Recommended

Miracles and Supernatural Physics: Simone Weil on the Relationship of Science and Religion

Vance Morgan read

Excerpt:

Given the proliferation in the last several years of publications concerning the relationship of science and religion, it is hard to imagine that Simone Weil, writing sixty years ago, would have much to contribute to this important discussion. It is my aim in this essay to argue that Weil’s frequently expressed thoughts on the relationship between science and faith are not only important, but they also provide a timely contribution to the current debate by describing a metaphysical framework for the discussion entirely different than those generally preferred by current participants in the dialogue.

Writing during the last few months of her life, in the midst of World War II, Weil writes that “the modern conception of science is responsible, as is that of history and that of art, for the monstrous conditions under which we live, and will, in its turn, have to be transformed, before we can hope to see the dawn of a better civilization.” In our contemporary world science and religion have become almost entirely disconnected, producing not only a vacuum where values once existed but also an intense psychological and intellectual distress.

The absolute incompatibility between the spirit of religion and that of science . . . leaves the soul in a permanent state of secret, unacknowledged uneasiness. . . . The most fervent Christians express every hour of their lives judgments, opinions, which, unknown to them, are based on standards which go contrary to the spirit of Christianity. But the most disastrous consequence of this uneasiness is to make it impossible for the virtue of intellectual probity to be exercised to the fullest extent . . . The modern phenomenon of irreligion among the population can be explained almost entirely by the incompatibility between science and religion.

In Weil’s estimation, the response to many contemporary crises must be rooted in a reawakened understanding of the necessary connection between true science and religion. “The remedy is to bring back again among us the spirit of truth, and to start within religion and science; which implies that the two of them should become reconciled.”

Essay in Rozelle-Stone, A. Rebecca & Stone, Lucian, eds., The Relevance of the Radical: Simone Weil 100 Years Later, New York: Continuum, pp.107-122

Simone Weil’s The Iliad or the Poem of Force: A Critical Edition

Simone Weil // James P. Holoka, ed. and trans. read

Simone Weil, a brilliant young teacher, philosopher, and social activist, wrote the essay, The ‘Iliad’ or the Poem of Force at France at the beginning of World War II. Her profound meditation on the nature of violence provides a remarkably vivid and accessible testament of the Greek epic’s continuing relevance to our lives. This celebrated work appears here for the first time in a bilingual version, based on the text of the authoritative edition of the author’s complete writings. An introduction discusses the significance of the essay both in the evolution of Weil’s thought and as a distinctively iconoclastic contribution to Homeric studies. The commentary draws on recent interpretations of the Iliad and examines the parallels between Weil’s vision of Homer’s warriors and the experiences of modern soldiers.

Peter Lang, Inc. (2006)

Suffering Divine Things: Simone Weil and Jewish Mysticism

Rico Sneller read

To what extent can man suffer God? The verb ‘suffering’ as such is ambiguous, for it can either mean bearing ‘pain’ (‘to suffer from’), or tolerating something. In other words, ‘suffering’ can be both intransitive and transitive. Whereas the first meaning seems to be predominantly passive, the second, while still fairly passive, is more active. In both cases, however, a kind of interpenetration of both ‘parties’ is implied: that which I am suffering is somehow inside me, whether I want it or not. Anyhow, the question, ‘can man suffer God?’, turns out to be in need of clarification before it can be answered at all.

In this contribution, I will study a Jewish author who ‘exchanged’ her Judaism for Christianity: Simone Weil (1909-1943). I will try to see what she writes about suffering God, it being my hypothesis that suffering God is a more adequate notion than the vaguer ‘experiencing’ God. Suffering God, or rather, suffering divine things might be a notion accounting for the conflation of ethical, spiritual, and global dimensions. I will try to shed some light on Simone Weil’s views by relating them to some motives from the Jewish mystical tradition: ‘cosmoeroticism’, kawanna and tsimtsum.

Mahmoud Masaeli, ed., Spirituality and Global Ethics (Cambridge Scholars Publishing (2017), pp. 9-26

The Living Philosophy of Simone Weil

The Living Philosophy channel watch

Albert Camus called the philosopher Simone Weil “the only great spirit of our times.” T.S. Eliot said she was the greatest saint of the 20th century. Charles de Gaulle said she was insane. But who is she and what is the Simone Weil philosophy? Despite dying at the age of 34, Simone Weil lived a life that rivaled any philosopher. And it was the authentic life of a philosopher following her inner compass. She did not fall in with the intellectual milieu of her time by becoming a public intellectual (which was far from a matter of intelligence — she finished 1st in her class for philosophy at France’s elite university the École Normale Supérieure beating out Simone de Beauvoir in second place). She was born into a Jewish family and raised agnostic and yet found herself drawn towards religion; she fought in the Spanish Civil War and worked in factories for a year to understand the working class.

The Living Philosophy (YouTube), June 20, 2021

‘In the beginning was the deed’

David Cockburn read

Winch’s readings of Wittgenstein and Weil call for a significant rethinking of the relation between ‘metaphysics’ and ‘ethics’. But there are confusions, perhaps to be found in all three of these writers, that we may slip into here. These are linked with the tendency to see idealist tendencies in Wittgenstein, and with his remark that giving grounds comes to an end, not in a kind of seeing on our part, but in our acting. The sense that we think we see in this suggestion is dependent on a distorted conception of ‘justification’. Getting clear about this involves coming to appreciate just how much of our nature as ethical beings is engaged when we do philosophy.

— David Cockburn, Emeritus Professor, University of Wales.