Volume > Issue > Who Can Be Called "The Greatest"?

Who Can Be Called “The Greatest”?

ON MAKING CATEGORICAL AFFIRMATIONS

By Alice von Hildebrand | December 2011
Alice von Hildebrand, a Contributing Editor of the NOR, is Professor Emerita of Philosophy at Hunter College of the City University of New York. She is the author, most recently, of Man and Woman: A Divine Invention (Sap­i­entia Press); The Soul of a Lion (Ignatius Press; preface by Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger), about her late husband, the Catholic philosopher Dietrich von Hildebrand; and By Love Refined (Sophia Institute Press). She has written extensively for many Catholic periodicals and works closely with the Dietrich von Hildebrand Legacy Project, whose aim is to translate her late husband's work into English.

I have always been struck by how often some thinkers make apparently apodictic statements about others, declaring so-and-so to be “the greatest.” In order to make such categorical affirmations, the person doing so must be talking about a domain in which he is fully competent, and also be acquainted with the works of the “competitors” for this honor. This is no easy task.

The famous analytic philosopher Gilbert Ryle is eloquent in his praise of German philosopher Martin Hei­degger: “I have nothing but admiration for his special undertaking…. He is a thinker of real importance.” The talented Jewish philosopher Emmanuel Levinas does not hesitate to write, “For me Heidegger is the greatest philosopher of the [twentieth] century, perhaps one of the very great philosophers of the millennium.” This encomium is all the more amazing considering that Levinas knew that Heidegger was a committed Nazi. Can one’s philosophy be totally unrelated to one’s political views? Michael Wyschogrod, a respected Jewish theologian, has also called Heidegger the greatest philosopher of the twentieth century.

Is it possible for a contemporary philosopher to have adequate knowledge of all the thinkers of the twentieth century? Are not the figures and events of this century the most difficult to evaluate because we are so close to them? Philosophers often leave behind a literary bequest containing many unpublished manuscripts that may be very valuable; moreover, when a philosopher’s books are written in a foreign language they are not widely accessible until long after his death, unless they were adequately translated during his lifetime. For these reasons, it is risky to “canonize” an intellectual contemporary. History may one day declare: “Step down; others are more worthy of this honor.”

There are numerous great thinkers whose brilliance was discovered long after their demise. Jean Pierre de Caussade, S.J., is a case in point. His remarkable religious classic, Abandonment to Divine Providence, was published one hundred and ten years after his death and is now highly recommended by spiritual directors for the depth and sublimity of its religious insights. Another example is the German philosopher Adolf Reinach, who is much more appreciated today than when he died at the young age of 34, a victim of the First World War.

Enjoyed reading this?

READ MORE! REGISTER TODAY

SUBSCRIBE

You May Also Enjoy

A Protestant Considers the Catholic Magisterium

Like a magnet drawing iron filings to itself, the Catholic Church can best help restore the brok­en Body of Christ by being that which God ordain­ed it to be.

Ecumenism of Blood: Persecution’s Fruit?

As much as we assume Christianity's home is Europe, the reality is that, in its first few centuries, Christianity was far more Middle Eastern than European.

New Oxford Notes: October 2002

Lumps, Bumps and Meditation... Playing Parents of "Gays" for Suckers... Is St. Monica Now Obsolete?... In the Name of the Father-Mother, Ron Rolheiser and the Holy Spirit... A Schism at Communio?... Psychiatric Stations of the Cross... Compassion and Psychobabble: What a Perfect Same-Sex Marriage!... Priest-Psychologist Hangs Himself