Kant: Religion within the Boundaries of Mere Reason: A Commentary

Kant: Religion within the Boundaries of Mere Reason: A Commentary book cover

Kant: Religion within the Boundaries of Mere Reason: A Commentary

Author(s): James J. DiCenso (Author)

  • Publisher: Cambridge University Press
  • Publication Date: 6 Sept. 2012
  • Language: English
  • Print length: 275 pages
  • ISBN-10: 1107009340
  • ISBN-13: 9781107009349

Book Description

Kant’s Religion within the Boundaries of Mere Reason is one of the great modern examinations of religion’s meaning, function and impact on human affairs. In this volume, the first complete English-language commentary on the work, James J. DiCenso explains the historical context in which the book appeared, including the importance of Kant’s conflict with state censorship. He shows how the Religion addresses crucial Kantian themes such as the relationship between freedom and morality, the human propensity to evil, the status of historical traditions in relation to ethical principles, and the interface between individual ethics and social institutions. The major arguments are clearly and precisely explained, and the themes are highlighted and located within Kant’s mature critical philosophy, especially his ethics. The commentary will be valuable for all who are interested in the continuing relevance of religion for contemporary inquiries into ethics, public institutions and religious traditions.

Editorial Reviews

Book Description

A rigorous and comprehensive commentary, showing how the Religion develops key themes in Kant’s mature philosophy.

About the Author

James J. DiCenso is Professor in the Philosophy of Religion at the University of Toronto. He is the author of Kant, Religion, and Politics (Cambridge, 2011), The Other Freud: Religion, Culture and Psychoanalysis (1999) and Hermeneutics and the Disclosure of Truth (1990) and has published several scholarly articles in international journals.

View on Amazon

电子书代发PDF格式价格30我要求助
未经允许不得转载:Wow! eBook » Kant: Religion within the Boundaries of Mere Reason: A Commentary