THE PHILOSOPHY OF LEV SHESTOV: THE CONFLICT OF RATIONALITY AND IRRATIONALITY

ABSTRACT

Lev Shestov was one of the prominent philosophers of the XX. century. Shestov due to his adogmatic views on religion, science, and reason has foreshadowed the rise of the postmodernist philosophy. In this regard, the fine distinction drawn by Shestov between rationality and irrationality is important. Shestov has put an effort to find new meanings in religion and philosophy of religion in the context of the conflict of rationality and irrationality. According to Lev Shestov, the human freedom can be examined through the conflict of rationality and irrationality. Shestov has considered the Bible and Christianity as the source of human freedom. According to Shestov, individual liberation from earthly, strings of rational thinking and Ananke lies through obtaining faith. Through experiencing pain and despair, an individual comes closer to freedom and faith. Shestov named severe existential pain and desperation as the state of “groundlessness”. The state of “groundlessness” is what pushes one to the “leap of faith”. Ananke and rational thinking strive to pull away a person from the state of “groundlessness” and from the “leap of faith”. In the philosophy of Lev Shestov, Athens symbolizes rational thinking. Jerusalem symbolizes religious devotion, irrationalism and faith. According to the philosopher, Athens and Jerusalem are in a constant tension.

АННОТАЦИЯ

Краткая информация, отражающая основное содержание статьи. Лев Шестов является одним из выдающихся философов ХХ. века. Шестов адогматическими и иррационалистическими взглядами на религию, науку и разум предвосхитил философию постмодернизма. Шестов искал новые смыслы в религии и философии религии в контексте конфликта рациональности и иррациональности. По мнению Льва Шестова, проблему свободы человека можно рассматривать в свете борьбы рациональности и иррациональности. Шестов рассматривал Библию и Христианство как источник человеческой свободы. По мнению философа, освобождение человека от земного, цепей рационального мышления и Ананке лежит через обретение веры. Сталкиваясь с сильной экзистенциальной болью и страданиями, человек приближается к вере. Экзистенциальную боль и сильное чувство безысходности Шестов называл состоянием «беспочвенности». Состояние «беспочвенности» толкает человека на «прыжок веры». Ананке и рациональное мышление стремятся отдалить человека от состояния «беспочвенности» и от «прыжка веры». Тема религиозной веры в философии Шестова исследуется в свете конфликта разума и веры. В философии Шестова Афины характеризуют рациональное мышление. Иерусалим символизирует иррациональную веру и покорность Писанию. В этой статье мы изучим взгляд Шестова на Ананке и на столкновение Афин и Иерусалима.

Keywords: Shestov, faith, God, Ananke, freedom

Ключевые слова: Шестов, вера, Бог, Ананке, свобода.

Introduction

In the era of modernity, there was an idea that rational thinking and science would answer all human needs. Two great wars, national and sometimes personal dramas pushed some thinkers to look for the ultimate answers, not only in reason but in religion. Religious existentialists like Kierkegaard, Martin Buber, Lev Shestov and Miguel de Unamuno sought philosophical answers in religion. [16: pp.97-106]

The conflict between reason and faith is one of the most acknowledged philosophical problems in philosophy of religion. For centuries Jews, Christians, Muslims, skeptics and atheists have been arguing about this subject. Sceptics like David Friedrich Strauss and atheists like Ibn al-Rawandi believed that the absurdity of divine books is a clear argument against religious faith and divine origin of revelations. Some religious thinkers like Lev Shestov and Miguel de Unamuno looked for a salvation from earthly in religious absurdism and irrationalism. Others like Ibn Rushd and William Lane Craig argued that the Revelation is consistent, and it is not in a conflict with reason.

The conflict of rationality and irrationality plays a huge role in the philosophy of Lev Shestov. Shestov believed that irrationality provides humans spiritual freedom. In his last work ‘Athens and Jerusalem’, Shestov researched the clash of rationality and irrationality. The philosopher argued that rational thinking clashes with religious faith. The philosopher didn’t believe in a peaceful coexistence of reason with religious absurdism and irrationality. Once faith becomes rational, ratio enslaves human spirit and turns a person into a slave of rational dogmas. [15: p.350] In rationalized faith rational thinking and rational dogmas become the main focus of a believer. In this case a believer pushes himself away from religious irrationalism and absurdism. Instead of thinking about God and salvation, an individual starts to think more about logic and proofs of religion.

The philosopher argued that majority of religious thinkers were bewitched by rational thinking and divinized critical reason instead of the Bible and God. [15:pp.250-260]. The thinker believed that there are several reasons why ratio managed to enter the realm of faith, which is according to Shestov in its core is different and far from rational concepts. Rational thinking has entered the realm of faith because of human strive to explain reality through monistic views. [13: pp.5-11] It is in human nature to look for simple monistic explanations. Shestov argues that Greek philosophers’ search for arche and logos merged with religious thought during the Hellenization of Christianity. Thus Christianity moved away from irrational core of itself towards more rationalistic teaching. [15: pp. 22-23, pp. 262-262]

Shestov highlights another aspect of rationalization of Christianity. The philosopher believed that the Church has put an effort to make faith look more rational to justify their rule over laymen. According to Shestov, dogmas and institutionalized Christianity pushes a believer away from irrational and mystical dimensions of faith. [12: p. 80] The thinker believed that rationalized faith loses its pathos and ability to inspire and to provide spiritual freedom.

In a conflict between rational and irrational, the relation between pain and faith plays a major role. To gain spiritual freedom a person must rebel against ratio. Shestov argued that only a person who is desperate enough is ready to rebel against rational thinking.

The clash between Athens and Jerusalem

Clash between Athens and Jerusalem is one of the topics Shestov has been focused on in his studies. Shestov has described Christian faith and devotion to God as Jerusalem and positivistic and critical reasoning as Athens.

Shestov believed that the essence of religious faith is a devotion to the Will of God. It means that a person should not apply ratio to criticize and to examine the Bible. Shestov explained it by citing Peter Damian words: “A Christian’s life has only one goal: to find salvation. Salvation is obtained by faith. To apply reason to faith means to destroy faith... In a word, it is the devil who has instilled a thirst for knowledge in man, and it is this thirst that is the cause of original sin, the source of all our evils.” [15: p. 269]

According to the thinker religious faith in its core is irrational. Shestov writes that humanity has lost its spiritual freedom after the Fall. Before the Fall humanity was free from ratio’s constraints and restrictions. Tasting fruit from the Tree of Knowledge has made humans rational and deprived sons of Adam of spiritual freedom given by the devotion to God. Shestov believed that applying rational thinking to faith is a sin [15: p. 26]. Shestov writes in his work that knowledge, according to the Bible excludes faith. Knowledge is sin κατ' εξοχήν (essentially), or original sin. Shestov states that it is the fruit from the Tree of Knowledge that has put the human spirit to sleep. For this reason alone God forbade Adam to eat fruit of knowledge. [15: p. 208]

Rational thinking allows humans see causality. Understanding of causality allows us to rule the world (to a certain degree). However when we try to apply causality on religious absurdism, irrationalism and faith it destroys mystical, irrational and unknown in religious faith.

Paradoxical and irrational side of faith is what makes religious faith so different from reason and science. There are mystery and absurdity in the Bible. A person who believes in the Bible gains spiritual freedom to act not in accordance with rational thinking. A believer gains spiritual freedom to dream and to live without ratio’s strings. Shestov writes: “The enormity, the incomparable wonder and at the same time the incomparable paradoxicality, or rather the monstrous absurdity, of the biblical Revelation is beyond all human comprehension and possibility. But for God nothing is impossible. God, in Kirkegaard’s words borrowed from the Bible, knows that nothing is impossible. In spite of Spinoza's taboos, in the end fallen man, yearns and cries out to the Creator only about the promised οὺδέν ὰδυνατήσει ὺμίν (nothing shall be impossible for you, v. 38). For this (οὺδέν ὰδυνατήσει ὺμίν) alone human cries out to the Creator.” [15:p.25]

 Shestov believed that faith should be reviewed as the second dimension of reason. Faith is a state of human soul and human mind. It is more than mere knowledge. Faith is a devotion to the God and the Bible. Faith sees irrational and impossible as possible and achievable. [15: pp.52,56,274,pp.330-331] Faith is irrational and defies reason and provides spiritual freedom. When logic and reason say that something is impossible, second dimension of reason (faith) states that everything is possible for those who believe in God and inspires an individual to live and to act despite all possible pains of vale. Shestov writes in his works, that if God wishes, even what is considered impossible will happen. By focusing on absurdist aspects of religious faith Shestov fights against deterministic and positivistic views of the XX. century. In Matthew 17:20-21 Jesus says: “For truly I tell you, if you have faith the size of a mustard seed, you will say to this mountain, ‘Move from here to there,’ and it will move; and nothing will be impossible for you.” In the light of Shestov philosophy we think that a person who deeply believes in the Revelation gains spiritual freedom and inspiration to live without looking back on the dogmas of ratio. By believing in Mathew 17:20-21 and by the devotion to God a person overcomes all pains.

According to Shestov, in the process of Hellenization, Christianity had moved away from irrational basics of the faith. Shestov pointed out, that ratio in some form tries to take place of God in human mind. In Job’s Balances Shestov writes: “But in any case, whether Thales or the devil, the fact remains the same: people are deeply convinced, they believe it to be a self-evident truth, that they are at the mercy of some timeless, ethereal, and indifferent force which decides the sum of the angles in a triangle, and which decides which destiny awaits man, nations and even the universe”. [13: p.18] In the I. and in the II. century ideas of Greek thinkers about logos, arche and the One have merged with the Christian thought. Shestov has written: “‘Les six jours de la Gènese - sont une allégorie,’ (‘The Six Days of Genesis - is an allegory’) was such a tempting thought: the bridge built by Philo of Alexandria, across which so easily passes the chasm that separates Athens from Jerusalem. But the seemingly innocent thought turned out to be an egg from which hatched a snake, whose venom, if not forever killed, paralyzed for many centuries the truth of the Revelation.” [15:p.257] Thus, according to Shestov Christians have put ratio on the pedestal. After the Hellenization had occurred, Christian thinkers declared “Credo ut intellegam”. From Shestov’s perspective, “Credo ut intellegam” (“I believe so that I may understand”) has subtext of reason’s superiority over The Bible and irrational parts of religious faith. Shestov explains his views in Athens and Jerusalem: “And doctor subtilis, as we remember, was tempted. He believed but faith was not enough for him: he asked God for permission to eat from the fruit of the tree of knowledge. All the most influential medieval thinkers tirelessly repeat: credo ut intelligam (believe in order to know).” [15: p.271]

Shestov was against myopic following of Christian dogmas. The thinker implied that dogmas of the Church are product of rationalization of faith. Christian leaders rationalized irrational faith to justify their authority over the laymen. As we understand, Shestov believed, that only God knows who will be in Hell or in Paradise. Shestov believed that indulgence, ideas about virtue, good and evil, authority of the bishop of Rome and his ex-cathedra clash against indeterministic, mystical and sometimes even absurd features of Christianity. Shestov criticized the Catholic Church for institutionalizing the realm of faith. According to Shestov, a person may not enter Paradise despite his virtue and strive. Even if a person acts according to all dogmas of the Catholic Church there is no guarantee that one will find the salvation. Potestas clavium does not belong to virtue, to ethics, to reason, to humans or to the Church. Potestas clavium (keys from Paradise) belongs to God. [12: p. 52, p. 180] Shestov stated that the faith could be obtained not by striving and virtue, but only by God’s Will. Shestov several times citates Romans 10:20 in his works; “And Isaiah boldly says, ‘I was found by those who did not seek me; I revealed myself to those who did not ask for me.’” Thus, Shestov puts an emphasis on the absurd feature of religious faith. No one knows for sure how and why faith is obtained. Only God gives faith to those to whom He wishes. [5: pp. 222-229]. God is not limited by the human understanding of good and evil. Shestov believed that God cannot be proven and that one cannot look for Him in “history”. God is the incarnate “caprice” that rejects all guarantees. God is beyond history and beyond all that men have considered their τό τιμιώτατον (the most important) [13: p. 97]

Shestov has very peculiar stance on theodicy. Shestov argued that everything God created should be considered as “dobroye zelo” or “very good”. Even if from rational perspective some aspects of existence seem as unideal it is still God’s divine Will to create reality in this way. God created the reality the way it is because His Will was such and we should not criticize His order. The knowledge of good and evil is what entailed The Fall from Paradise. Maybe rational view on God’s creation is not perfect and doesn’t show us some hidden causality or bigger picture. Shestov believed that struggle and pain might be considered as a driver of spiritual progress. In Sola Fide Shestov writes: “To save a man, God must first shake and break his spirit”. (1996:266) Problems we face in life might be here to help us grow up, mature and reflect on life. By reflection on life and pain people come closer to God. People in desperate situations look for hope and even miracle and thus they become closer to God.

According to Shestov’s view, theodicy was developed because of Christians moving away from “Credo quia absurdum est”. “Credo quia absurdum est” (“I believe because it is absurd”) defies ratio, defies deterministic worldview. According to Shestov views, “Credo ut intellegam” symbolizes humanity’s surrender to the law of necessity. “Credo ut untellegam” implies that God is not above the law of necessity. It implies that God’s “schlechthinnige und regellose Willkur” (“wicked and lawless arbitrariness”) is not beyond reason, ethics and Ananke. Theodicy is the result of arguing regarding “dobroye zelo”. Thinkers developed theodicy to rationalize what is considered as evil and bad. We think that Shestov in his late writings implied that theodicy is a rebellion against the Bible and against devotion to the Will of God. There is a relation between faith and desperation. In truly desperate situations humans look for condolence and hope in faith. However, when a person feels satiety, he starts wondering about problem of evil. First Christians had no opportunity to argue on problem of evil. They were in desperation. They looked for hope. In his writings, Shestov looked for that kind of devotion and faith. [Shestov, Speculation and Apocalipsis, V, pp.17-19]

Shestov believed that religious faith in Omnipotent God could not be proved by rational thinking. Shestov referred to Kantian ideas regarding reason-faith conflict. According to Immanuel Kant the human mind will always conflict with metaphysics. Critical thinking will always consider irrational and metaphysical faith as Schwarmerei (Fanaticism) and Aberglaube (Superstition). [15:pp.8-9] It is in human nature to look for pattern, to look for an explanation and order. Ratio and science for sure have made our lives better in many instances. In the light of Shestov philosophy we can state that reason and science are enemies for religious faith. Reason and science, even quantum mechanics strive to find only one formula, one solution to every aspect of existence including God.

Richard Dawkins, in The God Delusion, in chapter 4 examines a possibility of God’s existence. Dawkins examines God’s existence from a rational and scientific perspective. For instance, Dawkins studies how complex a creature as the Omnipotent God could be. [3: pp.119-134] This is the vivid illustration of difference between religious and rational thinking. According to Shestov, a devoted believer would never be interested in such a topic. Faith means to go into unknown, to be in touch with the mysterious. Shestov stresses this trait of religious faith by referring to the Hebrews 11:8 several times. In Hebrew 11: 8 God says: “By faith Abraham obeyed when he was called to go out to the place which he would receive as an inheritance. And he went out, not knowing where he was going”. [15: p.208] Also, Shestov has cited several times 1 Corinthians 1:19. In the 1 Corinthians God says: “For it is written, I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and will bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent”. [11: pp.208-209] Religious faith and reason cannot peacefully coexist in the sphere of religious faith. Fighting between Athens (reason) and Jerusalem (faith) will never stop. When we look to the problem from Shestov perspective, we argue that Richard Dawkins is not completely wrong in his thinking. Dawkins simply refers to the rational and earthly part of human existence. Dawkins considers religious beliefs as Schwarmerei and Aberglauben. Dawkins does not believe in metaphysical experiences. Dawkins may not be completely wrong in his assumptions.

At first rational thinking infiltrates in the realm of faith and works to make it more rational. Patristics worked to make faith sound more reasonable. This trend continues nowadays. We think, that Shestov believed that a faith which has lost its irrational and absurd features loses ability to give inspiration and spiritual freedom. Rationalized faith turns into a deterministic formula, against which Shestov has stayed in his works.

Shestov believed that reason is dangerous for faith. Ignorance is a bliss. Once humanity obtained the ability to think rationally and see the difference between good and evil, it has lost its freedom. According to Shestov humanity before the Fall was free. [14, pp.43-46] Berdyaev saw signs of quetism in Shestov’s views on reason and faith. [1: p.378] Contrary to Berdyaev we think that Shestov willingly did not focus on importance of ratio for religion and religious faith. Shestov’s focus was to liberate the spiritual part of humanity from constraints of ratio and deterministic worldviews. His critique of the Catholic Church highlights his strive for less institutionalized faith, where mystical, irrational and individual religious experience possess more value than rational thinking and rational dogmas.

Ananke

What is Ananke according to Shestov? Shestov viewed Ananke as a positivist-determinist worldview and force, which pushed humans away from irrationality, metaphysics and spirituality. Ananke is a child of ratio. The main task of Ananke is to deceive humanity, to push humanity away from religious faith and spiritual freedom. Ananke tries to make us think that metaphysics and religion are mere fairy tales.

Shestov has examined Aristo’s “ανάγκη αμετάπειστόν τι ειναι” (“Ananke does not listen to our cries”) and “ανάγκη στηναι” (“stop it”, which implies that humans should not go beyond rational thinking) [15: p.30]. According to Shestov Aristo implied that humanity should not search, look for and hope for something what is beyond physical world. According to Shestov “ανάγκη αμετάπειστόν τι ειναι” and “ανάγκη στηναι” mean that humanity should accept that human race is a mere cog without free will in the determined universe.

Shestov described humanity’s search for immortality as a memory of the time before the Fall. Before the Fall humanity was free from strings of reason and substance. With omnipotent God who gave everything to people in the Paradise, humanity was able to rule reality (jubere) by asking (almost) anything from God. Before the Fall there was no pain, no death, no suffering, and no reasoning. [15: pp.24-25]

Ananke tries to make religions more rational and scientific. In rationalized faith the main focus of belief moves from irrational faith and obedience to the rational thinking. In rationalized faith humanity praises not God but the ratio. [15: pp. 248-249, pp. 287-288] In a religion where main emphasis is on the rationality, faith loses its mystery. Mystery is a crucial part of the religious faith. A religious mystery creates some kind of vacuum (of the unknown). This vacuum fills with religious hope, faith and inspiration.

Shestov’s concern regarding theodicy roots in his search for spiritual freedom from rationalism. If we consider that God is not beyond our ratio and understanding of ethics, it means that God is not Omnipotent. In the time of antibiotics and vaccines there is no need for a powerless god.

Shestov has willingly written that majority of the Christian thinkers and philosophers of modern times were bewitched by reason. As we see it, Shestov implied that Christianity has never been solely about reason. The main emphasis of early Christianity were miracles and providing hope for those who had lost it. Shestov emphasized that in the beginning Christianity was not a religion of the elite and intellectuals. Shestov viewed Christianity as a beam of hope for those who were in despair. For those who had lost hope. For instance, for slaves, for non-citizens, for those who have been experiencing “groundlessness” (despair) due to their position in the Roman Empire. [15: pp.17-21]

Ananke fights against our spiritual freedom in several ways. Ananke threatens by ratio and causality those who are hopeless or brave enough to believe in the Bible and irrational religious belief. Ananke implies that those who believe in irrational will be punished. Shestov cites Epictetus in this regard. Epictetus has said that those who act against objective reality will be punished. [15:pp.43-45]

We believe that there is another way how Ananke pushes away humanity from faith. It is hedonism and satiety. During the time that Shestov lived in, the satiety was not a huge problem. In our time, in the epoch of Morioka’s “painless civilization” Ananke protects citizens of the developed countries from pain and despair. Shestov stressed that pain and despair were crucial for obtaining faith. In Sola Fide Shestov worked to focus our attention on the importance of pain for obtaining and sustaining religious faith. Shestov writes: “Pati, domine, aut mori” (“God, give me pain or take my soul”) has cried Teresa of Ávila. Antisthenes has said: “I’d rather go crazy than be satisfied with life”. [15: pp.9-12] Stress, tension and existential pain are factors which make one closer to religious faith. Satiety, good health and wealth push away an individual from faith.

The main reason why some people do not see any need in religious faith is the obvious fact that the world we live in today is a safer place than it was in the I. or in the VII. centuries. Once you face true desperation you might understand better what Shestov implied by the term “groundlessness”. In a state of despair a person prays and becomes a believer.

 As we stated earlier, Dawkins or atheists are not wrong. They believe that there is nothing more than substance. Materialists believe that there is no existence beyond matter. Thus our hopes, ideas are part of the substance. Maybe they are right that there is nothing beyond matter.

Nevertheless we think that it is still in our hands and in our will to look for hope and search for meaning beyond matter. It is in our hands to rebel against seemingly soulless substance. Without rebellion against positivistic and deterministic views it is impossible to become a truly free person. William James arguing with Renouvier deterministic views has said that the first act of his (William James’s) free will would be a belief in free will. [8: p. 285]

Without “groundlessness”, despair or hopelessness there will always be strings that pull one away from the “leap of faith”. One way or another Ananke and ratio will push a person who trusts reason in the sphere religion away from religious faith. Shestov describes reason as Medusa. Those who trust reason in the sphere of faith might lose spiritual freedom. For instance, if a Christian or a Moslem trusts reason in the sphere of religious faith, one day or another he might lose his faith. Shestov has written: “Looking back paralyzes a person. Who looks around, who looks back, he must see what is already there, that is, the head of Medusa, and whoever sees the head of Medusa, inevitably, as it was already known to the ancients, turns into stone. And his thinking, the thinking of a stone, will, of course, correspond to his stone being.” [15: p.42]

Several times Shestov cites Plato’s “πάντα γαρ τολμητέον” (“rebel against everything”). Shestov believed that one should fight for religious faith in mind, heart and soul. Without Unamono’s “agonia” (“battle”) and Shestov’s rebellion in the name of faith, a person will lose spiritual freedom and eventually will end up as a servant of Ananke and ratio.

Conclusion

In the context of the conflict of rationality with religious irrationalism Shestov distinguishes several points.

The search for arche of pre-Socratic philosophers characterizes the human striving to look for monistic explanations and to avoid irrationality. Irrationality in the physical world and mundane life scares people. Irrational and non-causal phenomena distance people from mastering nature. Humans are afraid of irrationality, indeterminism and chaos. Irrationality, indeterminism and chaos include the unknown. It is like darkness. By understanding causality and by applying rational thinking humanity managed to survive for centuries.

Shestov writes, that after the Hellenization of Christianity the irrational essence of faith was shadowed by rational thinking. It is worth mentioning, that the topic of the Hellenization of Christianity can be explored in different ways than Shestov did. For instance, according to Ahutin, Christianity was a mixture of Hellenistic intellectual tradition (search for logos) and the Jewish tradition of devotion to the religion. According to Ahutin, we can define two parts of Christian logos. One part of the Christian logos refers to logos in Jewish understanding. Ahutin states, that in the Jewish tradition logos was understood as “obey and obedience”. In Hellenistic tradition it was understood as “relation, esteem, measure and knowledge”. (2005: 342-344) It is difficult to consider Christianity as a completely irrational religion. In the Bible we read in 2 Timothy 2:7 “Think over what I say, for the Lord will give you understanding in everything”. In 1 Thessalonians 5: 19-22 we read: “Do not quench the Spirit. Do not despise prophecies, but test everything; hold fast what is good. Abstain from every form of evil.” A believer can find in Christianity motifs of devotion, irrationalism and reasoning.

Shestov argues that rational thinking provides humans seemingly solid ground. It enslaves our ability to look beyond visible causality. In search for liberation from earthly and deterministic views Shestov, like David Hume implied that the causality we see might not be a constant. [15: p.357] This is the problem of determined and indetermined universe researched in physics and philosophy. Philosophers such as Karl Popper and Robert Kane are proponents of indeterminism. Contemporary physicist Sabine Hossenfelder in her book “Lost in Math” researches aesthetical aspects of theories in science believing that humanity bewitches himself by monistic and beautiful theories. ( 2018:8-15) According to Hossenfelder the laws of nature we have developed might not be a constant or might be different from what we know. The universe might be indetermined, ugly and chaotic. In indetermined universe Shestov’s hope for miracles may be more acceptable.

 Modernists have believed that the light of science and reason would solve all possible problems. However the wars of the XX. century and constant instability of the world pushed existentialists to search for new less positivistic and scientific answers to the existential questions. Religious existentialists like Shestov argued that positivism and rationalism did not provide answers to existential questions. Shestov saw answers to existential questions in the absurdity and irrationalism of the Bible. As we understand, Shestov believed that the irrationality of religious faith helped believers to overcome the chaotic and painful experience of existence.

Once humanity discovered causality and developed the scientific method, many problems in the physical world were solved. Positivism had been popular among Shestov’s peers however Shestov believed that positivistic and deterministic view on human nature devalued human dignity. For Shestov the most important aspect of philosophy is humanity itself and not causality or scientific method.

Belief in the one explanation for the complexity of existence entails the emerging of deterministic views. These deterministic views take away human inspiration and freedom, given by divine revelation and religious faith. A person becomes bewitched by ratio and loses ability to strive beyond substance and pray and look for immortality.

Shestov believed that rationalist and positivist views on human devalues human dignity. In his first big work Shestov argues with Taine regarding value of human life. According to Taine human life is mere part of nature, we should not cry or stress much about death. Shestov argues against this approach to human life. [9:p.17] In later works Shestov implies that our ability to be homo religisus or homo fidelis shows that we are more than soulless flowers on the face of the earth. We do not simply live and die; we search for immortality. Shestov considered religious irrationalism and absurdism as a spring of spiritual freedom needed for metaphysical aspirations, providing humans inspiration to live.

The search for rational and the onliest proper explanation (for everything) merged with Christian thought in the I. century. According to Shestov, Patristic and Scholastic philosophy’s main focus was on rationalizing irrational faith. Once theology became a slave to rational thinking, the faith itself has turned into rationalistic teaching rather than mystical search for hope and consolation. Shestov states that Christian faith is a journey searching for hope and the unknown. Rationalized theology and institutionalized churches have shadowed the religious irrationalism, thus depriving humans of spiritual freedom and inspiration. According to Shestov’s view, the Catholic Church is not a church of Christ but a church of Ratio. For Shestov, faith is more individualistic phenomen rather than social. Our population does not consist only of intellectuals. Stevedore and laborer have right to believe too. Well-educated individuals might look for salvation beyond dogmas. The majority of the population has no opportunity to dive into topics such as the Hellenization of Christianity. The Church and religious authorities provide people scripts and basis needed for faith.

Shestov’s works call out to readers: “Rebel!”. Shestov’s “Rebel!” means that a person should not limit his own freedom of thinking and spiritual freedom by reason, scientific approach, or Church’s dogmas. An individual should not divinize reason instead of God. To be free a person should rebel against ratio and dogmas. [12: p. 180; 11, p.259]

In Athens and Jerusalem Shestov researches the connection between faith, pain and desperation. He believes that the state of “groundlessness” pushes one away from the dictatorship of reason towards the religious faith. He argues that first Christians abandoned reason to find consolation and hope. In Shestov’s philosophy to be a believer means to abandon ratio in the realm of faith and to accept that the message of the Bible and God is beyond human reason.

As Berdyaev has stated, Shestov didn’t see anything positive in rationalization of faith. [2: pp.50-52] For Shestov knowledge and ratio in the realm of faith are considered as pure evil.

To be human means to live in an endless struggle between reason and faith. Between rationality and irrationality. Between courage and inspiration against prudence. As another existentialist Unamuno states, a faith without inner conflict is a dead faith. [4: p. 310] We believe that constant inner conflict between reason and irrational faith and submission to God is what makes human alive. A person who is in constant inner fight is not a mere cog in the determined universe. This person is not a mere slave of ratio. Inner conflict and tension creates fire of life in a person.

With the high level of satiety and safety nowadays, it is problematic to imagine faith being completely irrational. Today many people do not feel and understand the state of "groundlessness". That is why contrary to Shestov we think that some drops of reason to the dwell of faith should not be considered as dangerous as Shestov belived. Unamuno’s “agonia” and Shestov’s rebellion against reason aim to call people to fight for inspiration in the world where spiritual freedom is chained by scientism and positivism.

As Moreva pointed out, the theme of human suffering and loneliness is central for Shestov. [7:p.7] The leitmotif of Shestov’s works is the idea that a person can overcome existential pain through faith in Omnipotent God. We think that for those who are not in the state of “groundlessness” (“great pain and despair”) some drops of rational thinking in the sphere of faith should not be tabooed completely.

References:

1. Berdyaev, Nikolay (1936): Lev Shestov and Kierkegaard. Sovremenniye zapiski. LXII, pp. 375-382 [In Russian]
2. Berdyaev, Nikolay (1936): Lev Shestov. Put. No:50. pp. 50-52 [In Russian]
3. Dawkins, Richard (2006): The God Delusion, Bantam Press.
4. De Unamuno, Miguel (1997): Tragic Sence of Life. The Agony of Christianity. 305-387. Simvol Publ. [In Russian]
5. Frolova, A. (2009): Lev Shestov and Tertullian: on the evolution of paradoxism, Sotsialno-gumanitarnıye znaniya 3, pp. 222-229 [In Russian]
6. Hosselfender, Sabine (2018): Lost in Math: How Beauty Leads Physics Astray, Eksmo Publ. [In Russian]
7. Moreva, Lubov (1991): Lev Shestov. Leningrad: İzdatelstvo Leningradskogo Universiteta Publ. [In Russian]
8. Pals, Daniel L. (2019): Nine Theories of Religion, Kayseri: Kimlik Yayınları Publ. [In Turkish]
9. Şestov, Lev (2021): Shakespeare ve Eleştirmeni Brandes, Birinci Basım, Ankara: Hece Yayınları Publ. [In Turkish]
10. Shestov, Lev (1927): Speculation and Apocalipsis, Public Domain [In Russian]
11. Shestov, Lev (1966): Sola Fide. Paris: YMCA PRESS Publ. [In Russian]
12. Shestov, Lev (1993): Works in two volumes. Volume I, Potestas Clavium. Moscow: Nauka Publ. [In Russian]
13. Shestov, Lev (1993): Works in two volumes. Volume II, In Job's balances. Moscow: Nauka Publ [In Russian]
14. Shestov, Lev (2016): Athens and Jerusalem. M. Bernard (Ed.), Introduction (pp.23-49). USA:Ohio University Press.
15. Shestov, Lev (2017): Athens and Jerusalem. Moscow: Ripol klassik Publ. (In Russian)
16. Yermishin, Oleg (2009): Religious Philosophy. The Concept of Religion in Foreign and in the Russian Philosophy. Study Book. Moscow: PSTGU Publ.(In Russian)