Customer Reviews

Kant: Religion within the Boundaries of Mere Reason: And Other Writings (Cambridge Texts in the History of Philosophy)

5 star:		(3)
4 star:		(2)
3 star:		(1)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

This is a fine edition all around: the translation is very readable, the introduction and the notes are helpful, and combining the well-known (but seldom read) "Religion" with a number of Kant's shorter writings on this subject is also valuable for scholars and general readers alike. Kant's views on this topic deserve to be more widely appreciated, and this edition will help make that possible.

John Connolly, Smith College

Immanuel Kant quotes Bible scripture in this work quite often; neither is his thesis is neither Christian, Jewish, nor Mormon, though he would like this work to shape theology of people of these faiths among others that exist. This book is theological in that it is a philosophy about God and man. The author believes in absolute truth but does not understand it to come from scripture or a particular religion. He wants right and wrong to be determined through reason and argument. An individual develops maxims about morals through experience in the world through the social process. This social process may include cultural understanding of God and Religious practice in society. Yet the author argues what is bad behavior and what is good behavior is distinct from personal preference. This ultimate truth is grasped through reason, not through dogma or scriptural interpretation. It is an interesting read to which conclusions I heartedly disagree.

Immanuel Kant uses John 3:5 in his argument: that man most be born again. His use of the term is not the common use evangelical circles of a supernatural rebirth of the individual. He understands this rebirth may come from any religious tradition. His arguments are not just made to alter Christianity but to alter all religion. Rebirth is a change of aim or purpose in the individual's life that is to follow God's Will (Kant's perspective who ever that may be). No longer does self love - self absorption rule, but man's common good. True seeking your neighbor's welfare is God's Will, but to Kant's arguments it really the sole purpose of religion and faith. While seeking to do God's Will includes serving the believer and the unbeliever in the World, one must seek to glorify God and have a relationship with God. Kant scorns worship and scriptural study.

Kant uses the term universalism. He wants all faiths to come one accord of this belief in this rational faith: An ecumenical faith where all faiths of the world give up their scriptural meaning and trade it for another understanding. A Faith based on Rational thought. Kant argues that scriptural meaning needs to be forced into rational thought. Faith based institutions would exist to train and socialize people to this rational faith and abandon their old ways. I guess this is an argument for liberal Christian theology and an alteration of other religions: An argument for those who never believed ion the first place. Five Star book, but to what is true One star.

I previously reviewed a different translation of this book that was posted for this version. I think the Cambridge Texts version has a better grasp of the terminology and flow of thought in religious thinking. Years ago I used another email address so I get to write as a different person now, but I hardly have to read this book anymore. Just opening it to a page brings me to where Kant considered whatever question he was on. Ending the book with the end of times allows Kant to quote an angel in the final book of the Bible, called Apocalypse in this translation, for the concept of eternity: time will be no more. Kant associated thinking with reflecting, so he pictured heaven as all one Allelulia all the time, and I know what people in hell are saying, which Kant dares not to say.

This book embodies much of Kant's mature moral philosophy. While the book's title suggests that it's only about religion, it's not! It offers a mature perspective on his earlier moral works. From my perspective, once cannot legitimately call oneself an "expert" on Kant's moral theory without reading this book (and several others).

An all too overlooked text of Kant. `Religion within the Mere Bounds of Reason' is a critical attempt-albeit a rather strange one-to reconcile Kant's rational ethical maxims with a conception of evil antecedent to the human being. This is in part a radically strange work, and often completely antithetical to the Aufklärung project itself. However, there are also brilliant epistemological moves here as Kant attempts to fold religious doctrine into morality itself. In the end, Kant is a figure of moral responsibility and duty. This is perhaps not the most surprising fact coming from a man who was by all accounts a sterile virgin. However, it is impossible to get a complete grip on the Critique of Practical Reason without the additional paths Kant erects in this idiosyncratic text.

The first essay in this book, published in a scholarly journal before many of Kant's key works had been written, established that Kant wanted to have his views on reason and truth considered by his age when controversial matters were being discussed. As he became more famous, the censor became an obstacle to having Kant's ideas published in such a popular vehicle. While religion can be a topic that is generally written about in a safe manner, it is possible to imagine Kant breathing fire into the final parts of this book as a direct result of restrictions, which then resulted in an order for his silence on the topic of religion for several years.

According to the Chronology on pages xxxiii-xxxiv, the works that are included in this book were originally published in 1786, 1791, 1792, 1793, and 1794. Also important were the death of Frederick the Great in 1786 and a royal letter in 1794 objecting to Kant's writings on religion, which Kant obeyed at least until, after he retired from university lecturing in 1796, he felt his situation had changed after King Frederick William II died in 1797. The first text in this book, "What does it mean to orient oneself in thinking?" was in response to a pantheism controversy published in the `Berlinische Monatsschrift.' Part one of RELIGION WITHIN THE BOUNDS OF MERE REASON was published in the same journal in 1792, but the second part was rejected by the censor in Berlin. The book as a whole had to be published as philosophy instead of theology.

Part One started with the evil in the world, with Kant's first footnote a Latin verse by Horace that is translated: "The age of our parents (who were worse than our forefathers) brought us forth yet more dishonest, and we are now ready to issue an even more vicious progeny." (p. 45, n. g). By the end of the first part, Kant was willing to say some good things about Christianity, but only if it could conform to his moral principles. "According to moral religion, however (and of all the public religions so far known, the Christian alone is of this type), it is a fundamental principle that, to become a better human being, everyone must do as much as it is in his powers to do; and only then, if a human being has not buried his innate talent (Luke 19:12-16), if he has made use of the original predisposition to the good in order to become a better human being, can he hope that what does not lie in his power will be made good by cooperation from above." (p. 71). The original Part Two starts on page 77, but the book had four parts, and by the time Kant got to the second half of Part Four, I'll bet he was steaming. Every time he called something the second part, he had an overwhelming urge to belittle the forces of religion which were imposing restrictions upon him:

"Second Section, The Christian Religion as a Learned Religion." (p. 160).

"Second Part, Concerning the counterfeit service of God in a statutory religion." (p. 164).

"Section 2, The Moral Principle of Religion Opposed to the Delusion of Religion." (p. 166).

After RELIGION WITHIN THE BOUNDARIES OF MERE REASON, the final text in the book is called "The end of all things." (pp. 193-205). This is not the ultimate picture of fire and brimstone. When Kant quotes Revelations 10:5-6, his interpretation is "that henceforth time shall be no more." (p. 200). Kant attempts to be comforting, though he is still sure that human activities will always be found wanting by any rational evaluation. "The end of all things which go through the hands of human beings, even when their purposes are good, is folly, i.e. the use of means to their ends which are directly opposed to these ends. Wisdom . . . dwells in God alone; . . . Hence too the projects - altering from age to age and often absurd - of finding suitable means to make religion in a whole people pure and at the same time powerful, so that one can well cry out: Poor mortals, with you nothing is constant except inconstancy!" (p. 202). This was good enough to be published in a scholarly journal in June, 1794, but "In October Kant receives a royal letter, signed by Woellner for the King, objecting to Kant's writings on religion and ordering him to avoid offending in this area in the future" (p. xxxiv). He had no need to force everyone to agree with him, so he agreed not to speak or write publicly on religion. He was familiar with the New Testament, but his tendency to declare, "Here now appears a remarkable antimony of human reason with itself, the resolution of which - or, if this is not possible, at least its settlement - can alone determine whether a historical (ecclesiastical) faith must always supervene as an essential portion of saving faith over and above the religious one, or whether, as mere vehicle, historical faith will finally pass over, in however distant a future, into pure religious faith" (p. 123) is a bit much.