The End of Continuity and Heidegger’ s Rediscovery of the Problem of Time

  • Gabriel Motzkin
Part of the Philosophical Studies in Contemporary Culture book series (PSCC, volume 1)


The Church’s rejection of Traditionalism did not stern from adesire to effect an accommodation with science; it preceded the efforts to reconcile science and religion. The Church rejected Traditionalism because it could not accept the Traditionalist vision of the interaction between religious and secular history. The French Traditionalists had sought to provide a continuity over time that is not retrospective. However, in order to make their case within the framework of the discourse of their time, they had to adopt the language and perspective of retrospection. They were ultimately unable to escape the constraints of the historical mentality through the expansion of the concept of tradition, however attractive the idea continued to appear weIl into the twentieth century.1 Although the tradition the Traditionalists provided appeared to be both prospective and eternal, the account that they gave of the tradition was a retrospective one; they had to justify the tradition in retrospective and historicist terms. Their account of the Tradition is ultimately an account from outside, an historical account, and not a nomothetical or apocalyptic account.


Past Event Philosophical Tradition Historical Continuity Continental Philosophy Historical Consciousness 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Yves Congar, La tradition et les traditions (Paris: A. Fayard, 1960, 1963); Joseph Pieper, Tradition als Herausforderung (München: Kösel-Verlag, 1963).Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    On Mercier, see L. de Rueymaker, Le Cardinal Mercier et l’institut supérieur de philosophie de Louvain (Louvain: Institut supérieur de philosophie, 1952). Also: Alois Simon, Le Cardinal Mereier (Brussels, 1960). Also: Malusa, op. cit., pp. 409 et seq., esp. pp. 415, 417. For Mercier’s psychologism, see: Désire Mercier, Logique (Louvain: A. Uystpruyst-Dieudonne and Paris: Felix Alcan, 1893). Also: Désire Mercier, Les origines de la psychologie contempoiraine (Louvain: Institut supérieur de philosophie, 1897, 1908), Eng. trans.: The Origins of Contemporary Psychology (New York: P. J. bKenedy & Sons, 1918).Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Donald J. Wilcox, The Measures of Time Past (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1987), pp. 17–18.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Edmund Husserl, Logische Untersuchungen (Halle: M. Niemeyer, 1900, 1901).Google Scholar
  5. 6.
    Edmund Husserl, The Phenomenology of Internal Time-Consciousness (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1964). Original German ed.: Edmund Husserl, Edmund Husserls Vorlesungen zur phänomenologie des inneren Zeitbewußtseins (Halle: Niemeyer,1928).Google Scholar
  6. 7.
    Reinhart Koselleck, op. cit., English, pp. 283ff., German, pp. 368ff.Google Scholar
  7. 8.
    René Démoris, op. cit.Google Scholar
  8. 9.
    Jeffrey Perl, The Tradition of Return (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1984).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 1992

Authors and Affiliations

  • Gabriel Motzkin
    • 1
  1. 1.The Hebrew University of JerusalemIsrael

Personalised recommendations