Kant’s Model for Building the True Church: Transcending “Might Makes Right” and “Should Makes Good” through the Idea of a Non-Coercive Theocracy

Stephen Palmquist

About author

Prof. Stephen Palmquist (龐思奮)
Department of Religion and Philosophy
Hong Kong Baptist University
Kowloon, Hong Kong SAR
CHINA

E-mail: stevepq@hkbu.edu.hk

Abstract


Kant’s Religion postulates the idea of an ethical community as a necessary requirement for humanity to become good. Few interpreters acknowledge Kant’s claims that realizing this idea requires building a “church” characterized by unity, integrity, freedom, and unchangeability, and that this new form of community is a non-coercive version of theocracy. Traditional (e.g., Jewish) theocracy replaces the political state of nature (“might makes right”) with an ethical state of nature (“should makes good”); non-coercive theocracy transcends this distinction, uniting humanity in a common vision of a divine legislator whose legislation is inward: the law of love binds church members together like families.


Full Text:

PDF


References


  1. Abramson J.B. (2009), Minerva’s Owl: The Tradition of Western Political Thought, Harvard University Press, Cambridge (MA).
  2. DiCenso J. (2011), Kant, Religion, and Politics, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
  3. Erlewine R. (2010), Monotheism and Tolerance: Recovering a Religion of Reason, Indiana University Press, Bloomington.
  4. Flikschuh K. (2011), Gottesdienst und Afterdienst: die Kirche als öffentliche Institution?, [in:] Immanuel Kant: Die Religion innerhalb der Grenzen der bloßen Vernunft, O. Höffe (ed.), Akademie Verlag, Berlin: 193–210.
  5. Fraenkel C. (2010), “Theocracy and Autonomy in Medieval Islamic and Jewish Philosophy,” Political Theory 38 (3): 340–366.
  6. Höffe O. (1990), Kategorische Rechtsprinzipien: Ein Kontrapunkt der Moderne, Suhrkamp Verlag, Frankfurt am Main.
  7. Kal V. (2011), “Theocratie en democratie,” Tijdschrift voor Filosofie 73 (1): 47–74.
  8. Kant I. (2009), Religion within the Bounds of Bare Reason, trans. W.S. Pluhar, Hackett, Indianapolis; revised translation in Palmquist (2016a).
  9. Mack M. (2014), German Idealism and the Jew: The Inner Anti-Semitism of Philosophy and German Jewish Responses, The University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
  10. Miller E.N. (2015), Kant’s Religion within the Boundaries of Mere Reason: A Reader’s Guide, Bloomsbury, London.
  11. Palmquist S. (1987), “A Priori Knowledge in Perspective: (II) Naming, Necessity and the Analytic A Posteriori,” The Review of Metaphysics 41 (2): 255–282.
  12. Palmquist S. (1993), Biblical Theocracy: A Vision of the Biblical Foundations for a Christian Political Philosophy, Philopsychy Press, Hong Kong.
  13. Palmquist S. (1994), “‘The Kingdom of God Is at Hand!’ (Did Kant really say that?),” History of Philosophy Quarterly 11 (4): 421–437.
  14. Palmquist S. (2000a), Kant’s Critical Religion: Volume Two of Kant’s System of Perspectives, Ashgate, Aldershot.
  15. Palmquist S. (2000b), The Tree of Philosophy: A Course of Introductory Lectures for Beginning Students of Philosophy, Philopsychy Press, Hong Kong.
  16. Palmquist S. (2009), “Kant’s Religious Argument for the Existence of God—The Ultimate Dependence of Human Destiny on Divine Assistance,” Faith and Philosophy 26: 3–22.
  17. Palmquist S. (2010a), “Philip J. Rossi’s The Social Authority of Reason: Kant’s Critique, Radical Evil and the Destiny of Humankind,” Kant-Studien 101 (1): 127–131.
  18. Palmquist S. (2010b), “Kant’s Ethics of Grace: Perspectival Solutions to the Moral Difficulties with Divine Assistance,” The Journal of Religion 90 (4): 530–553.
  19. Palmquist S. (2012), “To Tell the Truth on Kant and Christianity: Will the Real Affirmative Interpreter Please Stand Up?” Faith and Philosophy 29 (3): 340–346.
  20. Palmquist S. (2015a), “What is Kantian Gesinnung? On the Priority of Volition over Metaphysics and Psychology in Kant’s Religion,” Kantian Review 20 (2): 235–264.
  21. Palmquist S. (2015b), “Kant’s Prudential Theory of Religion: The Necessity of Historical Faith for Moral Empowerment,” Con-textos Kantianos 1: 57–76.
  22. Palmquist S. (2016a), Comprehensive Commentary on Kant’s Religion within the Bounds of Bare Reason, John Wiley & Sons, Chichester.
  23. Palmquist S. (2016b), “Kantian Theocracy as a Non-Political Path to the Politics of Peace,” Jian Dao 46: 155–175.
  24. Palmquist S. (forthcoming), “Kantian Conditions for the Possibility of Justified Resistance to Authority.”
  25. Poole R.A. (2014), Kant and the Kingdom of Ends in Russian Religious Thought (Vladimir Solov’ev), [in:] Thinking Orthodox in Modern Russia: Culture, History, Context, P.L. Michelson, J. Deutsch Kornblatt (eds.), University of Wisconsin Press, Madison: 215-234.
  26. Rawls J. (1971), A Theory of Justice, The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, Cambridge (MA), London (England).
  27. Rawls J. (1980), “Kantian Constructivism in Moral Theory,” The Journal of Philosophy 77 (9): 515–572.
  28. Rossi P.J. (2005), The Social Authority of Reason: Kant’s Critique, Radical Evil, and the Destiny of Humankind, SUNY Press, New York.
  29. Sala G.B. (2004), Das Reich Gottes auf Erden: Kants Lehre von der Kirche als ethischem gemeinem Wesen, [in:] Kants Metaphysik und Religionsphilosophie, N. Fischer (ed.), Felix Meiner Verlag, Hamburg: 225–264.
  30. Sanford J.C. (2014), Blueprint for Theocracy: The Christian Right’s Vision for America. Examining a Radical “Worldview” and Its Roots, Metacomet Books, Providence.
  31. Vries H. de (2002), Religion and Violence: Philosophical Perspectives from Kant to Derrida, The Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore.
  32. Wood A. (2011), Ethical Community, Church, and Scripture, [in:] Immanuel Kant: Die Religion innerhalb der Grenzen der bloßen Vernunft, O. Höffe (ed.), Akademie Verlag, Berlin: 131–150.

DOI:

http://dx.doi.org/10.13153/diam.54.2017.1134

Article links:

Default URL: http://www.diametros.iphils.uj.edu.pl/index.php/diametros/article/view/1134
English abstract URL: http://www.diametros.iphils.uj.edu.pl/index.php/diametros/article/view/1134/en

Share:






All works are licensed under a Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY-NC 4.0) License.