This volume collects for the first time in a single volume all of Kant's writings on religion and rational theology. These works were written during a period of conflict between Kant and the Prussian authorities over his religious teachings. His final statement of religion was made after the death of King Frederick William II in 1797. The historical context and progression of this conflict are charted in the general introduction to the volume and in the translators' introductions to (...) particular texts. All the translations are new with the exception of The Conflict of the Faculties, where the translation has been revised and re-edited to conform to the guidelines of the Cambridge Edition. As is standard with all the volumes in this edition, there are copious linguistic and explanatory notes, and a glossary of key terms. (shrink)

This volume collects for the first time in a single volume all of Kant's writings on religion and rational theology. These works were written during a period of conflict between Kant and the Prussian authorities over his religious teachings. His final statement of religion was made after the death of King Frederick William II in 1797. The historical context and progression of this conflict are charted in the general introduction to the volume and in the translators' introductions to (...) particular texts. All the translations are new with the exception of The Conflict of the Faculties, where the translation has been revised and re-edited to conform to the guidelines of the Cambridge Edition. As is standard with all the volumes in this edition, there are copious linguistic and explanatory notes, and a glossary of key terms. (shrink)

_ Source: _Volume 95, Issue 2, pp 287 - 299 Holm Tetens attempts to define ‘god’ as part of his rational theology. The term ‘god’ is supposed to be defined as ‘the infinite I-subject’. This should be achieved through the customary definition of a singular term by description. However, definitions of this kind have to meet certain formal requirements, which a Rational Theology should adhere to. This paper aims to show that Tetens’ definition faces problems with (...) these requirements since vital arguments are either missing or incomplete in a substantial way. In the process, possible approaches to remedy the outlined problems are hinted at. Overall, this paper raises the question of an alternative interpretation of his definition of god, which is central to the author’s project.Holm Tetens versucht im Rahmen seiner rationalen Theologie, eine Definition Gottes vorzulegen. Die Konstante ‚Gott‘ soll als ‚das unendliche Ich-Subjekt‘ definiert werden. Dies soll nach dem üblichen Schema der Definition einer Individuenkonstante über eine Beschreibung erfolgen. Für derartige Setzungen gibt es jedoch formale Voraussetzungen, die gerade unter dem Anspruch, eine rationale Theologie vorzulegen, eingehalten werden sollten. Nachfolgend soll gezeigt werden, dass Tetens’ Definition unter diesen Voraussetzungen problematisch ist, da erforderliche Argumentationen entweder fehlen oder in einem kritischen Maße unvollständig sind. Dabei werden auch Maßnahmen zur Behebung der aufgezeigten Mängel angedeutet, wie etwa die vom Autor stillschweigend vorausgesetzten Aussagen explizit zu machen. Insgesamt wirft die Untersuchung Fragen nach einer alternativen Deutung der für das Gesamtprojekt zentralen Gottesdefinition auf. (shrink)

In classical India, debates over rational theology naturally become the occasion for fundamental questions about the scope and power of inference itself. This is well evinced in the classical proofs for God by the Hindu Nyāya tradition and the opposing arguments of classical Buddhists and Mīmāsā philosophers. This paper calls attention to, and provides analysis of, a number of key nodes in these debates, particularly questions of inferential boundaries and whether inductive reasoning has the power to support inferences (...) to wholly unique entities (like God). (shrink)

v. 1. Liberal churchmen.--v. 2. The Cambridge Platonists.

SummaryIn this issue, four critical comments on my book “Gott denken. Ein Versuch über rationale Theologie” are published, I try to reply to. More strictly than it is accomplished in “Gott denken”, I outline systematically the fundamental questions and the most pertinent principles of a rational theology as an alternative to naturalism, predominant in our time. In the center of the following considerations, I try to establish a concept of God and a kind of a Kantian “moral” argument, (...) why it would be more reasonable in one’s own life to hope to God as the creator and redeemer of the world and mankind instead of adopting a naturalistic point of view. (shrink)

This Volume contains seven works of Kant, newly translated and edited, with Introductions. What does it mean to orient oneself in thinking? 1786 (Allen Wood) On the miscarriage of all philosophical trials in theodicy. 1791 (George di Giovanni Religion within the boundaries of mere reason. 1793 (George di Giovanni) The end of all things. 1794 (Allen Wood) The conflict of the faculties. 1798 (Mary J. Gregor & Robert Anchor) Preface to Reinhold Bernhard Jackmann's examination of the Kantian Philosophy of Religion. (...) 1800 (Allen W. Wood) Lectures on the philosophical doctrines of religion (1817) (Allen W. Wood -/- . (shrink)

In this response to Stenmark's critique of my views on rational theology, I concentrate on his distinction between the epistemic and the practical goals of religion and between descriptive and normative rational theology. With regard to the first distinction, I grant that truth claims play an essential role in religious belief and that it is indeed the task of philosophy of religion to decide on the meaning and rationality of such claims. I argue, however, that since (...) such claims are internally related to the practical context of religious belief, their meaning and rationally cannot be determined apart from this context as is done in the kind of rational theology which Stenmark calls 'scientific'. With regard to the second distinction, I reject Stenmark's view that philosophy of religion has a descriptive task with reference to religion, and hence also his claim that I have put forward a false description of 'the religious language game'. (shrink)

This book explores Kant's views on the concept of God and on the attempt to demonstrate God's existence as a means of understanding Kant's work as a whole and of achieving a proper appreciation of the contents of Kant's moral faith.

The third chapter gives an account of the debates over Cartesianism outlined below, which shifted from the University of Utrecht to Leiden, where the new philosophy was introduced by Adriaan Heereboord in the early 1640s, and was carried on by Johannes de Raey at the end of the decade. In Leiden, the quarrels over Cartesianism were prompted by the intervention of the theologian Jacob Revius, criticising Descartes’s philosophy as a source of Pelagianism in 1647. This gave rise to a series (...) of attacks, replies, and counter-replies which would dominate Dutch Cartesianism well into the 1650s: Revius’s Methodi cartesianae consideratio theologica (1648), Statera philosophiae cartesianae (1650), and Cyriacus Lentulus’s Nova Renati Descartes sapientia (1651) offered a full-blown critique of Descartes’s philosophy, focusing on his metaphysics, method and on their uses in academia. Such critiques are analysed in this chapter as they brought about the first foundation of Cartesian philosophy after Descartes himself, namely, the development of a ‘Cartesian Scholastic’ by Johannes Clauberg, professor at Herborn and Duisburg. In fact, Clauberg’s defence and foundation of a Cartesian academic philosophy was not the effort of one philosopher, but was coordinated with De Raey and with other members of the Cartesian network in the Netherlands and in Germany (including Abraham Heidanus, Tobias Andreae and Christopher Wittich), as a means to avoid the bans on Cartesianism and to provide a decisive answer to the theologians. This coordinated strategy of defence is revealed by two letters of De Raey to Clauberg: their contents shed light on the background of Clauberg’s foundation, which constitutes the first, Cartesian reworking of the academic curriculum. In his works, indeed, Clauberg maintained a metaphysical foundation embodying rational-theological arguments, while providing at the same time a logical theory of the method for natural philosophy, as well as for law, theology and medicine. Yet, his concerns with the traditional structure of the curriculum led him to develop, besides a Cartesian first philosophy, also an ontosophia, whose object is being as such. This is considered by Clauberg not only in the light of the ‘first notions’ of mind and body, but also of those abstracted from concrete realities, as ‘unity’, ‘goodness’, ‘truth’, and so on. This ultimately results in the reduplication of metaphysics, which will be reduced by Clauberg’s followers – dealt with in the next chapters. (shrink)

In both his published works and lecture notes Kant distinguishes between Transcendental and Natural Theology, associating the former with Deism and the latter with Theism. The purpose of this paper is to explore these distinctions, particularly as they are shaped by Kant’s engagement with Baumgarten’s Philosophical Theology.

This volume is part of the Cambridge Edition of the Works of Immanuel Kant and contains a new, annotated, state-of-the-art English translation of the texts in which Kant primarily dealt with religion. As a matter of fact, “rational theology and rational religious faith also figure prominently in all three Critiques” and were central to some of Kant’s first important writings, such as the Universal Natural History, the Nova Dilucidatio, and the Only Possible Ground of Proof. These texts (...) have found their place in other volumes of the Cambridge series. This volume presents the following writings in their chronological sequence : “What Does It Mean to Orient Oneself in Thinking?” ; “On the Miscarriage of All Philosophical Trials in Theodicy” ; Religion within the Boundaries of Pure Reason ; “The End of All Things” ; The Conflict of the Faculties ; “Preface to Reinhold Bernhard Jachmann’s Examination of the Kantian Philosophy of Religion” ; and the Lectures on the Philosophical Doctrine of Religion. (shrink)

This chapter contains section titled: Notes Bibliography.

First published in 2002. Routledge is an imprint of Taylor & Francis, an informa company.

First published in 2002. Routledge is an imprint of Taylor & Francis, an informa company.

Rational Theology and Metaphysics THERE are many approaches to the study of religion. The present work will be confined to a philosophical examination of ...

칸트의 이성신학은 계시신학뿐만 아니라 자연신학에서도 배척되고 있으며, 또한 학문으로서 종교를 취급하는 종교철학에서도 주변화 되고 있다. 그럼에도 불구하고 그의 이성신학이 신학의 철학적 형태로서 사변적 이성신학과 윤리적 이성신학으로 부단히 발전해 왔다. 전자는 경험에 의존하지 않는 가장 현실적이고 완전한 존재를 분석하면서 감각경험의 잘못된 신 개념의 사상을 순화하여 예지 힘에 의해 이성적 필연으로 신에 다가가게 하고, 후자는 실천이성 힘으로 이념계에 있는 도덕왕국을 통해 신에게 다가가게 한다. 이처럼 신학이면서도 결코 학문성을 잃어버리지 않고 실천이성과 예지의 힘으로 신의 존재를 밝히고자 하는 칸트 노력은 독일 관념론의 전통을 관통하여 (...) M. 셸러의 종교철학에 영향을 주었다.BR 이런 영향을 받은 셸러는 현상학적 경험이 우리 의식과는 상관이 없는 외부 대상에 대한 지각적 경험이 아니라 의식의 내재적 지향에 관한 경험이며, 이런 것은 현상학 방법으로 종교철학 할 때 더욱더 그렇게 두드러진다고 주장한다. 그에 따르면 종교 영역의 현상들은 절대자에 의해서 우리의 의식에 내재적으로 미리 주어져(선소여 되어) 있고, 우리의 종교적 행위로 그것들이 우리에게 더 잘 의식되어지고 더 잘 알려지기 때문이다.BR 또한 그의 종교현상학에 의하면, 종교적 현상들은 존재서열의 낮은 감각 · 생명 영역이 아니라 정신 영역과 같은 높은 영역에서 우리에게 알려지고 의식되어지며, 그것도 절대자 혹은 신에 의존하여 우리에게 의식되어진다. 실로 우리가 절대자, 신을 신앙과 같은 종교적 행위로 만날 때, 그가 우리의 의식에 미리 부여 해주고 심어준 것만을 우리가 만나고 알게 되기 때문이다.BR 위와 같은 몇 연유로 종교현상에 대한 인식활동 혹은 현상학적 경험은 절대자, 신에게 구속 · 제약되어 있거나 의존해 있다고 볼 수 있고, 신앙, 기도, 숭배, 신적인 것과의 교섭, 회개, 경외, 신의 사랑과 같은 종교적 행위가 우리의 종교적 인식활동 혹은 현상학적 경험을 일깨운다고 볼 수 있으며, 궁극적으로 절대자, 신을 지향하는 종교적 행위가 우리의 종교적 의식수준을 드높여준다고 볼 수 있다.BR 이상과 같이 셸러는 칸트가 그의 이성신학에서 두드러지지 않게 언급한 것들을 그의 종교철학에서 두드러지고 확연하게 언급하고 있다. 그리고 마지막으로 종교적 행위가 의식활동에 영향을 주고 신이나 절대자를 의식케 한다는 주장을 토대로, 우리의 앎이나 의식수준이 개인차의 종교적 행위를 이행하는 개별 인격에 더더욱 의존해 있기 때문에 종교적 행위에 의한 인격 교양이 절실히 필요하다고 주장한다. 특히 저급한 물질가치 영역에 얽매여있는 현대 물질문명인의 인격을 교양하기 위해서 셸러는 ‘그 시대의 치료사’가 필요하다고 하며, 이 치료사는 물질문명인을 그들의 물질가치에 대한 우상으로부터 구제할 수 있는 치유적 정신기술을 발휘하는 자이며, 아마도 내적 소여의 종교적 현상에 대한 현상학적 직관을 훌륭히 잘 하여 성(聖)의 가치에 대한 의식이 높은 자라고 함을 이해할 수 있다. (shrink)

Designed as a textbook for use in courses on natural theology and used by Immanuel Kant as the basis for his Lectures on The Philosophical Doctrine of Religion, Johan August Eberhard's Preparation for Natural Theology (1781) is now available in English for the first time. -/- With a strong focus on the various intellectual debates and historically significant texts in late renaissance and early modern theology, Preparation for Natural Theology influenced the way Kant thought about practical (...) cognition as well as moral and religious concepts. Access to Eberhard's complete text makes it possible to distinguish where in the lectures Kant is making changes to what Eberhard has written and where he is articulating his own ideas. Identifying new unexplored lines of research, this translation provides a deeper understanding of Kant's explicitly religious doctrines and his central moral writings, such as the Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals and the Critique of Practical Reason. -/- Accompanied by Kant's previously untranslated handwritten notes on Eberhard's text as well as the Danzig transcripts of Kant's course on rational theology, Preparation for Natural Theology features a dual English-German / German-English glossary, a concordance and an introduction situating the book in relation to 18th-century theology and philosophy. This is an essential contribution to twenty-first century Kantian studies. (shrink)

Wood aims at correcting an undue emphasis upon the negative or critical aspect of Kant’s theological thought. He seeks to achieve this object through two distinct inquiries: into the positive component of Kant’s rational theology, chiefly the account of the ens realissimium [[sic]] as the necessary ideal assumed by reason in its attempt to arrive at a complete determination of the properties of things, presented in the "Ideal of Reason" in the "Dialectic" of the first Critique, ; into (...) the strengths and weaknesses of the criticisms of the ontological and natural proofs of the existence of a supreme being, found chiefly in sections 3-7 of the "Ideal of Reason". The author here is centrally concerned with salvaging the ontological argument from Kant’s famous and still highly regarded attack. These two inquiries correspond to the two main parts of the text. The second part also contains a discussion and criticism of the role which theistic concepts play in the regulative idea of the unity of the laws of nature, as discussed in the "Appendix" to the "Dialectic". (shrink)

In the early 1740s, one book caused turmoil and debate among the English cultural elites of the time. Entitled Christianity Not Founded on Argument, it was attributed to Henry Dodwell the Younger (1706-1784). This book went through four editions between 1741 and 1746, and the controversy that followed its publication involved some of the major figures of English religious thought in the mid-eighteenth century. Dodwell purposely led a skeptical attack on any sort of rational theology, including deistic doctrines (...) of natural religion, which identified ‘true’ religion with the outcomes of unprejudiced, rational inquiry, and Boylean and Newtonian physico-theologies, which aimed at proving God’s existence and the veracity of Christian revelation by combining physico-mathematical rationality with traditional theological concepts. In fact, Dodwell called attention to the limits and inadequacies of human reason and, hence, to the impossibility of achieving religious truth by either reflecting on human nature and morality (as most deists used to do) or investigating the physical world (as several freethinkers, most prominently the deist and pantheist John Toland, and such physico-theologians as Boyle, Newton and their followers did). On the other hand, Dodwell did not openly reject Christianity and, instead, he claimed to be a defender of fideism. However, his observations on the Scriptures, religious education and the de jure divino (divine right) institutions of the Church and the Christian state were extremely ambiguous. For this reason, his book received a variety of reactions in the more than twenty replies that followed its publication. (shrink)

This is the sixth volume of the projected twelve volumes of translations of Kant's major writings—hence, about the halfway point for the completion of the project. The aim is to produce fully scholarly and reliable translations of a broader range of Kant's writings than have previously been readily available in English, with all the useful accoutrements for close study. Thus, we have the use of a standard pagination in the margins, three sorts of footnotes— Kant's original footnotes; explanatory editorial notes, (...) including information on names Kant referred to, English translations of passages in languages other than German, and references for biblical quotations or allusions; and the original German word when a translation might be surprising or unusual English-German and German-English glossaries of terms, separate indices of names, subjects, and, in this volume, biblical references, a general introduction to this volume, as well as a special introduction to each of the works included. In every respect, these scholarly aids are carefully done, accurate, and helpful. (shrink)

Newly accessible source material calls for a revision of our picture of the more technical transmission of sceptical epistemologies in the intellectual landscape of early Islam. Abū al‐Qāsim al‐Balkhīʼs (ninth/tenth century) Book of Doctrines shows that naẓar as the basic argumentative method of kalām is defined by the encounter with a broad spectrum of sceptical strategies. By the beginning of the tenth century, Greek traditions were amalgamated in a complex way with other intellectual traditions, most notably dualist ontologies. This situation (...) has shaped the evolution of kalām methodology decisively. Based on extensive paraphrases in Ibn al‐Malāḥimī (twelfth century) going back to Nawbakhtī (tenth century), it can be seen that arguments of the Greek sceptical tradition were accessible in Arabic in the early tenth century. The scarcity of coherent information on sceptical approaches before that time rather has to do with the problem that in general few sources of this earlier formative period of Islamic theology are preserved. Early Muʿtazilī treatises from this period are superseded by Ashʿarī texts in the later transmission. Sceptical approaches, being systematically involved in the very formation of early Muʿtazilī theology, are particularly invisible due to this process. (shrink)

An intellectual history of the relation of intellect to will and of the conflict between religious contemplation and moral practice in 17th century Britain, focusing on the thought of More. Virtually every writer known to More and every writer who has written about More is mentioned.--R. C. N.

The volume contains editions of the extant parts of two hitherto unknown theological works by the _Būyid_ vizier al-Ṣāḥib b. ʿAbbād. The manuscripts on which the edition is based come from Cairo Geniza store rooms.

In this book, Bäck dedicates himself to the logical properties of the qua connective, that is, to put it as does the Leibniz scholar Benson Mates, to “that treacherous little word ‘as’”. This connective is represented in ordinary language by expressions such as “insofar as,” “in virtue of,” “in the sense that,” translating the Greek ᾗ, and the Latin ut, prout, inquantum. Bäck reminds us that, traditionally, “a use of this connective was called reduplication”. The goal of the book is (...) thus to “trace the development of the theory of reduplication... [which] has its roots in various passages where Aristotle discusses qua propositions. Islamic and Latin medieval philosophers then contributed to the topic. From all this there arose a theory of qua propositions, or a theory of reduplication, in the high medieval period ”. Bäck adds that the views of the different philosophers who dealt with reduplication in that period are extremely similar, so that “it makes sense to talk of the rise of a single theory of reduplication”. In fact, quite correctly, he points out that the similarity of these views is due to the use of Aristotle’s work as a common reference point. All these authors “heed what Aristotle says about qua propositions, and attempt to offer analyses that demonstrate the truth of those qua propositions that Aristotle asserts and the validity of inferences involving qua propositions that he maintains”. The problem lying at the heart of all this is that of determination, that is, of the qualification of a sentence by a modifier. Among its applications are the fallacy of secundum quid et simpliciter, the ἔκθεσις of reduplicative propositions, the conversion of reduplicative propositions, the reduplicative syllogistic, and the supposition of terms in qua propositions. (shrink)