8/22/2019 Greek Tragedy - Irrationality_Essay - Noa - 08

1/6

Noa Bendit-Shtull 11/4/08

First Year Seminar Beta

Dr. Matthews

Olympus and Irrationality:

The Role of Greek Divinity in the Greek Struggle with Irrationality

Paul Tillich writes in his essay Symbols of Faith that There are within us dimensions

of which we cannot become aware except through symbols (Tillich 573). These dimensions are

matters of ultimate concerndimensions that are relevant to our concern about finding meaning

in our existence. Because these dimensions are issues of ultimate concern, they can only be

expressed through symbols. Therefore, unknowable dimensions of ultimate concern are turned

into gods. Faith, Tillich asserts, is the state of being ultimately concerned (Tillich 574). Thus, a

societys divinity reflects its ultimate concern. According to modern interpretation, the ancient

Greek divinity reflected the unconscious dimension, the unknowable realm of irrationality. How

does Greek divinity reflect the Greek struggle with irrationality? Jonathan Lear and Nietzsche

offer divergent arguments. Examination of AeschylusPrometheus Boundand Sophocles

Oedipus Rex reveals that, although Lear and Nietzsches arguments are ostensibly contradictory,

their conclusions are not mutually exclusive. Both Lear and Nietzsche provide accurate

explanations of the relationship between the Greek ultimate concern with irrationality and the

Greek divinity.

In his essay The Shrink is In, Lear explores the Greek relationship to the unconscious,

irrational mind. He argues that the Greeks shift locus of hidden meaning (25), representing it

as an external, rather than internal, force. This force is Olympus, the divine sphere that houses

the Olympian gods. This realm of irrational meaning cannot be easily deciphered by human

reason (Lear 24). Lear contends that the unconscious domain is dangerous only if we fail to

1

8/22/2019 Greek Tragedy - Irrationality_Essay - Noa - 08

2/6

recognize its influence in our determinedly rational existence. If we deny the irrational, it will

wreak havoc. But psychoanalysis, Lear explains, is a means of dealing with the irrational: It is a

technique that allows dark meanings and irrational motivations to rise to the surface of conscious

awarenessthey become less liable to disrupt human life in violent and unpredictable ways

(Lear 25). The role of the Greek divinity is comparable to the role of psychoanalysis; both

psychoanalysis and Olympus enable us to accept and wrestle with the irrationality in our

existence. The Greeks were able to cope with their ultimate concern, irrationality, by

representing it as an external force, Olympus.

Nietzsche makes the opposite case in his Apollonianism and Dionysiansim. His article

is constructed on many of the same premises as Lears, but reaches a contrary conclusion.

Nietzsche approaches the Greek relationship with irrationality by discussing Dionysianism and

Apollonianism. The Dionysiac state is a state of intoxication, of complete deferral to the id. The

id is an irrational, unconscious force, an impulse that seeks primal satisfaction. Nietzsche

describes Dionysiac celebrations as events marked by a complete sexual promiscuity

overriding every form of established tribal law; all the savage urges of the mind were unleashed

(Nietzsche 555). Apollonianism is the opposite of Dionysianism. Apollolonianism celebrates the

illusion of reason, a veil protecting us from a reality marred by inscrutable irrationality

(Nietzsche 553). Apollo, the god of illusion, protected the Greeks from those brutal and

grotesque Dionysiac forces (Nietzsche 555).

These two opposing states, Apollonianism and Dionysianism, are the foundation of

Nietzsches argument. Nietzsche writes that the Greeks harbored a tremendous distrust of the

titanic forces of nature: Moira, mercilessly enthroned beyond the knowable world (558). These

titanic forces represent the id: the unknowable irrationality and barbarity of the unconscious.

2

8/22/2019 Greek Tragedy - Irrationality_Essay - Noa - 08

3/6

Moira is Fate, the illogical, omnipotent force that rules the lives of men. The Greeks were aware

of the inexorable sufferingcaused by unknowable irrationalitythat is the fate of mankind, but

struggled to find meaning in this existence. So they used Olympus to conquer irrational fate.

How? The Greeks made their gods victims of fate in order to glorify irrational existence

(Nietzsche 559). Apollo, unable to resist the Dionysiac id, instead wrest[ed] the destructive

weaponfrom his opponents hand (Nietzsche 555).

Nietzsches argument parallels Lears in the assertion that the Greeks used their Gods to

help them deal with this enigmatic irrational force. However, he writes that Olympus was not a

symbol of irrationality, but a talisman against it. The role of Olympus, epitomized in Apollo, was

to create an illusion of meaning, a reason and rationality to existence (Nietzsche 556). Olympus

gave meaning to the irrational life of humanity by living it.

Aeschylus playPrometheus Boundelucidates the role of Olympus in the Greek struggle

with irrationality. Aeschyluss gods speak in riddles, straining communication between

humanity and divinity. Admittedly, the gods do not deign to communicate directly with man.

Instead, they speak through oracles, whose prophesies are incomprehensible. One character,

desperately seeking to evade Zeus wrath, sought advice from soothsayers, but those he sent

came back with riddling oracles dark and beyond the power of understanding (Aeschylus 163).

Divine riddling makes several appearances; Prometheus tells Io that he will speak plainly,

without riddles (Aeschylus 161), and Hermes warns Prometheus not to speak in riddle

(Aeschylus 175). Communication between the gods and men is obfuscated because the divine

realm is irrational. Humans, who live in a world dominated by reason veiled by the Apollonian

illusioncannot easily grasp the irrational lingo of the Gods. This evidence points to Lears

theory that the Greeks dealt will irrationality by expressing it in their divinity.

3

8/22/2019 Greek Tragedy - Irrationality_Essay - Noa - 08

4/6

However, Aeschylus gods are not merely the source of irrationality. They are also its

victims. The gods are subject to fate, the quintessence of irrationality. Even Zeus, the highest

Olympian, cannot escape the authority of fate. Prometheus relates Zeus doom: His own light-

witted counsels will undo himhe will make a marriage which he one day will rue (Aeschylus

167). Zeus is fated to fall at the hand of his heir unless he releases Prometheus from bondage

(certainly a twist of fate, but fated nevertheless). Prometheus, a god himself, also mentions fate

in passing. He asks, Why should I fear, since death is not my fate? (Aeschylus 174).

Prometheus declaration that death is not his fate implies that he is subject to fate. Thus,

Aeschyluss portrayal of the Greek gods dovetails with Nietzsches proposal. The Greeks

conceived the gods as victims of fate (albeit unconsciously) in order to bring meaning to their

irrational reality.

Prometheus Boundaffirms both Lear and Nietzsches notions of the role of Greek

divinity in helping the Greeks deal with their ultimate concern. Sophocles Oedipus Rex, on the

other hand, supports only Lears hypothesis. Because Oedipus Rex is squarely situated in the

mortal realm, it only addresses the human conflict with irrationality. Oedipus, the eponymous

protagonist ofOedipus Rex, is fated to murder his father and wed his mother. Oracles reveal this

fate in bits and pieces. An unnamed oracle tells Laius, Oedipus father, that he is fated to be

killed by his son (ironically the same fate that Prometheus prophesies for Zeus inPrometheus

Bound) (Sophocles 41). Teiresias, an oracle of Apollo, discloses the same fate to a defiant

Oedipus (Sophocles 26). Oracles are the messengers of the gods, which indicated that the gods

are the origin of the irrational fate that befalls Oedipus. 1

Another aspect of Oedipus struggle with fate bolsters Lears argument. Lear, to reiterate,

1Strictly speaking, the Fates, not the gods, are the perpetrators of fate. The role of oracles as messengers

of the gods andconveyors of fate may be accounted for by acknowledged inconsistency in the Greeks

conception of their divinity.

4

8/22/2019 Greek Tragedy - Irrationality_Essay - Noa - 08

5/6

asserts that unrecognized irrationality will create violent chaos. For a large portion ofOedipus

Rex, Oedipus adamantly disregards the influence of fate in his life. He says that he solved the

Sphinxs riddle using wit alone, although his success was necessarily determined by fate

(Sophocles 27). Later on, encouraged by his wife, Oedipus derides those who have faith in

prophesy; he calls the oracles deadand worthless (Sophocles 51). As Lear predicts, Oedipus

failure to acknowledge the irrational sphere of prophesy is his downfall. Ruined by the revelation

of his actualized fate, Oedipus gouges out his eyes (Sophocles 66).

In Oedipus Rex, Sophocles renders the Greek gods originators and perpetrators of

irrationality, affirming Lears contention that Greek irrationality was reflected in Greek divinity.

Prometheus Boundsupports Lears argument, but also corroborates Nietzsches assertion that

Olympus defended the Greeks from irrationality by succumbing to it. The Greek gods serve a

dual purpose. Like the Greeks themselves, the gods are both the source and the victims of

irrationality. Interestingly, this is what solidifies their humanity. The animal core of humanity,

the id, generates the very irrationality that inflicts pain and suffering on mankind. So although

Lear and Nietzsche both understand the role of divinity in the ancient Greek struggle with

irrationality, neither gives a comprehensive explanation. Neither Lear nor Nietzsche fully

expresses the role of Olympus in terms of Tillichian symbols. In order to embody ultimate

concern and aid in the search for meaning, Tillichian symbols must mirror humanity.

5

8/22/2019 Greek Tragedy - Irrationality_Essay - Noa - 08

6/6

Works Cited

Aeschylus. Prometheus Bound. 2nd ed. Ed. David Grene. Chicago: The University of Chicago

Press, 1991.

Lear, Jonathan. "The Shrink is In." The New Republic 25 Dec. 1995: 18-25.

Nietzsche, Friedrich. "Apollonianism and Dionysianism." The Birth of Tragedy, 550-563.

Sophocles. Oedipus the King. 2nd ed. Trans. David Grene. Chicago: The University of Chicago

Press, 1991.

Tillich, Paul. "Symbols of Faith." Dynamics of Faith, 1990. 572-580.

6