Facs
Transcript
he did not simply renew the Greeks, as the Renaissance generally speaking is not a renewal of the Greek and Latin attitude. But he used Greek concepts, of course—as all Renaissance people did—but he did it in connection with his activities: building ... [?], building water institutions, building even airplanes, in his imagination and in his drawing. The technical point of view starts in the Renaissance from the very beginning, while in Greece proper, the contemplative, the theoretical, point of view was always predominant.he did not simply renew the Greeks, just as the Renaissance, generally speaking, was not merely a renewal of the Greek and Latin attitude. Of course, he used Greek concepts, as all Renaissance thinkers did, but he used them in connection with his practical activities: building ..., designing waterworks, and even imagining and drawing airplanes. The technical point of view begins in the Renaissance from the very start, whereas in Greece itself, the contemplative, theoretical point of view was always predominant.
Now, what is the reason for this? It is the general reason: for the transformation of antiquity into something new in the Renaissance. It is a quite inadequate idea that the Renaissance is a rebirth of Greek rationalism, and now this terrible rationalism came into this world and ruined good old theology!—Now this kind of thinking is entirely non-historical and is dangerous because it deepens the unnecessary gap between reason and revelation—or however the relationship is called. The transformation which happened in the Renaissance is fundamental, in many respects—I cannot go into this now, but I probably can later.It is the broader reason underlying the transformation of antiquity into something new during the Renaissance. The idea that the Renaissance was merely a rebirth of Greek rationalism, as if this “terrible rationalism” entered the world and destroyed good old theology, is quite inadequate. Such thinking is entirely non-historical and dangerous, for it deepens the unnecessary gap between reason and revelation, or however this relationship may be understood. The transformation that occurred in the Renaissance was fundamental in many respects. I cannot go into this now, but perhaps I can return to it later. But one of the main differences is the active interest which from the very beginning was connected with the cognitive interest in the modern world, and probably—or I would say certainly—the reason for this is that the Renaissance grew up on Christian soil, and even if some Renaissance philosophers tried hard to become pagans (as also modern philosophers try hard—it could not succeed: you cannot jump over your own shadow, you cannot cease to live out of the spiritual substance which has transformed you for centuries of historical development). And this is all clear in the Renaissance. For instance, when the Renaissance revived astrology, it changed it at the same time. In the ancient world, astrology is a calculation of an inescapable fate; in the Renaissance astrology, it is not an inescapable fate, but it is the winds which drive the boat and the sail, but the man who stands on the rudder is able to give the direction. This imagery which we often find in Renaissance pictures is characteristic of such transformation. On the basis of Christianity, the ultimate responsibility of man remains, even in view of astrology.
And then in our case: the desire of the Jewish and Christian development, Jewish and Christian prophetism, to transform reality; the element of hope—which belongs to Jews and Christians—is something which drives towards action, towards an action which transforms reality according to an ideal. Such an action was not in the religious substance In our case, we must also consider the desire within Jewish and Christian development, especially Jewish and Christian prophetism, to transform reality. The element of hope, which belongs particularly to Judaism and Christianity, drives toward action: an action that transforms reality according to an ideal. Such action was not part of the religious substance