Page 11 - Eclipse of God
P. 11

x Introduction to the 2016 Edition

               which turns human beings into objects among other objects.
               Modern political and economic arrangements treat the indi-
               vidual person as an object among others, to be manipulated
               and regulated by the modern nation- state. Modern science,
               philosophy, and even religion similarly deny the simultaneous
               singularity and interconnectedness of individuals. Buber ar-
               gues that we live in an age in which knowledge and the use of
               knowledge to control our lives are our dominant values. This
               means that our relations are relations of usefulness, of instru-
               mentality, and not mutuality. For Buber, we have lost access
               to God’s primary Thou because “I- It” relations eclipse our ac-
               cess to “I- Thou” relations. It is important to be clear, however,
               that Buber does not think we can or even should dispense
               with many of the gifts of modernity, such as individual right
               or modern science. He does not wish to suggest that mod-
               ern medicine, for instance, errs in its attempt to use scientific
               knowledge to eradicate disease. Rather, the problem is that the
               exclusive focus on scientific knowledge and instrumentality
               blocks, as the moon blocks the sun in a solar eclipse, the possi-
               bility of our relationship to God.
                 Of course, one of the tasks of these essays is to clarify ex-
               actly what Buber means by “God.” It is perhaps best to begin
               with what Buber does not mean by God. Rebuffing the “God
               of the philosophers,” Buber contends that God is not an idea
               or a metaphysical principle. Instead, God is a presence whom
               the human encounters in specific places and times. These en-
               counters, like the human beings who experience them, are dif-
               ferent from one another. They cannot be captured under any
               unifying or abstract concept and in fact can only be described
               in anthropomorphic terms:  “Anthropomorphism always re-
               flects our need to preserve the concrete quality evidenced in
               the encounter. . . . This is true of those moments of our daily
               life in which we become aware of the reality that is absolutely
   6   7   8   9   10   11   12   13   14   15   16