truth, which is Christ, imposes itself as an all-embracing authority, which holds out to theology and philosophy alike the prospect of support, stimulation and increase.
To believe it possible to know a universally valid truth is in no way to encourage intolerance; on the Contrary, it is the essential condition for sincere and authentic dialogue between persons. On this
basis alone is it possible to overcome divisions and to journey together towards full truth, walking those paths known only to the Spirit of the Risen Lord.
1. This insistence on the need for a close relationship of continuity between contemporary philosophy and the philosophy developed in the Christian tradition is intended to avert the danger which lies
hidden in some currents of thought which are especially prevalent today.
2. By eclecticism
is meant the approach of those who, in research, teaching and argumentation, even in theology, tend to use individual ideas drawn from different philosophies, without concern for their internal coherence, their place within a system or their historical context.
is the philosophical notion that refuses to admit the validity of forms of knowledge other than those of the positive sciences; it relegates religious, theological, ethical and aesthetic knowledge to the realm of mere fantasy.
is an attitude of mind that, in making its choices, precludes theoretical considerations or judgements based on ethical principles. There is a growing support for a concept of democracy not grounded on unchanging values: a line of action is decided by the vote of a parliamentary majority.
5. The (aforementioned) positions lead to a more general conception which appears today as the common framework of many philosophies which have rejected the meaningfulness of being: the nihilist
interpretation, which is at once the denial of all foundations and the negation of all objective truth.
6. The affirmation of the principle of immanence, central to the rationalist argument, has
provoked a radical requestioning of claims once thought indisputable. In response, currents of irrationalism arose.
7. According to some (post-modern thoughts), the time of certainties is
irrevocably past, and the human being must now learn to live in a horizon of total absence of meaning, where everything is provisional and ephemeral.
has been justified in a sense by the terrible experience of evil that has marked our age. Such a dramatic experience has ensured the collapse of rationalist optimism.