Blame Shifting

Speaking of his sexual sin in the Testament of the Twelve Patriarchs, Reuben blames women for being too enticing: “For women are evil, my children, and by reason of their lacking authority or power over man, they scheme treacherously how they might entice him to themselves by means of their . . . . Continue Reading »

Means of grace

In the final “General Remark” in Religion Within the Bounds of Reason Alone , Kant deals with means of grace. Baptism, he claims is the “first reception of a member into a church” and therefore “is a solemnity rich in meaning which imposes grave obligations either upon . . . . Continue Reading »

The Shoah and Western Civilization

Marek Jan Chodakiewicz of the Institute of World Politics analyzes the role of Holocaust revisionism in the Islamic assault on the West: “The terrible, if unstated, implications of the anti-Jewish logic of the Islamists are clear. For them, the Holocaust is the secular religion of the West. . . . . Continue Reading »

Kantian sacrifice

Milbank’s criticisms of Kantian ethics begin from the observation that feeling enters into the ethical mix only as “the paradoxical feeling of ‘the sublime’ which is the feeling of a break with feeling, or the counter-attractive attraction of sacrifice.” This account . . . . Continue Reading »

Kant avec Oedipus and Hegel

In a web essay, Jean-Michel Rabaté traces the background to Lacan’s notorious coupling of Kant and Sade. One mediating figure is Freud. In an essay on the “economic problem of masochism,” Freud linked the Kantian categorical imperative with the cruel demands of the super-ego: . . . . Continue Reading »

Allegory of salvation

Part 2 of Kant’s treatise on rational religion is a philosophical allegorization of traditional Christology and soteriology, which he pursues in an effort to explain the formation of a humanity pleasing to God. Some notes on this section: 1) Kant approves of the Stoic notion of virtue as . . . . Continue Reading »

Scripture and Philosophy

Kant admits that his philosophical interpretation of the fall is not “intended for Scriptural exegesis, which lies outside the boundaries of the competence of mere reason.” Putting the “historical account” to “moral use” leaves the issue of the writer’s . . . . Continue Reading »