How subject and object relate is perceived differently. This has been identified and discussed by philosophers. Hegel built on Plato’s notion that true reality only exists in ideas and is, therefore, objectively true. Hegel argued that the world we encounter is the objectification of the divine mind. Empiricists argue that material things can be engaged through the senses and are, therefore, real. But how do we know that spiritual things are real since they cannot be engaged through the senses? (...) class='Hi'>Feuerbach reacted against the Enlightenment thoughts of his time by postulating that god is not real since it is a projection of human qualities. Feuerbach inverted Hegel’s theory by stating that the divine is an abstraction and reification of human thought. With this theory, Feuerbach stated that religion is human-made and redundant. Feuerbach’s theory of the non-existence of god was created during the 19th century and corresponds with post-theism. De Botton also denies the existence of god, but declared that religion has many valuable functions for society. Feuerbach, from a philosophical and De Botton, from a sociological perspective, both deny the existence of god, but differ on the role religion play in society. Feuerbach’s theories proves to have relevance to current studies of religion.Contribution: This contribution investigates the position of Ludwig Feuerbach and tries to indicate the influence his ideas had on current post-theistic theories, such as that by Allan de Botton. (shrink)

Unter dem Titel Feuerbach und der Judaismus wird mit dieser Publikation ein neues Kapitel in der Feuerbachforschung aufgeschlagen, da erstmalig Feuerbachs Stellung zum Judaismus, aber auch sein Einfluß auf die deutsch-jüdische Philosophie ...

Friedrich Engels: Ludwig Feuerbach und der Ausgang der klassischen deutschen Philosophie Edition Holzinger. Taschenbuch Berliner Ausgabe, 2013 Vollständiger, durchgesehener Neusatz mit einer Biographie des Autors bearbeitet und eingerichtet von Michael Holzinger Textgrundlage ist die Ausgabe: Karl Marx, Friedrich Engels: Werke. Herausgegeben vom Institut für Marxismus-Leninismus beim ZK der SED, 43 Bände, Band 21, Berlin: Dietz-Verlag, 1962. Herausgeber der Reihe: Michael Holzinger Reihengestaltung: Viktor Harvion Umschlaggestaltung unter Verwendung des Bildes: Friedrich Engels, Fotographie von 1888 von William Elliott Debenham (1839-1924) Gesetzt (...) aus Minion Pro, 10 pt. (shrink)

Ludwig Andreas von Feuerbach (July 28, 1804 - September 13, 1872) was a German philosopher and anthropologist. He was the fourth son of the eminent jurist Paul Johann Anselm Ritter von Feuerbach. Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels were strongly influenced by Feuerbach's atheism, though they criticised him for his inconsistent espousal of materialism. Not only, Marx also (and correctly) saw some divinization of the man substituting god.

On the philosophy of Hegel and Feuerbach, and the essence and tasks of philosophy.

Ludwig Feuerbach is traditionally regarded as a significant but transitional figure in the development of nineteenth-century German thought. Readings of Feuerbach's The Essence of Christianity tend to focus on those features which made it seem liberating to the Young Hegelians: namely, its criticism of reification as abstraction, and its interpretation of religion as alienation. In this book, Van Harvey claims that this is a limited and inadequate view of Feuerbach's work, especially of his critique of religion. The (...) author argues that Feuerbach's philosophical development led him to a much more complex and interesting theory of religion which he expounded in works which have been virtually ignored hitherto. By exploring these works, Harvey gives them a significant contemporary re-statement, and brings Feuerbach into conversation with a number of modern theorists of religion. (shrink)

ABSTRACTThis article begins with a detailed analysis of Althusser's criticism of Feuerbach as an “ideologue” of the body. Althusser concentrates on the mirror structure of the subject and the object and on empiricism, which represents the ideological discourse. I argue that Althusser overlooked Feuerbach's decisive revelations: a bodily materiality which corresponds to Adorno's non-identical inner nature, and the ontological condensation of the human being; a process which generates the “living reality” of the body. I show Feuerbach's breakthrough (...) reinterpretation of the Ground in Schelling's concept of the object that was identified with nature and represents the non-identical limitation of the subject. This limitation, which is connected to death, creates the difference between the “living reality” of the body and bodily materiality as subjected by ideological discourses. I conclude that Feuerbach revealed a non-identical materiality of the body that evades both Althusserian interpellations and Foucauldian regulative practices. (shrink)

In his monumental work Das Gastmahl des Platon (1869) the artist Anselm Feuerbach depicted the scene in Plato’s Symposium in which a drunken Alcibiades, accompanied by a band of revelers, enters the dining chamber of the house of the poet Agathon. We have reason to attribute three aims to the artist: (1) to recreate a famous scene from ancient Greek literature, making extensive use of recent archaeological discoveries in southern Italy; (2) through the depiction of a senate and dignified (...) Agathon, to convey a sense of the nobility of the ancient Greeks; and (3) to express in visual terms the contrast of reason with desire. As he set out to accomplish these objectives Feuerbach displayed considerable indifference to the details in Plato’s depiction. Thus, what Das Gastmahl offers us is less Plato’s symposium and more Feuerbach’s symposium, a visually striking but in several respects unfaithful recreation of the Platonic original. -/- . (shrink)

The present work carries us back to a period which, although chronologically no more than a generation or so behind us, has become as foreign to the present generation in Germany as if it were already a full hundred years old. Yet it was the period of Germany's preparation for the Revolution of 1848; and all that has happened in our country since then has been merely a continuation of 1848, merely the execution of the last will and testament of (...) the revolution. Just as in France in the eighteenth century, so in Germany in the nineteenth, a philosophical revolution ushered in the political collapse. But with what a difference! The French were in open combat with all official science, with the church and often also the state; their writings were printed beyond the frontier, in Holland or England, while they themselves were often on the point of landing in the Bastille. But the Germans were professors, state-appointed instructors of youth; their writings were recognized textbooks, and the system rounding off the whole development---the Hegelian system---was even raised, in some degree, to the rank of a royal Prussian philosophy of state! Was it possible that a revolution could hide behind these professors, behind their pedantically obscure phrases, their ponderous, wearisome sentences? Were not the liberals, the very people who then passed as the representatives of the revolution, the bitterest opponents of this brain-befuddling philosophy? But what neither governments nor liberals saw was seen by at least one man as early as 1833, and indeed by a man called Heinrich Heine. (shrink)

Excerpt from Feuerbachs Straftheorie und Ihr Verhältnis zur Kantischen Philosophie Vorliegende Schrift ist der hohen juristischen Universität Jena als Dissertation angenommen und genehmigt Worden. About the Publisher Forgotten Books publishes hundreds of thousands of rare and classic books. Find more at www.forgottenbooks.com This book is a reproduction of an important historical work. Forgotten Books uses state-of-the-art technology to digitally reconstruct the work, preserving the original format whilst repairing imperfections present in the aged copy. In rare cases, an imperfection in the (...) original, such as a blemish or missing page, may be replicated in our edition. We do, however, repair the vast majority of imperfections successfully; any imperfections that remain are intentionally left to preserve the state of such historical works. (shrink)

Ludwig Feuerbach's work is often too easily dovetailed with the works of Hegel and Marx and therefore read teleologically as an intermediary step between the two “major” figures. By re-interpreting Feuerbach more as a system critic than as a system builder, this article attempts to elucidate his relationships to the other two. It will also point up the gendered articulation of his critiques of religion and philosophy. The article will show how Feuerbach's use of gender, though remaining (...) fixed within a predictably hierarchical binary, is more than simply symptomatic of its context and offers significant resources for critical re-readings of nineteenth-century German philosophy. (shrink)

Barth, K. Ludwig Feuerbach.--Löwith, K. L. Feuerbach und der Ausgang der klassischen deutschen Philosophie.--Bloch, E. Keim und Grundlinie; zu den Elf Thesen von Marx über Feuerbach.--Lorenz, R. Zum Ursprung der Religionstheorie Ludwig Feuerbachs.--Löwith, K. Vermittlung und Unmittelbarkeit bei Hegel, Marx und Feuerbach.--Glasse, J. Barth zu Feuerbach.--Barth, H.-M. Glaube als Projektion.--Sass, H.-M. Argumentationsfiguren in der Kritik an Ludwig Feuerbachs Religions- und Metaphysikkritik.--Bayer, O. Gegen Gott für den Menschen.--Kosing, A. Ludwig Feuerbachs materialistische Erkenntnistheorie.--Finger, O. Von der anthropologisch-materialistischen (...) Religionskritik zur historisch-materialistischen Ideologieanalyse.--Rotenstreich, N. Anthropologie und Sinnlichkeit.--Arvon, H. Feuerbach und die Theologie.--Schmidt, A. Feuerbachs Stellung in der Geschichte des Materialismus.--Thies, E. Philosophie und Wirklichkeit; die Hegelkritik Ludwig Feuerbachs.--Rohrmoser, G. Warum sollen wir uns für Feuerbach interessieren? (shrink)

Ludwig Feuerbach (1804–1872) was born in Landshut, Bavaria, the son of Paul Johann Anselm, a renowned legal theorist who had been called from Jena by the king of Bavaria to modernize the kingdom’s penal code. Feuerbach’s brothers all became distinguished scholars in their fields and his nephew Anselm a renowned classicist painter. After enrolling in theological studies in Heidelberg, Feuerbach became enthralled in Hegel’s philosophy and moved to Berlin to study with him. He presented his dissertation in (...) 1828 at the university of Erlangen and began his career there as a young Privat Dozent. Posterity has associated Feuerbach’s name to his anthropological critique of religion, presented in the 1841 The Essence of Christianity. Yet his writings touched on many other areas of philosophy. His life-long interest in religion arose from his attempt to solve the classical, fundamental questions of philosophy, of the human being’s place in the world, the relationships between thinking and being, reason and nature, mind and body, and the epistemological implications entailed in answering these questions. (shrink)

‘The Image of Thought’ could be considered to be the most important piece of writing in the entire Deleuzian corpus. This is the chapter of Difference and Repetition that several decades later, Deleuze claims is the ‘most necessary and the most concrete’ (Deleuze 1994: xvii) section of the book, and the one that provides a basis for his later work with Guattari. Here, Deleuze engages with two basic issues. First, he separates out his conception of thinking, and with it, philosophy, (...) from prior philosophical approaches, explaining why the difference of his philosophy from prior systems itself differs from the traditional relationship between philosophical positions. Second, he raises the question of how one should begin to philosophise. As we will see, philosophy often operates by the recognition of implicit presuppositions in prior thinkers, and their refutation. Descartes, for instance, criticises Aristotle for presupposing the transparency of categories such as rational and animal. Kant, in turn, criticises Descartes for presupposing the determinability of his own foundational moment, the cogito. If we see the development of philosophy as the unmasking and critique of presuppositions of prior systems, then the endpoint of philosophy will be a system entirely without presuppositions. This is the goal Hegel aims at with his system of absolute idealism. Deleuze’s claim is that such a model of the progress of philosophy itself operates within one overarching assumption: the good will of thinking. In this essay, I want to relate these questions of thinking and beginnings to the work of one of Deleuze’s predecessors. Deleuze writes of Ludwig Feuerbach that ‘Feuerbach is among those who have pursued farthest the problem of where to begin.’ (Deleuze 1994: 319) As we shall see, prefiguring Deleuze, Feuerbach accuses Hegel of operating within ‘an image of Reason’. While Feuerbach is famous as a precursor of Marx, and for his critique of traditional accounts of religion, I want to here focus on an early piece by Feuerbach, his Critique of Hegelian Philosophy. Here Feuerbach sets out the limitations of traditional philosophical accounts, and provides the groundwork for his own later materialism. Deleuze discovered Feuerbach through his friend Althusser’s translation of his work, published in 1960. While many of the intuitions behind Deleuze’s critique of the image of thought can be found within a broader pantheon of thinkers, including Nietzsche, Bergson, and Foucault, the specific mechanics of Deleuze’s criticism bear a striking resemblance to the formulation of the critique of philosophy in Feuerbach’s earlier thought. I want to explore this connection, first by looking at the dialectical interrelation of two thinkers, Descartes and Hegel, to get a sense for how criticism in philosophy typically operates. I then want to move on to look at Feuerbach’s critique of Hegel and philosophy more generally, drawing out several aspects that will be taken up by Deleuze himself. I will then look at some of the ways in which Deleuze goes beyond Feuerbach by recognising some of the limitations that persist in Feuerbach’s own analysis. I will conclude by showing how Deleuze’s desire to think the two common acceptations of aesthetics together (the artistic and the sensible) bring Feuerbach into relation with an unexpected figure: the playwright and poet, Antonin Artaud. (shrink)

Ludwig Feuerbach is traditionally regarded as a significant but transitional figure in the development of nineteenth-century German thought. Readings of Feuerbach's The Essence of Christianity tend to focus on those features which made it seem liberating to the Young Hegelians: namely, its criticism of reification as abstraction, and its interpretation of religion as alienation. In this long-awaited book, the first of an important new series, Van Harvey claims that this is a limited and inadequate view of Feuerbach's (...) work, especially of his critique of religion. The author argues that Feuerbach's philosophical development led him to a much more complex and interesting theory of religion which he expounded in works which have been virtually ignored hitherto. By exploring these works, Harvey gives them a significant contemporary re-statement, and brings Feuerbach into conversation with a number of modern theorists of religion. (shrink)

By contextualising the striking similarities in Feuerbach and Kierkegaard’s conceptions of sin as infinite qualitative difference, and the related question of the individual and the species as a shared response to the Hegelian Entzweiung, this article seeks to offer a new framework for understanding Feuerbach’s critique of Christian theology and of Kierkegaard’s famous articulation of the infinite qualitative difference as simultaneously ontological, hamartiological, and soteriological. It argues that Kierkegaard offers a modification of the Feuerbachian account to argue against (...) Feuerbach’s conclusion that the Christian doctrine of sin negates qualitative differences between individual humans, and to conversely affirm that sin differentiates not just God and humans, but each single individual too. Kierkegaard might be said to at once uphold Feuerbach’s critique of Hegelian theology, while inverting Feuerbach’s anti-theological programme by harnessing the ambiguities that appear in Feuerbach’s account of sin. It is thereby shown how both Feuerbach and Kierkegaard make use of Hegelian logic, both through their formal application of the concepts of quality and quantity, as well as their creative appropriation of the notion of Entzweiung. (shrink)

Ludwig Feuerbachs Das Wesen des Christentums, zuerst erschienen 1841, gilt nicht nur als Klassiker der Religionskritik, sondern auch der junghegelianischen Hegel-Kritik. Der hier vorgelegte Kommentar erstreckt sich auf alle Textabschnitte des Buches sowie die Kontexte der Entstehungs- und Wirkungsgeschichte. Er wurde von 13 Forscherinnen und Forschern der Fachrichtungen Philosophie und Theologie aus Deutschland, Italien, Portugal, Österreich und den USA verfasst. Dabei wird deutlich, dass Feuerbach weniger eine Religionskritik als eine Kritik der Theologie im Auge hat und dabei weitgehend auf (...) Hegels Religionsphilosophie zurückgreift. Es handelt sich hier um eine umfassende Biographie und um den ersten vollständigen Kommentar zu Feuerbachs grundlegendem Werk, mit Einbeziehung der zeitgenössischen Kontexte sowie der Entstehungs- und Wirkungsgeschichte. Feuerbachs Verhältnis zur Religion und zu Hegel wird differenziert dargestellt, wodurch die Kontinuität zur Klassischen Deutschen Philosophie sichtbar wird. Damit richtet sich der Titel besonders an Lehrende und Studierende in den Fächern Philosophie, Theologie und Religionswissenschaften. (shrink)

: O presente artigo evidencia, por um lado, o mérito da filosofia de Espinosa, pelo fato de haver submetido a oposição das partes e do todo, do corpo e da alma, da matéria e do espírito, à unidade da substância, já que toda parte singular da substância pertence à sua natureza. Por outro lado, destaca a crítica de Feuerbach a Espinosa, porque a filosofia deste é, na verdade, uma filosofia da identidade, que não reconhece, como Hegel também assinala, a (...) substância como espírito e o espírito como substância, e não determina suficientemente a unidade da matéria e do espírito, já que falta a ela a realidade da diferença, da determinidade. Enquanto Espinosa identifica Deus com a natureza (Deus sive natura) e, mediante a natureza divina (a substância), supera a contradição de Descartes entre matéria (res extensa) e espírito (res cogitans), Feuerbach quer, em oposição ao panteísmo, a diferença entre natureza e Deus (aut Deus aut natura). (shrink)

The aim of this article is to analise the religion philosophy and its critic, based on Ludwig Feuerbach principles as one of the greatest exponents of modern atheism. It will start from some thinkers that could be considered as Ludwig predecessors, going through Feuerbachian considerations to finish with a valuation of those philosophers who have built a new critic philosophy of the religion and theology, relating some Feuerbach innovations in this fields with highly topical matters, proving the actual (...) relevance of his thinking despite the fact that it has been a century and a half since his death. (shrink)

Feuerbach is now recognized as a central figure in the history of nineteenth-century thought. He was one of Hegel's most influential pupils: he dominated German radical philosophy in the 1840s and was the leader of the Young Hegelians; his 'anthropological' critique of Hegel's idealism decisively influences the materialism and humanism of Marx and Engels; his critique of religion pointed the way for the philosophers of religion; and his psychological analyses found a place in Freudian thought and the existential and (...) phenomenological traditions. In this 1977 text, Professor Wartofsky wishes to go beyond this conventional view to establish Feuerbach as much more than a transitional figure between Hegel and Marx or an influence on important later developments. He seriously considers Feuerbach's philosophy on its own terms and seeks to demonstrate its continuing importance. He therefore traces Feuerbach's development in detail, emphasizing its dialectical character, and finds fundamental originality in his epistemology. (shrink)

Pre-Marxist materialism attained its highest point in the philosophy of Feuerbach. And therefore it is no accident that the bases from which Marx, in creating the philosophy of dialectical materialism, took his departure were both the scholarly contributions of Feuerbach and those elements of his theory that were "capable of development." His attitude toward Feuerbach's materialism, which sharply defined the boundary between what was discarded and what was retained, became an organic component of dialectical materialism.

The article searches to retract the theme of the inversion of theology in anthropology in Ludwig Feuerbach, achieving the context of the philosophical tradition to create another vision in what sense it is correct to comprehend what the 19th century philosopher is not an atheist and also does not reduce to serving as a little point between two great authors: Hegel and Marx. Focusing on the an important question on the history of the philosophy, in those who looked deeply (...) to the man, that claims a lot to find spur,sense or peace, if in font of emptiness, of pain, produced by uncertainty, scarcity, anguish, impotency and suffering, can be realized all of this density that brought on the Feuerbach's philosophical work, which will be so much understood by inserting it in the context of discussions, tied on the field of our presenting world, because the problem that it is concerned there is the central themes of the philosophy leading to meditations on God, religion, theology, and everything that will be related to it in theoretical and practical life. Reviewing the structure and functioning of religion and the religious events as such, to the beyond that can be judge an atheist by the way. (shrink)