{"id":751,"date":"2015-02-20T15:09:09","date_gmt":"2015-02-20T20:09:09","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/my.dev.vanderbilt.edu\/williamfranke\/?page_id=751"},"modified":"2024-06-01T09:19:04","modified_gmt":"2024-06-01T14:19:04","slug":"media-documents","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/my.dev.vanderbilt.edu\/williamfranke\/media-documents\/","title":{"rendered":"Media Documents"},"content":{"rendered":"

2024-05-17 09.03.33 Project Paradiso_ A Gateway to Dante\u2019s Heaven \u2013 Google Drive<\/a>\u00a0 57:00-1:06:00<\/h2>\n

<\/h2>\n

Berlin ICI (Institute for Cultural Inquiry) Lecture on Lyric Poetry and Reduction, May 16, 2022<\/a><\/h2>\n

<\/h2>\n

Podcast with Kevin Hart:\u00a0 On the Way – Talking about God.\u00a0 Brisbane Australia<\/a><\/h2>\n

<\/h2>\n

Istituto Cultura y Sociedad, Universidad de Navarra<\/a><\/h2>\n

\u00a0CREMS (Centre for Early Modern Studies), University of York<\/a><\/h2>\n

\u201cHow to Read the Bible: Can Fundamentalists and Secularists be Brought into Dialogue,\u201d Lake Forest Place, December 21, 2017<\/span><\/h2>\n

Video Recorded Fragments of Lecture on Humanities\u00a0Tradition and the Bible at Lake Forest Place (Chicago, Illinois):<\/p>\n

1.\u00a0“Bible as Revelation in Tradition of Humanities,” Lake Forest Place 12-21-17<\/a><\/p>\n

2.\u00a0“Bible as Revelation in Secular Sense,” Lake Forest Place 12-21-17<\/a><\/p>\n

3.\u00a0“Self-Reflective Wisdom of Humanities Texts,” Lake Forest Place 12-21-17<\/a><\/p>\n

4.\u00a0“Theological Mystery of human and physical being,” Lake Forest Place 12-21-17<\/a><\/p>\n

5.\u00a0“Humanities Texts as Chanels of Theological Revelation,”\u00a0 Lake Forest Place 12-21-17<\/a><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

“Outline of an Intercultural Philosophy of Universalism,” World Congress of Philosophy, Beijing, 2018 (version without video of questions and answers)<\/a><\/h2>\n

 <\/p>\n

Saarbr\u00fccken Lecture (2017): Traum-Epistemologie und religi\u00f6se Offenbarung in Dantes\u00a0Vita nuova<\/i><\/a>, Universit\u00e4t des Saarlandes<\/p>\n

FrankePlakat_13.06.17<\/a><\/p>\n

Video Recording<\/a><\/p>\n

<\/h2>\n

Mystical Philosophy Network, Keynote Lecture:\u00a0 Mysticism in Intercultural Philosophy, Glasgow University, December 2016<\/a><\/h2>\n

\u00a0MTN link to videorecorded lecture<\/a><\/h2>\n

\u201cReligious Tradition and Interdisciplinary Humanities Studies in a (Post)Secular World,\u201d Beijing Capitol University of Business and Economics (CUEB), Beijing, October 17, 2016<\/a><\/h2>\n

 <\/p>\n

Video Recording<\/a><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Conf\u00e9rence sur la po\u00e9sie \u00e0 Op\u00e8de, Lub\u00e9ron, July 18, 2016<\/a><\/h2>\n

video<\/a><\/p>\n

Transcendence and Immanence in Intercultural Philosophy<\/h2>\n

\"\"<\/a>\"\"<\/a>\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

Video Tapes:<\/p>\n

Opening<\/a>, On Macao as Providential Place for Philosophy (William Franke) 1<\/a><\/p>\n

Transcendence & Immanence, Macau Conference (William Franke) 2<\/a><\/p>\n

Transcendence & Immanence, Macau Conference (Roger Ames) 3<\/a><\/p>\n

Transcendence & Immanence, Macau Conference (Karl-Heinz Pohl) 4<\/a><\/p>\n

Transcendence & Immanence, Macau Conference (Hans-Georg M\u00f6ller) 5<\/a><\/p>\n

Transcendence & Immanence, Macau Conference (John. W. P. Phillips) 6<\/a><\/p>\n

Transcendence & Immanence, Macau Conference (Hans-Rudolph Kantor) 7<\/a><\/p>\n

Transcendence & Immanence, Macau Conference (Nahum Brown) 8<\/a><\/p>\n

Transcendence & Immanence, Macau Conference (Antonia Pont)<\/a> 9<\/p>\n

Transcendence & Immanence, Macau Conference (Fabian Heubel) 10
\n<\/a><\/p>\n

Transcendence & Immanence, Macau Conference (Mario Wenning)<\/a> 11<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Videotaped Conference:\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 What is Apophatic Thinking and Why is it Relevant\u00a0Today?<\/strong> Discussions around William Franke’s\u00a0<\/strong>A Philosophy of the Unsayable<\/em><\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a>\"\"<\/a>\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a>\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Preliminaries<\/a><\/p>\n

Welcoming and Introductory Remarks<\/a><\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n

Apopophatic Thinking Colloquium 1 <\/a><\/em>(W<\/a>illiam Franke)<\/a>
\n<\/a><\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n

Apopophatic Thinking Colloquium 2 <\/a><\/em><\/strong><\/em><\/strong>(Stephen Palmquist)<\/a><\/strong>
\n<\/a><\/em><\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n

Apopophatic Thinking Colloquium 3<\/a><\/em><\/strong><\/em><\/strong><\/em><\/strong><\/em><\/strong> (Anthony Adler)<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n

Apopophatic Thinking Colloquium 4 <\/em><\/strong><\/a><\/em><\/strong><\/em><\/strong><\/em><\/strong><\/em><\/strong><\/em><\/strong><\/em><\/strong><\/em><\/strong><\/em><\/strong> (James Wang)<\/strong><\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n

Apopophatic Thinking Colloquium 5 <\/em><\/strong><\/a><\/em><\/strong><\/em><\/strong><\/em><\/strong><\/em><\/strong><\/em><\/strong><\/em><\/strong><\/em><\/strong><\/em><\/strong> (Sabine M\u00fcller)<\/strong><\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n

Apopophatic Thinking Colloquium <\/em><\/strong><\/em><\/strong><\/em><\/strong><\/em><\/strong><\/em><\/strong><\/em><\/strong><\/em><\/strong> 6 <\/strong><\/em><\/strong> (Sabine M\u00fcller Discussion)<\/strong><\/a><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

Apopophatic Thinking Colloquium 9 <\/em><\/strong><\/em><\/strong><\/em><\/strong><\/em><\/strong><\/em><\/strong><\/em><\/strong><\/em><\/strong><\/em><\/strong> (Andrew Hass<\/strong> )<\/strong> <\/a><\/p>\n

Apopophatic Thinking Colloquium <\/em><\/strong><\/em><\/strong><\/em><\/strong><\/em><\/strong><\/em><\/strong><\/em><\/strong><\/em><\/strong>10 <\/strong><\/em><\/strong><\/a><\/strong><\/em><\/strong> (Hass Discussion + Nahum Brown)<\/strong><\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n

Apopophatic Thinking Colloquium <\/em><\/strong><\/em><\/strong><\/em><\/strong><\/em><\/strong><\/em><\/strong><\/em><\/strong><\/em><\/strong>11 <\/strong><\/em><\/strong><\/a><\/strong><\/em><\/strong><\/em><\/strong> (Discussion + Nahum Brown)<\/strong><\/a><\/strong>
\n<\/strong><\/em><\/strong><\/a><\/strong><\/em><\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n

Apopophatic Thinking Colloquium <\/em><\/strong><\/em><\/strong><\/em><\/strong><\/em><\/strong><\/em><\/strong><\/em><\/strong><\/em><\/strong>12 <\/strong><\/em><\/strong>(David Chai)<\/strong><\/a><\/p>\n

Apopophatic Thinking Colloquium <\/em><\/strong><\/em><\/strong><\/em><\/strong><\/em><\/strong><\/em><\/strong><\/em><\/strong><\/em><\/strong>13 <\/strong><\/em><\/strong><\/em><\/strong> (Karl-Heinz Pohl)<\/strong><\/a>
\n<\/strong><\/em><\/strong><\/a><\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n

Apopophatic Thinking Colloquium <\/em><\/strong><\/em><\/strong><\/em><\/strong><\/em><\/strong><\/em><\/strong><\/em><\/strong><\/em><\/strong>14 <\/strong><\/em><\/strong><\/a><\/strong><\/em><\/strong><\/em><\/strong> (Closing D<\/strong><\/a><\/strong>iscussion)<\/strong><\/a><\/strong>
\n<\/strong><\/em><\/strong><\/a><\/strong><\/em><\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n

Apophatic Thinking Colloquium 15<\/strong><\/em> (Closing Reflections – William Franke)<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

Videotaped Lecture : “Rethinking Cultural Universality Today and The Question of Theological Transcendence”<\/a><\/h2>\n

Rethinking Cultural Universality Today and The Question of Theological Transcendence<\/a><\/p>\n

(Video Taped Lecture, Sri Lanka, March 2, 2014)<\/p>\n

Rethinking Cultural Universality Today and The Question of Theological Transcendence<\/a><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Videotaped Lecture:\u00a0 23rd<\/sup> World Congress of Philosophy:\u00a0 “Philosophy as Inquiry and as Way of Life”\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0 School of Philosophy, University of Athens, Greece, August 2-11, 2013<\/h2>\n

\u201cThinking in the Gap between the Cultures of Greece and China:\u00a0\u00a0Apophatic Universalism\u201d
\n(minutes 33-55 in tape)<\/a><\/p>\n

\u201cThinking in the Gap between the Cultures of Greece and China: Apophatic Universalism\u201d<\/a><\/p>\n

(Single Videotaped Lecture)<\/p>\n

“Authorial Intentions” Book Interviews<\/a> (Conversations with Chris Benda about recent books by William Franke)<\/h2>\n

Dante and the Sense of Transgression<\/a><\/p>\n

The Revelation of Imagination: From the Bible and Homer through Virgil and Augustine to Dante<\/a><\/p>\n

A Philosophy of the Unsayable<\/a><\/p>\n

Authorial Intentions: Interviews with Chris Benda<\/a> on: Secular Scriptures; A Philosophy of the Unsayable; Dante and the Sense of Transgression; The Revelation of Imagination<\/h2>\n

Chris Benda interview on A Theology of Literature: The Bible as Literature in the Tradition of the Humanities<\/a><\/p>\n

Secular Scriptures: Modern Theological Poetics in the Wake of Dante<\/a><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Syndicate Theology Symposium\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 [https:\/\/syndicatetheology.com\/symposium\/a-philosophy-of-the-unsayable\/]<\/p>\n

\n

A Philosophy of the Unsayable<\/h1>\n<\/div>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

\n

Symposium Introduction<\/h1>\n

by Kendall Cox<\/h3>\n

In A Philosophy of the Unsayable<\/em>, William Franke examines the \u201cvalences and varieties\u201d of what cannot be said\u2014from the indeterminacy of language to the infinite openness of thought to the ineffability of the divine and the unspeakability of suffering. The work reflects Franke\u2019s depth of study across the fields of philosophy, theology, and literature as a professor of Comparative Literature and Religious Studies at Vanderbilt University and of Philosophy and Religions at the University of Macao. Here he condenses and clarifies some of the main themes and assertions of his two edited volumes On What Cannot Be Said: Apophatic Discourses in Philosophy, Religion, Literature and the Arts<\/em> (2007). Both projects draw attention to \u201capophasis\u201d as a distinct genre that spans a host of related disciplines. Franke\u2019s concern is to identify and set in conversation certain resources in the Western intellectual tradition that figure as \u201ca kind of perennial counter-philosophy to the philosophy of Logos\u201d (1). \u201cApophasis\u201d specifically designates, for him, the \u201cnegation\u201d\u2014namely the \u201cself-negation\u201d\u2014of discourse (80). Franke discerns within discourses as manifold and varied as Neoplatonism, negative theology, medieval mysticism, Romantic poetry, Death of God theology, Radical Orthodoxy, and especially contemporary continental philosophy \u201cmajor monuments\u201d of what he calls an \u201capophatic culture\u201d (2). He concludes the work with the claim that \u201capophaticism is the soul of philosophy inasmuch as it critically questions everything that can be believed\u201d (328).<\/p>\n

\"Franke\"<\/a>In the first few chapters of A Philosophy of the Unsayble<\/em>, Franke examines the theme of unsaybility in literature. Peppered with epigraphs and insights from literary figures such as Shakespeare, Rilke, H\u00f6lderlin, Dickenson, Beckett and many others, in these initial theoretical and literary-critical reflections, Franke turns to Hegel and post-Hegelian philosophy (chapters 1-2) as well as the \u201cpathbreaking\u201d post-holocust poetry of Paul Celan and Edmond Jab\u00e8s (chapter 3) (83). In the second half of the book, Franke more explicitly examines the relationship between philosophy and theology, enacting the \u201ctrans-philosophical thinking\u201d he commends (5). One of his goals is \u201cto situate apophatic thought as key to some of the most challenging developments and disputes in the philosophy of religion today\u201d and \u201cto mediate and unblock the deadlock between secularizing\u2026and theologizing approaches\u201d (274). He attempts to bridge discourses as apparently polarized as the \u201cpostsecular religious revivalist philosophy\u201d (or Radical Orthodoxy) of figures such as John Milbank, Catherine Pickstock, and Graham Ward, on the one hand, and the secular or atheistic philosophy of Thomas Altizer, Slavoj \u017di\u017eek, Alain Badiou, Giorgio Agamben, and John Caputo, on the other (chapters 4-7). Franke says these discourses have a \u201ccommon basis in critical, apophatic insight\u201d (270). Apophasis is \u201cthe missing link.<\/p>\n

The way Franke relates philosophy, theology, and literature is a common thread in the responses comprising this symposium on his work. Franke believes that in the face of \u201cwhat cannot be said,\u201d 1) philosophy \u201cnecessarily becomes literary\u201d and 2) language is pushed \u201cin a direction which is best understood as theological\u201d (4).<\/p>\n

Sai Bhatawadekar highlights the performative quality of a \u201cphilosophy of the unsayable,\u201d integrating humor, hymnody, as well as some of her own aphoristic rhymes into her response. Bringing together modern German philosophy and South Asian Studies, Bhatawadekar\u2019s engagement with Franke is set against the backdrop of her upbringing in a Hindu household where, she says, the \u201cbizarre appearances\u201d of various gods and goddesses represented \u201cvery imaginative yet ultimately feeble attempts of depicting something beyond human capacities.\u201d<\/p>\n

Kevin Hart, himself a theologian, philosopher, and poet, is well aware of the sorts of resonances Franke identifies across these distinct discourses. However, he is wary of collapsing the differences between the contemplative practices of medieval mysticism and, for example, the brokenness of language that marks post-Holocaust German literature. Hart suggests teasing out more thoroughly the various \u201cmodes\u201d in which unsayability \u201cimpinges on us.\u201d He also notes the fact that apophasis \u201cis ineluctably tied to\u201d kataphasis\u2014a point Aaron Simmons makes as well. Writing from the perspective of modern philosophy of religion, Simmons raises a number of other important questions, including whether the \u201cground between philosophy, literature, and religion\u201d might \u201cbe made a bit less slippery\u201d and whether the discussion would benefit from a broader engagement with analytic philosophy and epistemology.<\/p>\n

In light of the poetic and theological quality of Franke\u2019s writing, Stephen Palmquist specifically considers the question of whether it is \u201cproperly named philosophy.\u201d He believes Franke\u2019s claims about apophatic language could be grounded more clearly in an apophatic logic<\/em> that can make \u201csense out of language that might otherwise appear to be but a literary game.\u201d William C. Hackett too draws attention to the problem of language and identity. His response to Franke takes the form of an extended reflection on Aristotle\u2019s understanding of metaphor in light of Franke\u2019s criticism that metaphysics has been \u201cinterpreted narrowly as a deductive system and without regard for its allusive and largely poetical power of vision\u201d (39). Hackett, like Franke and some of the other panelists, notes the close affinity between the kind of apophatic questioning Franke describes and religious commitment. But Hackett wonders whether Franke\u2019s valorizing of \u201cleaving the question of religion undecided\u201d (269) is itself \u201can a priori decision constricting the possibility of divine revelation\u201d such that \u201cthe a priori character of (absolute) indecision\u201d becomes a nihilistic \u201caffirmation of the impossibility of a last word.\u201d<\/p>\n

In all, one of the most valuable dimensions of the book that surfaces in\u00a0this symposium is the profound connection between thought and life within Franke\u2019s \u201cphilosophy of the unsayable.\u201d It embodies the fact that, in Simmons\u2019 words, at its best \u201cphilosophy is itself<\/em> lived engagement.\u201d<\/p>\n

\n

Panelists<\/h1>\n

Christopher Hackett<\/h4>\n

Stephen R. Palmquist<\/h4>\n

J. Aaron Simmons<\/h4>\n

Kevin Hart<\/h4>\n

Sai\u00a0Bhatawadekar<\/h4>\n

About the Author<\/strong><\/h1>\n

William Franke<\/strong> is professor of philosophy and religions at the University of Macao and professor of comparative literature and religious studies at Vanderbilt University.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

\n

A Philosophy of the Unsayable<\/h1>\n<\/div>\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

\n

Symposium Introduction<\/h1>\n

by Kendall Cox<\/h3>\n

In A Philosophy of the Unsayable<\/em>, William Franke examines the \u201cvalences and varieties\u201d of what cannot be said\u2014from the indeterminacy of language to the infinite openness of thought to the ineffability of the divine and the unspeakability of suffering. The work reflects Franke\u2019s depth of study across the fields of philosophy, theology, and literature as a professor of Comparative Literature and Religious Studies at Vanderbilt University and of Philosophy and Religions at the University of Macao. Here he condenses and clarifies some of the main themes and assertions of his two edited volumes On What Cannot Be Said: Apophatic Discourses in Philosophy, Religion, Literature and the Arts<\/em> (2007). Both projects draw attention to \u201capophasis\u201d as a distinct genre that spans a host of related disciplines. Franke\u2019s concern is to identify and set in conversation certain resources in the Western intellectual tradition that figure as \u201ca kind of perennial counter-philosophy to the philosophy of Logos\u201d (1). \u201cApophasis\u201d specifically designates, for him, the \u201cnegation\u201d\u2014namely the \u201cself-negation\u201d\u2014of discourse (80). Franke discerns within discourses as manifold and varied as Neoplatonism, negative theology, medieval mysticism, Romantic poetry, Death of God theology, Radical Orthodoxy, and especially contemporary continental philosophy \u201cmajor monuments\u201d of what he calls an \u201capophatic culture\u201d (2). He concludes the work with the claim that \u201capophaticism is the soul of philosophy inasmuch as it critically questions everything that can be believed\u201d (328).<\/p>\n

\"Franke\"<\/a><\/p>\n

In the first few chapters of A Philosophy of the Unsayble<\/em>, Franke examines the theme of unsayability in literature. Peppered with epigraphs and insights from literary figures such as Shakespeare, Rilke, H\u00f6lderlin, Dickenson, Beckett and many others, in these initial theoretical and literary-critical reflections, Franke turns to Hegel and post-Hegelian philosophy (chapters 1-2) as well as the \u201cpathbreaking\u201d post-holocust poetry of Paul Celan and Edmond Jab\u00e8s (chapter 3) (83). In the second half of the book, Franke more explicitly examines the relationship between philosophy and theology, enacting the \u201ctrans-philosophical thinking\u201d he commends (5). One of his goals is \u201cto situate apophatic thought as key to some of the most challenging developments and disputes in the philosophy of religion today\u201d and \u201cto mediate and unblock the deadlock between secularizing\u2026and theologizing approaches\u201d (274). He attempts to bridge discourses as apparently polarized as the \u201cpostsecular religious revivalist philosophy\u201d (or Radical Orthodoxy) of figures such as John Milbank, Catherine Pickstock, and Graham Ward, on the one hand, and the secular or atheistic philosophy of Thomas Altizer, Slavoj \u017di\u017eek, Alain Badiou, Giorgio Agamben, and John Caputo, on the other (chapters 4-7). Franke says these discourses have a \u201ccommon basis in critical, apophatic insight\u201d (270). Apophasis is \u201cthe missing link.<\/p>\n

The way Franke relates philosophy, theology, and literature is a common thread in the responses comprising this symposium on his work. Franke believes that in the face of \u201cwhat cannot be said,\u201d 1) philosophy \u201cnecessarily becomes literary\u201d and 2) language is pushed \u201cin a direction which is best understood as theological\u201d (4).<\/p>\n

Sai Bhatawadekar highlights the performative quality of a \u201cphilosophy of the unsayable,\u201d integrating humor, hymnody, as well as some of her own aphoristic rhymes into her response. Bringing together modern German philosophy and South Asian Studies, Bhatawadekar\u2019s engagement with Franke is set against the backdrop of her upbringing in a Hindu household where, she says, the \u201cbizarre appearances\u201d of various gods and goddesses represented \u201cvery imaginative yet ultimately feeble attempts of depicting something beyond human capacities.\u201d<\/p>\n

Kevin Hart, himself a theologian, philosopher, and poet, is well aware of the sorts of resonances Franke identifies across these distinct discourses. However, he is wary of collapsing the differences between the contemplative practices of medieval mysticism and, for example, the brokenness of language that marks post-Holocaust German literature. Hart suggests teasing out more thoroughly the various \u201cmodes\u201d in which unsayability \u201cimpinges on us.\u201d He also notes the fact that apophasis \u201cis ineluctably tied to\u201d kataphasis\u2014a point Aaron Simmons makes as well. Writing from the perspective of modern philosophy of religion, Simmons raises a number of other important questions, including whether the \u201cground between philosophy, literature, and religion\u201d might \u201cbe made a bit less slippery\u201d and whether the discussion would benefit from a broader engagement with analytic philosophy and epistemology.<\/p>\n

In light of the poetic and theological quality of Franke\u2019s writing, Stephen Palmquist specifically considers the question of whether it is \u201cproperly named philosophy.\u201d He believes Franke\u2019s claims about apophatic language could be grounded more clearly in an apophatic logic<\/em> that can make \u201csense out of language that might otherwise appear to be but a literary game.\u201d William C. Hackett too draws attention to the problem of language and identity. His response to Franke takes the form of an extended reflection on Aristotle\u2019s understanding of metaphor in light of Franke\u2019s criticism that metaphysics has been \u201cinterpreted narrowly as a deductive system and without regard for its allusive and largely poetical power of vision\u201d (39). Hackett, like Franke and some of the other panelists, notes the close affinity between the kind of apophatic questioning Franke describes and religious commitment. But Hackett wonders whether Franke\u2019s valorizing of \u201cleaving the question of religion undecided\u201d (269) is itself \u201can a priori decision constricting the possibility of divine revelation\u201d such that \u201cthe a priori character of (absolute) indecision\u201d becomes a nihilistic \u201caffirmation of the impossibility of a last word.\u201d<\/p>\n

In all, one of the most valuable dimensions of the book that surfaces in\u00a0this symposium is the profound connection between thought and life within Franke\u2019s \u201cphilosophy of the unsayable.\u201d It embodies the fact that, in Simmons\u2019 words, at its best \u201cphilosophy is itself<\/em> lived engagement.\u201d<\/p>\n

\n

Panelists<\/h1>\n

Christopher Hackett<\/h4>\n

Stephen R. Palmquist<\/h4>\n

J. Aaron Simmons<\/h4>\n

Kevin Hart<\/h4>\n

Sai\u00a0Bhatawadekar<\/h4>\n

About the Author<\/strong><\/h1>\n

William Franke<\/strong> is professor of philosophy and religions at the University of Macao and professor of comparative literature and religious studies at Vanderbilt University.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

\n
\n
\n

COMMENTARIES<\/h2>\n
\n

\"Sai \u00a0<\/a><\/p>\n

A Personal Reaching Out<\/h3>\n

Sai Bhatawadekar<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

\"W.C. \u00a0<\/a><\/p>\n

On \u201cSowing a God-Created Flame\u201d<\/h3>\n

W.C. Hackett<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

SYMPOSIUM EDITOR<\/h2>\n
\n

\"Kendall<\/p>\n

Kendall Cox<\/a><\/h3>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
\n
\n

Join Syndicate’s Mail List<\/h3>\n

 <\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a><\/div>\n
\n
\n