000 03524nam a22005175i 4500
001 205572
003 IT-RoAPU
005 20221214233529.0
006 m|||||o||d||||||||
007 cr || ||||||||
008 190708s2009 nju fo d z eng d
020 _a9780691133928
_qprint
020 _a9781400826650
_qPDF
024 7 _a10.1515/9781400826650
_2doi
035 _a(DE-B1597)9781400826650
035 _a(DE-B1597)446370
035 _a(OCoLC)979744898
040 _aDE-B1597
_beng
_cDE-B1597
_erda
050 4 _aBD450.M85 2007
072 7 _aPHI022000
_2bisacsh
082 0 4 _a128/.092/2
_222
084 _aonline - DeGruyter
100 1 _aMulhall, Stephen
_eautore
245 1 0 _aPhilosophical Myths of the Fall /
_cStephen Mulhall.
250 _aCourse Book
264 1 _aPrinceton, NJ :
_bPrinceton University Press,
_c[2009]
264 4 _c©2005
300 _a1 online resource
336 _atext
_btxt
_2rdacontent
337 _acomputer
_bc
_2rdamedia
338 _aonline resource
_bcr
_2rdacarrier
347 _atext file
_bPDF
_2rda
490 0 _aPrinceton Monographs in Philosophy ;
_v23
505 0 0 _t Frontmatter --
_tContents --
_tAcknowledgments --
_tIntroduction --
_tChapter 1. The Madman and the Masters: Nietzsche --
_tChapter 2. The Dying Man and the Dazed Animal: Heidegger --
_tChapter 3. The Child and the Scapegoat: Wittgenstein --
_tConclusion --
_tIndex
506 0 _arestricted access
_uhttp://purl.org/coar/access_right/c_16ec
_fonline access with authorization
_2star
520 _aDid post-Enlightenment philosophers reject the idea of original sin and hence the view that life is a quest for redemption from it? In Philosophical Myths of the Fall, Stephen Mulhall identifies and evaluates a surprising ethical-religious dimension in the work of three highly influential philosophers--Nietzsche, Heidegger, and Wittgenstein. He asks: Is the Christian idea of humanity as structurally flawed something that these three thinkers aim simply to criticize? Or do they, rather, end up by reproducing secular variants of the same mythology? Mulhall argues that each, in different ways, develops a conception of human beings as in need of redemption: in their work, we appear to be not so much capable of or prone to error and fantasy, but instead structurally perverse, living in untruth. In this respect, their work is more closely aligned to the Christian perspective than to the mainstream of the Enlightenment. However, all three thinkers explicitly reject any religious understanding of human perversity; indeed, they regard the very understanding of human beings as originally sinful as central to that from which we must be redeemed. And yet each also reproduces central elements of that understanding in his own thinking; each recounts his own myth of our Fall, and holds out his own image of redemption. The book concludes by asking whether this indebtedness to religion brings these philosophers' thinking closer to, or instead forces it further away from, the truth of the human condition.
530 _aIssued also in print.
538 _aMode of access: Internet via World Wide Web.
546 _aIn English.
588 0 _aDescription based on online resource; title from PDF title page (publisher's Web site, viewed 08. Jul 2019)
650 7 _aPHILOSOPHY / Religious.
_2bisacsh
850 _aIT-RoAPU
856 4 0 _uhttps://doi.org/10.1515/9781400826650
856 4 2 _3Cover
_uhttps://www.degruyter.com/cover/covers/9781400826650.jpg
942 _cEB
999 _c205572
_d205572