Samenvatting
This article examines Kant’s response to the criticisms of natural the-
ology that Hume articulates in the Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion. Though
Kant was in agreement with the Dialogues’ rejection of dogmatic theism, he equally
viewed many of its arguments as a threat to his aim of constructing a critical theol-
ogy. Kant is often taken to have successfully diffused this skeptical threat on the basis
of a symbolic anthropomorphism articulated in the Prolegomena. However, I argue
that the Prolegomena account remains susceptible to Hume’s criticisms, and that it
was only several years later in the third Critique that Kant was able to show how the
Dialogues’ skeptical conclusions can be circumvented. In this manner, I aim to show
that Hume’s challenge is more significant, and Kant’s response more complex, than
has previously been acknowledged.
ology that Hume articulates in the Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion. Though
Kant was in agreement with the Dialogues’ rejection of dogmatic theism, he equally
viewed many of its arguments as a threat to his aim of constructing a critical theol-
ogy. Kant is often taken to have successfully diffused this skeptical threat on the basis
of a symbolic anthropomorphism articulated in the Prolegomena. However, I argue
that the Prolegomena account remains susceptible to Hume’s criticisms, and that it
was only several years later in the third Critique that Kant was able to show how the
Dialogues’ skeptical conclusions can be circumvented. In this manner, I aim to show
that Hume’s challenge is more significant, and Kant’s response more complex, than
has previously been acknowledged.
Originele taal-2 | English |
---|---|
Pagina's (van-tot) | 77-101 |
Aantal pagina's | 25 |
Tijdschrift | Journal of the History of Philosophy |
Volume | 61 |
Nummer van het tijdschrift | 1 |
DOI's | |
Status | Published - jan.-2023 |
Extern gepubliceerd | Ja |