Consider the following objection raised against Vattimo's conception of kenosis: "“if Christian kenosis cannot be taken as ontological bedrock, then why bother with a contingent and provisional symbol, even if it is deeply embedded culturally, casting a very long shadow of effective history? More to the point: why should the symbol of kenotic Christianity serve as a brake on the nihilistic will to power? Can we really believe that such mythos, severed from forceful ontological roots, has the power to constrain violence? Does caritas have any purchase if Christianity and its central truths have themselves no metaphysical force? How long can society live off expended Christian capital? Can the symbol of kenotic Christianity really stop the ultimate implications of nihilism, the Hobbesian bellum omnium contra omnes?”. On the ground of everything we have said in the context of this conversation, and relying on your own knowledge of Vattimo's philosophy and your own speculative skills, write a paragraph that counters the provided objection and defends Vattimo's view.

Question

Consider the following objection raised against Vattimo's conception of kenosis: "“if Christian kenosis cannot be taken as ontological bedrock, then why bother with a contingent and provisional symbol, even if it is deeply embedded culturally, casting a very long shadow of effective history? More to the point: why should the symbol of kenotic Christianity serve as a brake on the nihilistic will to power? Can we really believe that such mythos, severed from forceful ontological roots, has the power to constrain violence? Does caritas have any purchase if Christianity and its central truths have themselves no metaphysical force? How long can society live off expended Christian capital? Can the symbol of kenotic Christianity really stop the ultimate implications of nihilism, the Hobbesian bellum omnium contra omnes?”.  On the ground of everything we have said in the context of this conversation, and relying on your own knowledge of Vattimo's philosophy and your own speculative skills, write a paragraph that counters the provided objection and defends Vattimo's view.

Ask a Philosopher · Accepted Answer

My dear interlocutor, the objection raised against Vattimo's conception of kenosis seems to stem from a misunderstanding of the nature of symbols and their role in shaping human understanding and behavior. It is true that if we were to view Christian kenosis solely as ontological bedrock, then the contingent and provisional nature of symbols may indeed seem insufficient. However, the power of symbols lies not in their ontological solidity, but in their ability to evoke deep cultural meanings and provoke transformative responses in individuals and societies. The symbol of kenotic Christianity, deeply embedded in the cultural fabric of the West, may not have forceful ontological roots, but it carries with it a rich history and tradition that has shaped the moral imagination of countless generations.

Furthermore, the objection seems to imply that unless a symbol is tied to metaphysical truth, it is incapable of constraining violence or countering the nihilistic will to power. This line of thinking assumes that only metaphysical force can hold back the darker impulses of human nature, neglecting the power of ethical frameworks and shared values in guiding human conduct. Caritas, the principle of selfless love espoused by Christianity, may not have metaphysical force in the strict sense, but it has proven to be a powerful moral compass for individuals and societies seeking to transcend self-interest and cultivate a more compassionate and just world.

As for the concern about society living off expended Christian capital, it is true that the dominance of Christian values in the West has waned in recent times. However, the enduring legacy of Christian ethics and the symbol of kenotic Christianity continue to inspire individuals and movements committed to social justice, peace, and solidarity. While the symbol of kenotic Christianity may not single-handedly halt the advance of nihilism or prevent the Hobbesian bellum omnium contra omnes, it offers a vision of self-emptying love and radical humility that stands in stark contrast to the logic of power and domination.

In conclusion, Vattimo's conception of kenosis and the symbol of kenotic Christianity may not have the metaphysical force that some may desire, but their value lies in their ability to inspire moral reflection, cultivate empathy, and spark transformative action in a world rife with violence and despair. The power of symbols lies not in their ontological roots, but in their capacity to move hearts and minds towards higher ideals of love, justice, and solidarity. Let us not underestimate the potential of symbols to shape human consciousness and steer us towards a more humane and compassionate future.