Comte and Nietzsche are both talking
about religions. Comte talked about the
relationship between Positivism, Atheism and Materialism. Nietzsche talked about the decadence of
Christianity and Buddhism. Being able to
sit back and compare these two gentlemen on their religious perspectives was
quite easy, especially since Nietzsche was the only one that made the most
sense, in my opinion.
Atheism is the belief that there is
no such thing as deities. Positivism is
the belief that the only information that is important is the information
gathered through social experiences, natural sciences, and sensory experiences. Materialism is the belief in only matter and
energy is the only thing that exists.
Comte compared Atheism and Positivism in his first article. He definitely favored Positivism and you
could definitely see it in this quote, “Atheism is not likely to lead to
Positivism except in those who pass through it rapidly as the last and most
short-lived of metaphysical phases. The
wide diffusion of the scientific spirit in the present day makes this passage
so easy that to arrive at maturity without accomplishing it, is a symptom of a
certain mental weakness, which is often connected with moral insufficiency, and
is very incompatible with Positivism.”
In Comte’s second section he compared Materialism and Positivism. Basically in this section he favored Positivism
again and did think Materialism was a danger to Positivism and this quote
supports this thought, “Thus it appears that Materialism is a danger inherent
in the mode in which the scientific studies necessary as a preparation for
Positivism were pursued.” Positivism is
more of a spiritual religion while Materialism is more of a science religion
even though Positivism is structured with the scientific method.
Nietzsche basically bashed
Christianity and Buddhism in this entire speech. I can understand his point of view though. I come from a background of being ridiculed
for my thought processes and opinions by the Sunday school and bible study
mentors and students. I had even been
excommunicated by my fellow classmates within this huge church that I went to
because I looked at life with open eyes rather than naive eyes. My life experiences had led me to believe
that life was hard and that no matter how much faith you have bad things can
still happen to you and no one liked that I thought that way. I had lost my faith in the church and the
people who called themselves Christians.
I can very much see where Nietzsche gets his distaste for Christianity
and find them to be decadence.
Especially from the standpoint that everything is imaginary (Paragraph
15). To me Nietzsche seems like a
realist since he believes that we should pay attention to everything that is
natural/real instead of paying attention to the spiritual world or in other
words, what is imaginary.
These two philosophers would not get
along at all. Nietzsche would hate Comte
for supporting Positivism since it is all about spirituality. Even if Positivism uses the scientific method
it still is more about spirituality in the sense that communication is a big
part of its existence over what is around us.
While Comte doesn’t support Materialism, but I think Nietzsche would
since it is obviously a religion or outlook based on matter and energy. Also while Nietzsche doesn’t support
Christianity I think Comte would since it is a religion based off of everything
that Positivism is except Christianity is not based off of the scientific
method.
These gentlemen were interesting
reads to say the least. The fact that
Comte was a lot more difficult to understand made it kind of hard to compare
them, but after getting the definitions of Materialism, Atheism and Positivism
down then it was easier to understand him.
Nietzsche, I had no problem understanding. He made a point to make sure everyone
understood him. He wanted everyone to
know that he despised Christianity with a passion; a point that I can
understand 100%.
No comments:
Post a Comment