Faith and Philosophy 29 (2):193-209 (2012)
|Abstract||This essay replies to four critics of In Defense of Kant’s Religion (IDKR). In reply to Gordon E. Michalson, Jr., I argue that the best pathway for understandingKant’s Religion within the Boundaries of Mere Reason (Religion) is to conduct close textual analysis rather than giving up the art of interpretation or allowing meta-considerations surrounding Kant’s personal and political circumstances to govern one’s interpretation. In response to George di Giovanni, I contend that his critique is dismissive of theologically robust readings of Kant for reasons that have very little to do with what Religion actually asserts. Pamela Sue Anderson’s essay, I argue, reads Kant on God according to an empirically-biased stream of British interpretation which makes Kant’s transcendental philosophy appear foreign to its rationalist heritage. Lastly, in response to Stephen R. Palmquist, I suggest that his reading of Kant’s two experiments is done not only in a vacuum, but also according to a perspectival interpretation of Kant that goes beyond what Kant’s writings actually maintain|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Nathan A. Jacobs (2012). A Reply to Critics of In Defense of Kant's Religion. Faith and Philosophy 29 (2):210-228.
Pamela Sue Anderson (2012). The Philosophical Significance of Kant's Religion. Faith and Philosophy 29 (2):151-162.
George di Giovanni (2012). On Chris L. Firestone and Nathan Jacobs's In Defense of Kant's Religion. Faith and Philosophy 29 (2):163-169.
Stephen R. Palmquist (2012). Cross-Examination of In Defense of Kant's Religion. Faith and Philosophy 29 (2):170-180.
Michalson (2012). In Defense of Not Defending Kant's Religion. Faith and Philosophy 29 (2):181-192.
Stephen R. Palmquist & Steven Otterman (2013). The Implied Standpoint of Kant's Religion : An Assessment of Kant's Reply to (and an English Translation of) an Early Book Review of Religion Within the Bounds of Bare Reason. [REVIEW] Camrbridge Core Philosophy 18 (1):73-97.
Patrick Frierson (2011). Rational Faith: God, Immortality, Grace. In Immanuel Kant: Key Concepts. Acumen Publishing Limited.
Chris L. Firestone (2009). Towards and New Kantian Theology: Theology at the Transcendental Boundaries of Reason. Ashgate.
Andrew Chignell (2012). Introduction. Faith and Philosophy 29 (2):144-150.
Brian Chance (forthcoming). Causal Powers, Hume’s Early German Critics, and Kant’s Response to Hume. Kant-Studien.
James DiCenso (2011). Kant, Religion, and Politics. Cambridge University Press.
Dennis Schulting (forthcoming). Kant's Transcendental Religious Argument: The Possibility of Religion. In Stefano Bacin & Claudio La Rocca (eds.), Akten des XI. Kant-Kongresses 2010. de Gruyter.
Andrew Chignell (2010). The Devil, The Virgin, and the Envoy: Symbols of Moral Struggle in Religion II.2. In Otfried Hoeffe (ed.), Klassiker Auslegen: Religion innerhalb der Grenzen der blossen. Akademie Verlag.
Sorry, there are not enough data points to plot this chart.
Added to index2012-09-18
Total downloads2 ( #232,501 of 549,088 )
Recent downloads (6 months)2 ( #37,333 of 549,088 )
How can I increase my downloads?