Pillars of Unbelief, Part 1: Kant

CERC ^ | Peter Kreeft

[JMJ333]

Immanuel Kant

[JMJ333]

*

[JMJ333]

bump

[Siobhan]

le bimp!

[JMJ333]

Merci, Madame! =)

[GOPcapitalist]

Interesting take. The turning point Kreeft finds in Kant is similar to what I've held occurred with Hume.

The ball was in motion, but I believe Hume gave it the big push to get it going. Kant and subsequent writers added their own momentum, but the denial of reality itself that occurs in the wake of the post modernist division is itself a type of radical skepticism. Kant tried with what he could to find away over it but pushed us only deeper into it.

[JMJ333]

I will do a bit of research on Hume, as he isn't included in the series I am posting by Kreeft. If you have any good articles about him, feel free to link it here. =)

[Sock]

Find A Grave

[GOPcapitalist]

I'll look around and see if I can find some on him. In the meantime the best I can recommend for a short intro to him is reading the first 4 chapters of his Enquiry (though the whole book will give the more complete picutre if you have the time).

It's relatively short - the whole book is roughly 100-150 pages depending on what version you have. The first part you can probably get through roughly 30 minutes to an hour.

I think you'll find right away how he fits into what was followed by Kant and how the famous "dogmatic slumber" quote came about. Kant arrived after the pieces had been broken apart by Hume. He reacted making somewhat of an attempt to gather them together and ended up, part by his own problems and part by his own design, only making it worse esp. once Nietzsche came along and destroyed what little remained.

Hume is a sort of "completion" of the picture of the modernist world who takes it from its root to its undesirable consequences. That makes it possible to examine Hume and all that his argument is in its base, and that's where IMHO deconstructing the problem he creates lies.

[JMJ333]

Thanks for the help. I'll look it up. Speaking of Nietzsche, he is next in the lineup. What a mental case.

[JMJ333]

Thanks for the interesting link.

[PA Lurker]

As always JMJ333, riviting and on the mark. You never cease to amaze me with your depth of knowledge in philosophy and theology. So happy to be a lowly pen pal of yours.

PA Lurker

[JMJ333]

Lowly!? Pffft. You're a wonderful person! I am happy to be aquainted with you, and pray for your family. The word charitable comes to mind in describing you. Fortunately, the word still conveys the meaning of unselfishness, mercy, kindness, understanding, and most of all concern for others. Sums you up, friend! =)

[EODGUY]

I enjoyed your post very much, as usual. Thanks for remembering me.

EODGUY

[ThomasMore]

I see Dr. Kreeft is talking about some of my favorite people.(in another life) Bumped and bookmark for later reading!

[Aquinasfan]

There was such a third theory available, ever since Aristotle. It was the common sense philosophy of Realism. According to Realism, we can know truth through both the intellect and the senses if only they worked properly and in tandem, like two blades of a scissors.

Aristotelian/Thomist/Realist bump.

[PA Lurker]

Goldhammer;

I went immediately to the Ratzinger Fan Club site and purchased a "Ratzinger Fan Club" baseball cap. This will be given to my wonderful grand-daughter Jenifer who just graduated from St. Vincent Academy in Latrobe,PA. She graduated with honors in a very diffulcult area of study. However, she has accepted a job in our parish as the new Teen Life Director.

The diocese requires that all parish employees (always females, for some reason)obtain a Masters of Theology at Duquesne University (Holy Ghost Fathers in the old days, now the Spiritans). The parish will pay for this additional degree. It will be during her indoctrinization into this second degree that the AmChurch policies and doctrines will be instilled in her by feminest nuns.

When she walks into that first class with the Ratzinger hat on the you-know-what will hit the fan. Jenifer was raised in the Faith in an orthodox enviorment and it was augmented by the priests and brothers of the Benedictan Archabby of St. Vincent in Latrobe, PA. This archabby does not have the problems that many of the abbys in the mid-west have.

So thanks again, Goldhammer for the site. All Jenifer's friends will want one of these hats and Grandpa has the site bookmarked. Then her sister Steffie will see this hat and want one and Grandpa, of course, will get one for her. Now every young person at the Franciscan University in Steubenville, Ohio will want one.

Again Goldhammer, thanks very much, but it's going to cost Grandpa a bundle in the end. But what the hell, they are all outstanding Catholics and Grandma and I are very proud of them.

PA Lurker

[JMJ333]

Thanks for the bumps!

[livius]

I loved the Cardinal Ratzinger Fan Club - all sorts of great stuff. Thanks for that link!

As to Kant, I think Kreeft has summarized it very clearly. I read this post just after I read JMJ333's other posting, from Belloc writing on Islam.

Belloc was discussing the fact that Islam grows in the fertile soil first tilled and then abandoned by Christianity. That is, for one reason or another (Arianism or other heresies), orthodox Christianity had been weakened and Islam filled the void.

Islam is a violent and authoritarian religion with a complete social system, and that is probably the major secret of its success. But I think another thing that people may find attractive about it is that it never doubts its reality and the reality of God. Granted, Allah is an appalling God-substitute, but I suspect that many people are impressed by the certainty Islam offers.

Naturally, we don't want to convert Christianity into an anti-philosophical, anti-intellectual, image-phobic power cult like Islam. But by wavering on the radical "non-negotiable" reality of orthodox Christian faith, and in fact, wavering on the subject of our own reality and our own ability to actually decide on the reality of anything, we are essentially just ceding the field to Islam.

I don't mean to sound obsessed by Islam tonight! But Kreeft's article combined with Belloc's just reminded me, once again, of how crucial it is that we reclaim theological reality from its Kantian hall of mirrors.