Lizzie Sanduleac’s Reviews > Bulwarks of Unbelief: Atheism and Divine Absence in a Secular Age > Status Update

This should not give us a feeling of “superiority of the state of humanity prior to modern technoculture” which would “fail to properly evaluate modern atheism or (crucially) ancient religion and culture.” Rather, we have “an opportunity to shape a future that could not have been attained without going through this stage…”

Gratitude for our day and age, reminds me of Eve in Exile.

Heidegger’s explanation of presence and absence is lacking something.
That is the distinction between “I/not-I” and “subject/object” presence.
“This circumvents Heidegger's deconstruction of Western theology.”

“God is not an ontic being who creates more ontic beings… but is a pure act of absolute communication… the ‘Logos’.”

In our modern culture:
We relate to the world primarily by means of our will.
“Men become machines.”
“Men become movies.”
Film teaches us a certain kind of reality or presence of things.
Words are “a more primal mode of attunement to the world.”

6) Humanity has gained an “ability to control” rather than simply to “predict the alleged agencies of the cosmos”. As I go about my day, the world feels like it is “a world for me”.

7)These foundational shifts created a new environment in which we get a different “sense of the divine in relationship to nature and to the city” than people did before modern times.

3)The city became “an icon of human activity” rather than the orderly dominion of the gods.
4)Nature was sentimentalized, especially by Romantics.
5)The city “threatens to swallow even the personalism of the countryside”.
All of this makes modern culture a possibility, but #6 makes it “all but inevitable”.

The modern era is comparable to early adulthood or “juvenility”. To explain this “epistemic and ultimately existential shift”, we need to understand 7 points.
1)After the HRE fell, the city became centered around “human flourishing” more than around religion.
2)Bacon’s scientific method changed “humanity’s posture toward nature” from Aristotelian “inner potency” to its function.

The ancients viewed the world as “series of individuated experiences, scenes, trusts, and fears”, like a young child but the medievals had more of a “theoretical sense of the whole” but including a level of “mystery” as we feel in late childhood.

But in the modern era, we’ve had a fundamental shift in understanding essential reality and in our posture toward it. “World of things” vs “actors”

Compared to medievals, “our universe… is less mapped out but more ordinary… and controlled (rather than vulnerable).”

“The mere act of looking up was far more wonder producing than it is for us— even though their picture was neater.”

The Greeks also discussed the world as a unified subject.

But “in neither the Hebrew nor the Greek tradition do we witness the loss of the felt agency of the cosmos.”

“While the world was theoretically and theologically mapped out,” it was still full of “immediate mystery.”

(Tracing the roots of our objectified/mechanical view of the world is helping me to discern what exactly to change in my life.)

We can trace the cracks in ancient “primal unboundedness” back to both the Hebrew Scriptures and Greek philosophers.

Hebrew Scriptures showed
1) The whole earth is God’s temple in a sense, implying “structural order to all of creation.”
2) God created ex nihilo.
3) He is “outside the unbounded and able to render it to nothing.”