A Response to Critics of In Defense of Kant's Religion

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 understanding Kant’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 Contemporary Philosophy  Philosophy and Religion
Categories (categorize this paper)
ISBN(s) 0739-7046
DOI 10.5840/faithphil201229219
Options
 Save to my reading list
Follow the author(s)
My bibliography
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Revision history
Request removal from index
Download options
Our Archive


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 26,150
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library
References found in this work BETA

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles
A Reply to Critics of In Defense of Kant's Religion.Nathan A. Jacobs - 2012 - Faith and Philosophy 29 (2):210-228.
The Philosophical Significance of Kant's Religion.Pamela Sue Anderson - 2012 - Faith and Philosophy 29 (2):151-162.
In Defense of Not Defending Kant's Religion.Gordon E. Michalson - 2012 - Faith and Philosophy 29 (2):181-192.
Triangulating God: A Kantian Rejoinder to Perovich.Stephen Palmquist - 1994 - Faith and Philosophy 11 (2):302-310.
Introduction: On Defending Kant at the AAR.Andrew Chignell - 2012 - Faith and Philosophy 29 (2):144-150.
Kant's Transcendental Religious Argument: The Possibility of Religion.Dennis Schulting - 2013 - In Stefano Bacin & Claudio La Rocca (eds.), Akten des XI. Kant-Kongresses 2010. de Gruyter. pp. 949-962.

Monthly downloads

Added to index

2012-09-18

Total downloads

14 ( #326,537 of 2,152,226 )

Recent downloads (6 months)

1 ( #399,478 of 2,152,226 )

How can I increase my downloads?

My notes
Sign in to use this feature


Discussion
Order:
There  are no threads in this forum
Nothing in this forum yet.

Other forums