Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-68ccn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-12T20:38:24.389Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The ‘Two Experiments’ of Kant’s Religion: Dismantling the Conundrum

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 January 2017

Lawrence Pasternack
Lawrence Pasternack*
Affiliation:
Oklahoma State University
*
Email: l.pasternack@okstate.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The past decade has seen a sizeable increase in scholarship on Kant’s Religion. Yet, unlike the centuries of debate that inform our study of his other major works, scholarship on the Religion is still just in its infancy. As such, it is in a particularly vulnerable state where errors made now could hinder scholarship for decades to come. It is the purpose of this article to mitigate one such danger, a danger issuing from the widely assumed view that the Religion is shaped by ‘two experiments’. I will begin with a survey of the four current interpretations of the experiments, and then propose one further interpretation, one that hopefully will help dismantle this alleged ‘conundrum’ and thereby help scholarship on the Religion move beyond this early misstep.

Keywords

KantreligionconundrumTwo ExperimentsChristianity
Type
Articles
Information
Kantian Review , Volume 22 , Issue 1 , March 2017 , pp. 107 - 131
Copyright
© Kantian Review 2017 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Chignell, Andrew (2011) ‘The Devil, the Virgin, and the Envoy: Symbols of Moral Struggle in Religion, Part Two, Section Two’. In Otfried Höffe (ed.), Die Religion innerhalb der Grenzen der Bloßen Vernunft (Berlin: Akademie Verlag), 111–129.Google Scholar
DiCenso, James (2012) Kant’s Religion within the Boundaries of Mere Reason: A Commentary. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Duncan, Samuel (2012) ‘Moral Evil, Freedom and the Goodness of God: Why Kant Abandoned Theodicy’. British Journal for the History of Philosophy, 20/5, 973–991.Google Scholar
Firestone, Chris (2012) ‘A Response to Critics of In Defense of Kant’s Religion ’. Faith and Philosophy, 29/2, 193–209.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Firestone, Chris (2015) Review of Lawrence Pasternack, Kant on Religion within the Boundaries of Mere Reason, Notre Dame Philosophical Reviews, 21 Sept. <http://ndpr.nd.edu/news/60958>..>Google Scholar
Firestone, Chris, —— and Jacobs, Nathan (2008) In Defense of Kant’s Religion. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
Gressis, Robert ( forthcoming) ‘The Spirit of Evil: Kant’s Development of Theodicy and its Role in the Development of Radical Evil’. Archiv für Geschichte der Philosophie.Google Scholar
Hare, John (1996) The Moral Gap: Kantian Ethics, Human Limits, and God’s Assistance. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Kant, Immanuel (1934) Religion within the Limits of Reason Alone. Trans. Theodore Green and Hoyt Hudson. New York: Open Court Press.Google Scholar
Kant, Immanuel (1996) Religion within the Boundaries of Mere Reason. Trans. George di Giovanni. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Kant, Immanuel (2009) Religion within the Bounds of Bare Reason. Trans. Werner Pluhar. New York: Hackett.Google Scholar
Kuehn, Manfred (2001) Kant: A Biography. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Mariña, Jacqueline (1997) ‘Kant on Grace: A Reply to his Critics’. Religious Studies, 33/4, 379–400.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Palmquist, Stephen (2000) Kant’s Critical Religion. Aldershot: Ashgate.Google Scholar
Palmquist, Stephen (2015) Comprehensive Commentary on Kant’s Religion within the Bounds of Bare Reason. Chichester: Blackwell.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pasternack, Lawrence (2012) ‘Kant on the Debt of Sin’. Faith and Philosophy, 29/1, 30–52.Google Scholar
Pasternack, Lawrence (2014) Kant on Religion within the Boundaries of Mere Reason: an Interpretation and Defense. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Reardon, Bernard (1988) Kant as Philosophical Theologian. Totowa, NJ: Barnes & Noble.Google Scholar
Vanden Auweele, Dennis (2014) ‘For the Love of God: Kant on Grace’. International Philosophical Quarterly, 54/2, 175–190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar