2004
Volume 113, Issue 2
  • ISSN: 0002-5275
  • E-ISSN: 2352-1244

Abstract

Abstract

In his latest opus magnum, Jürgen Habermas reconsiders the history of philosophy from a peculiar perspective: the true and unique nature of philosophy is shown to have been given shape in philosophy’s dispute with Christian theology. This article reviews Habermas’ chapter on the Enlightenment, in which Habermas casts David Hume and Immanuel Kant dancing their own with that theological legacy. After having sketched the historical scripts in which Hume and Kant are involved by Habermas, I will critically assess the author’s claim that while Hume ends up refusing the dance and (hence) betraying (enlightened) philosophy’s nature, Kant accepts and transforms the heritage, yet ends up failing to give his a genuine modern and enlightened twist.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.5117/ANTW2021.2.007.VANE
2021-07-01
2022-05-21
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. De Dijn, H.(2001)David Hume: filosoof van de menselijke natuur, in: de Martelaere, P. en Lemmens, W. (red.) David Hume. Filosoof van de menselijke natuur. Kapellen/Kampen: Pelckmans/Agora, pp. 51-69.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. de Martelaere, P.(2001)Hume over kennis: van scepticisme tot naturalisme, in de Martelaere, P. en Lemmens, W. (red.) David Hume. Filosoof van de menselijke natuur. Kapellen/Kampen: Pelckmans/Agora, pp. 70-96.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Firestone, C.L. and Jacobs, N.(2008)In Defense of Kant’s Religion. Bloomington and Indianapolis: Indiana University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Grenberg, J.(2013)Kant’s Defense of Common Moral Experience. A Phenomenological Account. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Habermas, J.(2019)Auch eine Geschichte der Philosophie. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp Verlag.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Habermas, J.(1985), Der philosophische Diskurs der Moderne. Zwölf Verlesungen. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp Verlag.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Habermas, J.(1990)Na-metafysisch denken. Ingeleid door W. van Reijen en vertaald door A. Middelhoek, Kampen/Kapellen: Kok Agora/Pelckmans.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Hume, D.(1978)A Treatise of Human Nature. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Hume, D.(1975)Enquiries concerning human understanding and concerning the principles of morals. Oxford: Clarendon.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Kant, I.(2010)De religie binnen de grenzen van de rede. Inleiding, vertaling en annotaties Geert Van Eekert e.a. Amsterdam: Boom.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Kant, I.(1990)Metaphysische Anfangsgründe der Tugendlehre. Hamburg: Felix Meiner Verlag.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Lemmens, W.(2001)Humes morele theorie: van passies tot deugd, in: de Martelaere, P. en Lemmens, W. (red.) David Hume. Filosoof van de menselijke natuur. Kapellen/Kampen: Pelckmans/Agora, pp. 97-128.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Van Eekert, G.(2017)Remarks on Immanuel Kant's assessment on the use of the thesis of innate evil in moral philosophy (Religion, 6:50-51), International journal of philosophy and theology78, pp. 348-360.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Van Eekert, G. en De Vriese, H.(2018)Het einde van de metafysica. Kant, Hegel en de jonghegelianen. Brussel: University Press Antwerp.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Van Herck, W.(2020)Geen gedachte God. Een inleiding tot de filosofie van de religie. Brussel: University Press Antwerp.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.5117/ANTW2021.2.007.VANE
Loading
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error