Heiner F. Klemme

Wie können wir uns in der Welt ohne Selbstverlust orientieren, wie unsere rationalen Fähigkeiten und Vermögen erhalten? Kant ist der Philosoph der reinen Vernunft und des kategorischen Imperativs. Aber mit seinen Überlegungen zur Selbsterhaltung der Vernunft erweist er sich zugleich als ein Philosoph mit einem klaren Bewusstsein davon, worauf es in unserem Leben ankommt: auf Selbstbilligung und Selbstständigkeit, auf Selbstdenken und Kritik, auf Aufklärung und Humanität, auf Recht und Freiheit, auf die Überwindung unserer Unmündigkeit und auf den Austausch von Argumenten und Perspektiven. Mit seinem Fokus auf die Selbsterhaltung der Vernunft bietet das Buch einen neuen Zugang zu Kants Werk und leistet zugleich einen Beitrag zur Debatte über die Modernität seines Denkens.

Foucault est fasciné par l’essai de Kant « Réponse à la question : qu’est-ce que l’ Aufklärung? » (1784) et s’y confronte à plusieurs reprises. Selon lui, l’essai représente une « charnière » entre les « trois Critiques » et son présent (l’actualité). Il contient « l’esquisse » de l’attitude de la modernité, que Foucault décrit comme attitude de la critique. Contre Foucault, l’article soutient que Kant, dans le cadre de sa réflexion sur le présent, tient des propos qui prétendent à une validité intemporelle. Ensuite, l’essai s’adresse à un public érudit pour lequel les idées qu’il défend sont compréhensibles sans aucune connaissance relevant des domaines de la philosophie transcendantale et de la métaphysique. Enfin, l’attitude de la modernité est mieux décrite par le concept de « penser par soi-même » [ Selbstdenken ] que par celui de critique. Penser par soi-même vise l’état de majorité et « l’autoconservation de la raison » (Kant).

Klemme offers a summary of one of Schiller’s most influential philosophical writings, its origin, philosophical context, and reception in the literature. Special attention is given to Kant’s impact on Schiller. On the one hand, Schiller is critical of Kant’s ethics, which has no room for grace because it constructs the concept of duty out of the opposition between freedom and nature. On the other hand, he refrains from any critical dissociation from Kant’s ethics in the section on dignity, which Schiller conceives of as more of a ‘masculine’ virtue that more closely approximates Kant’s model of human volition characterized by conflict and difference. Apart from that, Schiller’s conception of the sublime does not constitute any continuation of this doctrine in Kant.

Die Erforschung des historischen und systematischen Kontextes von Kants Philosophie weist bis auf den heutigen Tag signifikante Lücken auf. Dies gilt umso mehr für unser Verständnis der Bedeutung der gegenüber Kants Philosophie erhobenen Einwände und Kritikpunkte sowohl für die verschiedenen Entwicklungsphasen seiner Philosophie wie für ihre Rezeption und Darstellung in späteren Jahrhunderten. Die im vorliegenden Band versammelten Beiträge wollen einen Beitrag zur Schließung dieser Lücken leisten. Sie gehen auf Vorträge zurück, die auf dem VII. Multilateralen Kant-Kolloquium zum Thema „Kant und seine Kritiker – Kant and his critics – Kant et ses critiques“ gehalten worden sind, das vom 28.-30. April 2017 an der Martin-Luther-Universität Halle-Wittenberg stattfand. There are still significant gaps in the study of the historical and systematic contexts of Kant’s philosophy. This is true even more of our understanding of the significance of the objections and criticisms levelled at Kant’s philosophy and of the development of his philosophy and its reception and depiction in later centuries. The essays in this volume seek to close these gaps. They are based on the papers given at the 7th multilateral Kant Colloquium with the theme “Kant und seine Kritiker – Kant and his critics – Kant et ses critiques” which took place from 28th-30th April 2017 at the Martin-Luther-University, Halle-Wittenberg.

This monumental work features the most important German philosophers, jurists, pedagogues, literary critics, doctors, historians, and others whose work has philosophical significance who lived and wrote in the eighteenth century, covering the period between 1701 and 1801. The Dictionary includes work by philosophers whose mother tongue was German, were published in German or who lived in Germany for an extended period of time. Since historic borders are different from today's, the Dictionary includes authors born or who lived in places such as Strasbourg, Danzig, Koenisberg, or Austria. Swiss philosophers are also covered. These philosophers published in German, Latin, French, and Hebrew. Since German philosophy cannot be understood without the influence of French and English philosophers, the work also includes translators and editors. Each entry aims to give the reader insight into the philosophers' life and contribution to the world of thought. Bibliographical references will help with further research. The entries include a biographical sketch, analysis of doctrines with emphasis on historical context, subsequent influences, and bibliography of further works and secondary literature.

: The paper discusses the concepts of obligation and moral evidence in Mendelssohn’s and Kant’s prize essays. I argue that Mendelssohn departs in significant ways from Christian Wolff’s position, and that Kant intends to overcome Wolffian philosophy with Newtonian methodology while still owing a lot to Wolff and to the project of an ethics within the limits of metaphysics. Although quite akin to Francis Hutcheson’s philosophy, it becomes clear that Kant intended to lay the foundation of an innovative concept of obligation, which shares some similarities with Christian August Crusius’s interpretation of it.

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:Reviewed by:The Dictionary of Eighteenth-Century British PhilosophersHeiner F. KlemmeJohn W. Yolton, John Valdimir Price, John Stephens, general editors. The Dictionary of Eighteenth-Century British Philosophers. Vols. 1, 2. Bristol: Thoemmes Press, 1999. Pp. xxiii + 1,013. Cloth, $550.00.Good dictionaries are like good maps of a city: they indicate the main and minor quarters, give you an impression of its internal developments, and they indicate to where its highways eventually lead. In philosophy, comprehensive subject dictionaries have a long history, and they do seem to experience a revival these days. To be sure, the lives and works of the leading figures of the history of ideas are generally well explored and documented. We even know which French dishes Hume liked to cook or which types of wine Kant preferred. But the lives and works of lesser known philosophers and men of letters still seem to be more or less neglected. The Dictionary of Eighteenth-Century British Philosophers fills this gap for the period and the subject it covers. It comprises entries on almost six hundred persons as well as a number of entries on anonymous works. The work of close to a hundred scholars from several countries, it is unique in its attempt to bring together in two extensive volumes all minor and major British philosophers of the period between John Locke and Dugald Stewart. Since "British" is to be understood in a broad sense meaning authors who lived under British rule, it also includes Americans writing before 1776, Irish philosophers (like George Berkeley) and the French thinker Pierre Desmaizeaux, who lived and worked for a long period in Britain. Nor is the Dictionary restricted to philosophers in today's sense of the word, comprising entries on people who made in one way or the other a contribution to the history of ideas, even if their contributions are of marginal importance. Besides historians, poets, translators, mathematicians and physicists, dissenting ministers and physicians are well represented.In almost all cases, the selection makes sense. The boundaries between philosophy and, say, natural sciences were not as nicely drawn in the eighteenth century as they are today. But there are a few entries where one might wonder whether the subject's work had any specific philosophical importance or influence at all, as for example: Charles Burnet, author of a history of music; John Ellicott, who wrote on Electricity, and Thomas Innes, who published in 1729 a book on "Ancient Inhabitants on the Northern Parts of Britain or Scotland." One might also wonder if Gaelic scholar Beg Eolach Moidhach would appreciate being remembered today as a British philosopher.The length of the entries varies from several lines to up to seven pages. Generally, each entry gives the details of the life and work of the person covered, provides a bibliography of his or her main works, references to "other relevant works," and a section of "further reading." While the larger entries are naturally devoted to the better known figures, most of the authors dealt with in the minor sections cannot complain either. In many cases, information about the life and work of these minor authors is scarce and the entries are useful for this reason alone. But unfortunately, there are also cases in which essential references to "classical" biographical accounts are not listed in the bibliography, like Williams Smellie´s account of James Gregory or George Skene Keith´s biography of John Campbell.The entries on Lord Kames and George Turnbull lay, as far as their length is [End Page 282] concerned, somewhere in the middle between the shorter and longer contributions. They nevertheless are highly informative, densely argued, and are good reading. Knud Haakonssen sees in Kames "perhaps the most complete 'Enlightenment man' among the eighteenth-century Scottish thinkers´" because he covers like no other author "the whole spectrum of human knowledge and its applicability to his society" (503). The most philosophical work of Kames is his Essays on the Principles of Morality and Natural Religion (1751). According to Haakonssen, it is important because in it Kames "turns the previous moral-sense criticism of moral scepticism into a refutation of general epistemological scepticism" (504). By arguing that our...