{"id":1653,"date":"2018-03-13T10:56:48","date_gmt":"2018-03-13T15:56:48","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/my.vanderbilt.edu\/williamfranke\/?p=1653"},"modified":"2025-06-07T23:09:56","modified_gmt":"2025-06-08T04:09:56","slug":"a-philosophy-of-the-unsayable","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/my.vanderbilt.edu\/williamfranke\/2018\/03\/a-philosophy-of-the-unsayable\/","title":{"rendered":"A Philosophy of the Unsayable"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

A Philosophy of the Unsayable<\/a><\/h2>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

This monograph proposes an original philosophy pivoting on analysis of the limits of language and explains why the encounter with what exceeds speech has become the crucial philosophical issue of our time.\u00a0 It also offers readings of literary texts, especially the poetic oeuvres of Paul Celan and Edmond Jab\u00e8s, in which the philosophical principles\u00a0 worked out on a theoretical plane are illustrated and put into practice.\u00a0 Finally, it engages with philosophical theologies and philosophies of religion in the debate over negative theology, demonstrating the irresistible infiltration of negative theology into the thinking even of those who attempt to deny or delimit it.\u00a0 Both extremes of Radical Orthodoxy and Secular Theology share in common not very fully acknowledged and sometimes explicitly repudiated premises in negative or apophatic theology, which surprisingly emerges as key to fostering genuine possibilities for dialogue among even the most antagonistic approaches to philosophical theology on the scene today.<\/p>\n

From University of Notre Dame Press<\/a>
\n\u201cWilliam Franke is an articulate spokesman for what cannot be said not only with regards to modern European poetry but also with respect to contemporary theology. A Philosophy of the Unsayable is essential reading for everyone working in religion and literature and in modern theology.\u201d \u2014 Kevin Hart, Edwin B. Kyle Professor of Christian Studies, University of Virginia<\/p>\n

\u201cBy now, it would seem that there could be no more to say about not-saying. Apophatic language and negative theology have been accused of meaninglessness, nihilism, and even ill-concealed ontologies. In this lovely and surprising book, William Franke not only deftly undoes these criticisms but shows that apophasis underlies and strangely grounds all language and thought, even of those very discourses that most vigorously reject it. A Philosophy of the Unsayable demonstrates with elegance that there is indeed more to say, and more that is both meaningful and important.\u201d \u2014 Karmen MacKendrick, Professor of Philosophy (Joseph C. Georg Endowed Professorship of Philosophy, 2009-12), Le Moyne College<\/p>\n

\u201cWilliam Franke is an eminent scholar in comparative literature, who is schooled in philosophy and religion. He is recognized as one of the most creative contemporary thinkers working at the double intersection of philosophy and literature and philosophy and theology. A Philosophy of the Unsayable shows an intellectual grasp of a dizzying array of discourses and sheds real light on all thinkers who are discussed.\u201d \u2014 Cyril O\u2019Regan, Huisking Professor of Theology, University of Notre Dame<\/p>\n

\u201cWilliam Franke is a major voice in current discussions of \u201cReligion and Literature.\u201d One thing that makes him unusual, as well as highly valuable, is that unlike most people in the area he has a broad knowledge of philosophy, both ancient and modern; another unusual characteristic of this author is that his writing is firmly based in meticulous scholarship in several European languages. I have long been an admirer of his work, and I am pleased to say that the substantial typescript I have been given to read, A Philosophy of the Unsayable<\/em>, has all the desirable qualities I have just indicated. There is one further quality that makes Professor Franke an author that Notre Dame University Press will want to retain: he writes a remarkably clear and engaging prose.\u201d\u2014(Senior scholar writing anonymously for UNDP)<\/p>\n

\n
\n
<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
\n

INTERNET FORUMS<\/p>\n

J. Aaron Simmons, \u201cDiagnosing Predicaments and Attending to Futures: Responding to William Franke\u2019s Account of the \u201cPredicament of Philosophy of Religion\u00a0Today\u201d<\/a><\/p>\n

Syndicate online Symposium<\/a><\/p>\n

Martin Shuster, Realism and Ineffability<\/a><\/p>\n

Per Caritatem<\/a><\/p>\n

Boston University IPR Blog: Silence and Resilience in Suffering<\/a><\/p>\n

REVIEWS:<\/p>\n

\u201cWilliam Franke has emerged as our foremost purveyor of what cannot be said.. . .this is a remarkable text, and deserves close attention at every level. Like all important texts, it raises questions for further interrogation.\u201d<\/p>\n

\u2013 Andrew W. Hass, editor of Literature and Theology<\/em> (Oxford University Press).<\/p>\n

Andrew W. Hass, Literature and Theology<\/a><\/p>\n

\u201cFranke\u2019s book is . . . a thoughtful, provoking and often helpful exploration of an intellectually and spiritually demanding discourse.\u201d George Pattison, Theology<\/em> 111 (2): 144-46<\/p>\n

George Pattison, Theology<\/a>
\nBrett Gray review of A Philosophy of the Unsayable<\/em><\/a> (PDF):<\/p>\n

“Ultimately, what Franke seems to be questing for in his \u201cphilosophy of the unsayable\u201d is the possibility of a form of faithful and non-nihilistic pluralism. If all discourses, preeminently theological discourses, find their true orientation towards something that cannot be said, but something which nonetheless elicits a frequently prolix and often doxological linguistic saying, then all discourses have a hidden unity beyond their irreducible differences. That is not an immanently obtainable unity, but a unity in distension towards what cannot, by its very nature, be obtained. It renders language both chastened and noble: chastened by its limits, and ennobled by its endless quest. Likewise, the apophatic thinker-whether a French philosopher or a theolo- gian steeped in the knowledge of Christian mysticism\u2014is to Franke a “knight of faith\u201d (p. 328) who restlessly probes the possibilities of believing through an ardent ascesis of questioning, whether such a knight is more Galahad or Don Quixote will probably be for the reader to decide, what they will not be able to dispute is the erudition and audacity of Franke\u2019s own quest.”<\/p>\n

–Brett Gray, Anglican Theological Review<\/em> 99.1 (2017): 145-148<\/a><\/p>\n

Andrea Aguti, Humanitas<\/a><\/p>\n

\n
\n
Jon Frederickson\u00a0 \u00a0 Amazon.com: Customer reviews: A Philosophy of the Unsayable<\/a><\/span><\/div>\n<\/div>\n
\n
5.0 out of 5\u00a0<\/span><\/i><\/a>stars<\/span><\/i>\u00a0Stunning and beautiful book on apophatic discourse<\/a><\/h5>\n<\/div>\n

Reviewed in the United States on August 20, 2022\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

I am only part way through the book, yet the depth of scholarship, the subtlety of thinking, and the beauty with which he describes the apophatic tradition is already evident. I cannot recommend this book highly enough to anyone interested in the limits of language and concepts to “capture” the non-conceptual.<\/span><\/div>\n<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n

Syndicate online Symposium<\/a><\/span><\/h1>\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

 <\/p>\n

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<\/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

 <\/p>\n

FURTHER EDITIONS AND COMMENTS:<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

Project Muse<\/a> Search Browse Download<\/p>\n

Kindle electronic edition<\/a><\/p>\n

Comment by Ronald L. Hall, International\u00a0 Journal for\u00a0 Philosophy of Religion (2013) 73:1\u20133 3, on component article, <\/a>
\n“Apophasis as the Common Root of Radically Secular Radically Orthodox Theology<\/a>
\npdf<\/a>
\nFranke_PhilosophyOfUnsayable_Announcement<\/a><\/p>\n

Good Reads <\/a><\/p>\n

Book Plug<\/a><\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

For detailed critical engagement by 14 philosophers and cultural critics, see:<\/p>\n

Contemporary Debates in Negative Theology and Philosophy<\/a><\/p>\n

includes Kevin Hart chapter on William Franke’s philosophy of the unsayable<\/a><\/p>\n

amazon – contents<\/a><\/p>\n

\"contemporary<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

A Philosophy of the Unsayable This monograph proposes an original philosophy pivoting on analysis of the limits of language and explains why the encounter with what exceeds speech has become the crucial philosophical issue of our time.\u00a0 It also offers readings of literary texts, especially the poetic oeuvres of Paul Celan and Edmond Jab\u00e8s, in…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":615,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-1653","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-news"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/my.vanderbilt.edu\/williamfranke\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1653","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/my.vanderbilt.edu\/williamfranke\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/my.vanderbilt.edu\/williamfranke\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/my.vanderbilt.edu\/williamfranke\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/615"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/my.vanderbilt.edu\/williamfranke\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1653"}],"version-history":[{"count":25,"href":"https:\/\/my.vanderbilt.edu\/williamfranke\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1653\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":4505,"href":"https:\/\/my.vanderbilt.edu\/williamfranke\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1653\/revisions\/4505"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/my.vanderbilt.edu\/williamfranke\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1653"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/my.vanderbilt.edu\/williamfranke\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1653"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/my.vanderbilt.edu\/williamfranke\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1653"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}