13.07.2015 Views

[Andrzej_Wiercinski_(ed ... - WordPress.com

[Andrzej_Wiercinski_(ed ... - WordPress.com

[Andrzej_Wiercinski_(ed ... - WordPress.com

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

folds a pre-given set of possibilities and which fosters a certain self-concern stemmingdirectly from Dasein’s openness. For example, Ricoeur’s treatment of the “already there”character of evil 20 and the “necessarily corrupt nature of fre<strong>ed</strong>om,” 21 or “the prior captivity,which makes it so that I must do evil” 22 can be replac<strong>ed</strong> or put on a better philosophicalbasis than the Kantian notion of radical evil, or, for that matter, any religioustradition that too quickly buys into a view of an essential corruption of human existence.Rather, philosophically, all that these expressions say is that man is not determin<strong>ed</strong> andthat fre<strong>ed</strong>om is capable of good as well as evil (or the lesser evil of errors and meremistakes). Thus, reinterpret<strong>ed</strong>, Ricoeur’s statement that “I claim that my fre<strong>ed</strong>om hasalready made itself non-free” means that fre<strong>ed</strong>om is already human, and thus must beactualiz<strong>ed</strong> in the finite. 23 This reinterpretation recognizes, within the existential structures,a neutrality <strong>com</strong>mon to innocent, fallen, and recreat<strong>ed</strong> existence.20212223Ricoeur, The Conflict of Interpretations, 435.Ibid., 422.Ibid., 436.Ibid.82

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!