"Religion", the "Political" and "Judaism" in Classical German Philosophy.

德国古典哲学中的“宗教”、“政治”和“犹太教”。

• 批准号: 389350747
• 负责人: Dr. Amit Kravitz
• 金额: --
• 依托单位: Lehrstuhl für Philosophie I: Philosophie, insbes. Metaphysik und Ontologie
• 依托单位国家: 德国
• 项目类别: Research Grants
• 财政年份: 2017
• 资助国家: 德国
• 起止时间: 2016-12-31 至 2021-12-31
• 项目状态: 已结题
• 来源: https://gepris.dfg.de/gepris/projekt/389350747?language=en
• 关键词: Religion; Political; Judaism; Classical; German

My research will focus on the concepts of religion, politics, and Judaism in the philosophy of Kant and German idealism. As I argue, the concept of Judaism in the work of these philosophers cannot be seen as having been wholly determined by their acquaintance with actual Jews or with Jewish theology (their knowledge of which was very limited); nor can it be reduced to classical Christian positions towards Judaism (such as that of Marcion, Augustine or Luther, positions that are rooted, to some extent, in the writings of Paul). I do not claim that such factors did not play any role whatsoever in this regard (nor do I argue that the role they played was minor or unimportant). Rather, I suggest that their analysis of the concept of Judaism was also influenced by other irreducible, inner systematic considerations as well, related to the unique way they understood religion, and politics in general, and that these considerations require specific attention in order to more fully understand the way that Judaism is conceptualized in the work of these philosophers. I argue further that despite the differences in their work, these philosophers share significant common ground, rooted in the unique challenge arising from Kantian philosophy: The attempt to bridge the gap between reason and its realization in history. Reason cannot, due to inherent metaphysical constraints, be realized in history immediately, and its implementation necessitates an absolute negation of that which precedes it. Kant identifies the object of this negation, which ought to lead to Vernunftreligion as mediating between reason and history, with the negation of the political as such, which he identifies in this context with Judaism. Fichte, Schelling and Hegel drew on different aspects of this unique Kantian tension, suggesting different ways to bridge the abovementioned gap between reason and history. Their conception of Judaism cannot be understood without the context of the Kantian framework, which they try to overcome. Finally, I plan to address the possible relationships between such conceptions of Judaism, rooted in the understanding of religion and politics in general, and later, anti-Semitic developments. This discussion will be carried out without identifying the philosophical context of Kant and German idealism with later developments on the one hand, since assuming a clear-cut causal relation in the realm of Geist is fundamentally misleading. On the other hand, later developments must be located in relation to historical antecedents; otherwise they will be viewed as aberrations or madness, a break in history itself. The best way to explore this relationship, therefore, is to ask what in these philosophical approaches would enable them or make them prone to later be applied, twisted, and adapted to Nazi ideology.

我的研究将集中在康德和德国唯心主义哲学中的宗教，政治和犹太教的概念。正如我所论证的，在这些哲学家的著作中，犹太教的概念不能被看作是完全由他们对实际犹太人或犹太神学的了解所决定的（他们对犹太神学的了解非常有限）;它也不能被简化为古典基督教对犹太教的立场（如马吉安、奥古斯丁或路德的立场，这些立场在某种程度上植根于保罗的著作）。我并不是说这些因素在这方面没有发挥任何作用（我也不是说它们发挥的作用很小或不重要）。相反，我认为他们对犹太教概念的分析也受到其他不可简化的内在系统考虑的影响，这些考虑与他们理解宗教和政治的独特方式有关，这些考虑需要特别关注，以便更全面地理解犹太教在这些哲学家的工作中被概念化的方式。我进一步认为，尽管他们的工作的差异，这些哲学家有着重要的共同点，植根于康德哲学所产生的独特挑战：试图弥合理性和它在历史上的实现之间的差距。由于固有的形而上学的限制，理性不能在历史中立即实现，而理性的实现需要对先于理性的事物的绝对否定。康德把这种否定的对象（它应当导致理性与历史之间的“真理”）与政治本身的否定（他在这里把政治本身与犹太教等同起来）等同起来。费希特、谢林和黑格尔从不同的方面借鉴了这种独特的康德张力，提出了弥合理性和历史之间上述鸿沟的不同方法。他们对犹太教的理解离不开他们试图克服的康德框架。最后，我计划解决这些概念之间的可能关系的犹太教，植根于一般的宗教和政治的理解，后来，反犹太主义的发展。在进行这种讨论时，一方面，我们不把康德和德国唯心主义的哲学背景与后来的发展联系起来，因为在精神领域中假定一种明确的因果关系从根本上说是误导性的。另一方面，后来的发展必须与历史先例相联系;否则，它们将被视为失常或疯狂，是历史本身的中断。因此，探索这种关系的最好方式是问，在这些哲学方法中，什么使它们能够或使它们倾向于在以后被应用、扭曲和适应纳粹意识形态。