Positive and negative myths: superman vs. God-man

Abstract

The author claims that Nietzsche’s idea of ​​superman was a mythological reflection of the crisis of the Enlightenment concept of man as a subject of self-improvement through reason; therefore, this idea expressed the impossibility of an alternative, positive foundation of philosophical anthropology. Nietzsche seems to have considered biological mortality to be the criterion of human imperfection. The concept of “superman” regarded as a subject of immortality does not imply a “new” or “more perfect” person, it was introduced by Nietzsche with the aim of discrediting the traditional metaphysical understanding of man. According to the author, the mythological character of the idea of superman is emphasized by the following paradox: in order to become a superman, one needs to return to the past and revive the conditions of the prehistoric myth; but the return to the past is coming back to the times of heroes in order to regain lost vitality; in this case the superman is not necessary. Among the various reactions to Nietzsche’s idea of superman, the most interesting is called the teaching of ​​God-humanity proposed by Vladimir Solovyov. The Russian philosopher, in fact, created a positive myth to oppose the negative myth. His doctrine of God-humanity does not imply a “new” or “more perfect” man either, it was believed to be a way of overcoming the individual existence of man through the reunion of people in God as the substantially existing Absolute. In Solovyov’s view, this requires a universal church as an institution of humanity-god and a positive religion as a spiritual basis for the reunification of God-humanity and humanity-god. Solovyov described the positive religion as the actual and ultimate knowledge of God as the Absolute Logos, achieved with the help of faith.