Life is meaningless since people are born to suffer and then destined to die and be forgotten; this simple sentence represents a common nihilist perception of the world. Nevertheless, it is crucial to note that every writer who represents the philosophical stream of nihilism views the matter of living and dying differently. Jean Paul and Ernst August Klingemann were German philosophers of the 18th century, both of which lived in the same historical period, yet obtained different opinions about the same matters. They tackled the issue of love, science, emotion, after-life, and soul and managed to come to completely different conclusions. While in this essay, the author will portray how the theories and ideas of both philosophers differ, the author will also argue that Jean Paul’s perception triumphs Klingemann’s.

Jean Paul and Religion

Jean Paul is mostly known for his novels and controversial stories with unexpected turns and revelations at the end. He highly criticizes both atheism and religion in his philosophical writings. He argues that some people believe in God’s existence and some do not, but the problem which arises from each statement is that either of the groups aspire to go further in explaining the belief or the fundamental features of what each means. Jean Paul writes, “In a similar manner to this, I myself was suddenly horror-struck at the perception of the poison-power of that vapor which strikes with such suffocating fumes to the heart of him who enters the school of Atheistic doctrine” (The Dead Christ,” p. 260). Jean Paul invokes the idea that once someone decides to be an atheist, it is a “poison-power” since an atheist becomes the loneliest one in the universe. The reason is that an atheist has an orphaned heart which is due to the fact that he is missing the Holy Father.

As the atheist believes that there is not even a soul, let alone the immortality of it, this brings us to the infamous passage of his dream in which the dead Christ proclaims that there is no God. In this dream, the dead gather in church for a midnight sermon, during which the dead Christ appears and claims that there is no God. The collapsing world is without redemption and hope as galaxies come together to destroy each other–nothing can save humanity. Jean Paul writes, “...a great immeasurable bell began to swing in act to toll the last hour of Time, and shatter the fabric of the universe to countless atoms– when my 2 sleep broke up, and I awoke” (“The Dead Christ”, p.265.). At first, he describes that the world is collapsing but all of the sudden, he wakes up only to find out it was nothing more than a horrific dream. “And my soul wept for joy that it could still worship God—my gladness, and my weeping, and my faith—these were my prayer” (“The Dead Christ”, p.265.), writes Jean Paul. As he awakes from his slumber, he realizes that the nightmare of his consciousness is only there to reassure him that his belief in God is significantly important, which circles back to the passage where he claims that, “Leave us the dim and painful dreams even; they serve to make life's high-lights all the more brilliant” (“The Dead Christ”, p.265). Then, he continues to admire the nature around him that is accompanied with a glowing sun as he slowly forgets the dream and moves on. This could be contrasted to Klingemann’s theory which says that idealism and such illusions are just a fantasy that block our vision of the harsh reality. It is interesting to see that while Jean Paul’s faith is being reassured by the horrific dream, Kreuzgang as he sees the absurdity of life, he comes to the exact opposite conclusion; that life is meaningless and everything will eventually perish.

Jean Paul’s story of the Dead Christ has a rather odd ending. One cannot just simply wake up and abandon the dream’s meaning; it is too big of a thought just to ignore it all together. There are couple of observation and speculations that I would like to add to the conversation. Firstly, the reason why Jean Paul uses the Christ as the ultimate proclaimer of God’s death is because Christ is so to speak the superhero of Christianity and in this scenario probably the most persuasive character. Therefore, if people ought to believe anyone, it would be Christ and not a random person. Secondly, this dream could possibly represent the transcendental world which lays beyond the reality of our solid, mortal bodies. This transcendental dimension could only be visited after death. Thirdly, what if this is exactly what it means to be nihilistically and somewhat spiritually skeptical? One can then abandon the belief in heaven and hell and realize that the transcendental world after death is nothing but an ultimate chaos of the collapsing worlds. A bit unsettling, but possibly true.

Jean Paul and the Immortality of the Soul

As Jean Paul elaborates on the topic of the world beyond mater, the concept of the immortal soul arises. The Campaner Thal is a complex story of him and his scientist friend Karlson travelling together, while discussing the immortality of the soul. As Karlson is a natural scientist, he does not believe that the soul lives on after death. Nevertheless, Jean Paul starts a rather interesting debate about the topic and he criticizes the Kantian idea of 3 immortality. Immanuel Kant’s idea may not be wrong but it has the wrong approach, since, as Jean Paul claims, one must not disregard the humanity of people. Jean Paul argues, “For as a full conformity of the human will to the moral law, with which the just Creator never can dispense, is quite unattainable by a finite being, an eternally continuing progress, i.e. an unceasing duration, must contain and prove this conformity in God's eyes, who overlooks the everlasting course” (Campaner Thal, p. 30). Kant argues that one must assume human immortality since the process of achieving morality is so complex that the practice must continue even after death. Therefore, people continue to pursue immorality in the afterlife. Jean Paul points out that if Kant’s theory was true, then people have infinite time not only to improve morally but to worsen and be sinful. I find Jean Paul’s argument a bit more appealing and realistic, since people can get bored very easily even during their life on Earth. Image having infinite time to improve as a person, or in the afterlife as a soul– maybe at some point one might become a fully realized and morally improved being, but what happens then?

Kant and Jean Paul have a fairly common but somewhat distinct understanding of the immortality of soul, at least both of them believe in its existence. However, in 506th station of the Campaner Thal, Jean Paul discusses the soul-body dilemma with Karlson, who believes that the body and soul die together; one cannot function without the other. As the body moves and creates, the mind is where the idea happens therefore, they must move together as a whole; and are in correlation. I can see a bit of a resemblance between Karlson and Klingemann’s view, since both claim that when the body dies nothing more is left. To prove Karlson wrong, Jean Paul presents the idea of the virtue, beaty and truth, claiming that if one believes in these concepts, then it in only rational to see there must be something more than the physical body. This could be explained through the principle of human grief. If one feels sadness, they cry but the tear is not grief as such, it is only a reaction. The tear is caused by the grief, and therefore, they are not the same, since the inner (emotional) sphere is different from the outer sphere. Essentially, they are independent of each other which works in favor of Jean Paul’s theory of immortality.

Jean Paul finalizes his thoughts in the 507th station of Campaner Thal by claiming that only few people deny immortality. “On the whole, I find fewer men than one would imagine who decidedly believe in, or deny, the existence of a future world. “Few dare to deny it, as for them this life would then lose all unity, form, peace, and hope; few dare to believe it, for they are startled at their own purification and at the destruction of the lessened earth. The majority, according to the promptness of alternating feelings, waver poetically 4 between both beliefs” (Campaner Thal, p. 50). This invokes the possibility that people would rather believe in something because if they do not have something to grasp on, they would lose sanity. And if God only created us to die, then our entire existence is extremely dull and worthless. For instance, if people experience the desire to come home, this suggests that people have this desire in the bigger sense as well; like in the afterlife to achieve harmony and fulfillment.

Klingemann’s Nightwatches of Bonaventura

Jean Paul ultimately criticizes nihilism even before the concept came to life and he indicates that there could be more to life than just simply dying. On the other hand, Ernst Klingemann in his novel the Nightwatches of Bonaventura proposes a completely opposite explanation of the world. A story begins with a man called Kreuzgang, the narrator and nightwatchman, who shares his thoughts about the world and humanity. Kreuzgang is satirical, often ignorant, blunt, and he doesn’t seem to be emotionally attached whatsoever, not even in scenarios when he enters the room in which a poet killed himself; he casually jokes about it. Altogether, he disregards the possibility that human beings could be able to progress, hence he is critical of the enlightenment spirit. Idealism is just a fantasy and obstacle that prevent us from seeing the hard and bitter reality of life– nihilism.

In the Sixth Nightwatch, Kreuzgang decides to do a prank on his fellow citizens by claiming that within the last hour of the day, the Last Judgement will come. Everyone panics, people start acting in diverse ways. For instance, proper citizens are not so proper anymore (which proves that everyone is just wearing a mask). Judges are metaphorically speaking wolves who want to become sheep and start helping the vulnerable people because they are afraid of their judgement. The absurdity of the story stems from the fact that Kreuzgang is just a nightwatchman and the majority of citizens believe him without verifying if it is really true. Whereas in Jean Paul’s “Dead Christ,” the bearer of the bad news was Christ to justify the plausibility of the upcoming disaster. Here one can see how Klingemann points out the absurdity of people and how foolish they can be.

Comparing and contrasting Jean Paul and Klingemann’s theory

Jean Paul, even though he criticizes religion and atheism, he still believes in something that is beyond our comprehension. Whereas Kreuzgang is entirely degrading not only the belief in religion, but humanity as such. Jean Paul often talks about human beings as demigods of some sort with a higher purpose, while Klingemann says that human kind 5 has achieved nothing and everyone continues to wear masks at all times, pretending to be someone they are not. Kreuzgang says “...the ape, which is incontestably more cloddish yet than a mere fool, is actually the introductory speaker and prologist of the entire human race and that my and your thoughts and feelings have only with time been merely somewhat refined and cultivated, although they ever remain, according to their origin, only thoughts and feelings such as could arise in the head and heart of an ape” (Klingemann, p. 62). A casual and nice way how to say that people are only apes who can use their thumbs (a bit harsh, but okay). It appears as if Kreuzgang loathes humanity as a whole and loses faith, while Jean Paul argues that people should, for the sake of their sanity, make sure that they believe in at least something.

The concept of love for each of the writers is entirely different. While in Jean Paul’s story Karlson fell in love with Gione, who later dies (at least it looks like so for a moment), Karlson packed his bags and in agony leaves right away. As Karlson does not believe in the soul’s immortality, he thinks that Gione is gone for good, nothing was left of her– she and her essence were annihilated. When he finds out that Gione is alive, he comes back and looks forward to seeing her because his love, the meaning of his life is alive. On the other hand, Kreuzgang unexpectedly falls in love with his fellow actress colleague who plays Ophelia. He sees no meaning in love and describes it as if it was a sickness. “Everything miscarried, however, for me; indeed, the symptoms grew more and more critical, and I began to wander about engrossed in myself and felt myself almost human and meekly disposed toward the world” (Klingemann, p. 102). For a second, he felt like perhaps he could be immortal. Jean Paul claims that love is the reason why people throw away rationality but for Klingemann, love is just a delusion of being immortal and a belief that the world can be the best place.

Furthermore, Jean Paul argues that there is immortality because there must be something more to life if God created it, but Klingemann says that once someone dies, the closest family members remember them but then the generations to come do not really, so once the body decomposes, the body and soul as well die together. Kings and emperors remain in our minds, but if they had no greater significance on the society or world they will eventually be forgotten. Nevertheless, everyone ends up in the same place so perhaps the actions of important people live on in the memories but they end up dying anyway. What is more, this also outlined the criticism of idealism since once someone dies, their ideas die with them as the brain starts to decompose. The ideas have no reality in the external world. They are only illusion and results of the masks people are wearing, claims 6 Klingemann. Consequently, this is what nihilism represents, the idea that everything will eventually decay into nothingness. All human existence comes to nothing.

Conclusion

The world is split between two sides; one is Kreuzgang’s nihilist modern scientist person and the other one is trying to cling onto something by using religion or faith. Jean Paul claims that people bounce between these two. I must say that this idea prevails to be true even in today’s society. Of course, the world is a complex system of diverse ideas but when it comes to this topic, I may perhaps over-generalize but I believe it to be true. One person abandons religion, grasps onto science and claims that there is nothing else beyond life on Earth. Some might even ridicule the idea and go further to say that those who pray have no dignity and it is useless, just as Kreuzgang would argue. But some claim that it is extremely naïve to believe that a person should live her/his life for approximately 85 years then die and that’s it.

Life would go on without either of these theories. Even if we believe that either of the mentioned authors were right, in the wider picture, Earth and humanity altogether are just a speck of dust in the immense, expanding and everchanging universe. None of our actions, stories, theories, speculations, lives matter. Nevertheless, in the smaller picture, I am more inclined towards Jean Paul’s theory and would personally like to believe that my life was not worthless and that perhaps there is an ideal transcendental spiritual paradise with unlimited fries, delicious food, fresh air to breathe, mountains to climb, good books to read and everlasting peace. And since none of it matters in the bigger picture, for my personal sake I will believe in whatever I deem to be right.

References:

Klingemann, E. A. (2014). The Nightwatches of Bonaventura. Chicago, London: University of Chicago Press x Chicago and London.

Richter, J. P. (1897). First Flower Piece. In Flower, Fruit and Thorn Pieces (pp. 259-265). London: George Bell and Sons.

Richter, J. P. (1864). The Campaner Thal and Other Writings. Boston: Ticknor and Fields