The rationality of history and the history of rationality: Menachem Fisch on the analytic idealist predicament

Two essential Kantian insights are the significance for rationality of the capacity for criticism and the limits of cognition, discovered when criticism is pursued methodically, that are due to the perspectival character of the human standpoint. After a period of disparagement, these Kantian insight...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Franks Paul
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: De Gruyter 2020-11-01
Series:Open Philosophy
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.1515/opphil-2020-0141
id doaj-8a53e5249b3647b6ae7d79535fa8a727
record_format Article
spelling doaj-8a53e5249b3647b6ae7d79535fa8a7272021-09-22T06:13:18ZengDe GruyterOpen Philosophy2543-88752020-11-013169971510.1515/opphil-2020-0141opphil-2020-0141The rationality of history and the history of rationality: Menachem Fisch on the analytic idealist predicamentFranks PaulTwo essential Kantian insights are the significance for rationality of the capacity for criticism and the limits of cognition, discovered when criticism is pursued methodically, that are due to the perspectival character of the human standpoint. After a period of disparagement, these Kantian insights have been sympathetically construed and are now discussed within contemporary analytic philosophy. However, if Kant’s assumption of a single, immutable, human framework is jettisoned, then the rationality of historical succession is called into question. Moreover, if the revolutionary character of framework transitions is acknowledged, then reason is historicized and even its character as reason is threatened. I argue that Menachem Fisch’s approach to criticism and rationality offers an escape from this post-Kantian predicament that acknowledges revolutionary framework transitions and that draws upon the dialogical traditions of Jewish thought, and I also argue that Fisch’s approach should be seen as thematizing, to use the terms of Kant’s aesthetics and of Fichte’s account of natural right, the reflecting rather than determining status of critical judgement, which involves second-personal address.https://doi.org/10.1515/opphil-2020-0141
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Franks Paul
spellingShingle Franks Paul
The rationality of history and the history of rationality: Menachem Fisch on the analytic idealist predicament
Open Philosophy
author_facet Franks Paul
author_sort Franks Paul
title The rationality of history and the history of rationality: Menachem Fisch on the analytic idealist predicament
title_short The rationality of history and the history of rationality: Menachem Fisch on the analytic idealist predicament
title_full The rationality of history and the history of rationality: Menachem Fisch on the analytic idealist predicament
title_fullStr The rationality of history and the history of rationality: Menachem Fisch on the analytic idealist predicament
title_full_unstemmed The rationality of history and the history of rationality: Menachem Fisch on the analytic idealist predicament
title_sort rationality of history and the history of rationality: menachem fisch on the analytic idealist predicament
publisher De Gruyter
series Open Philosophy
issn 2543-8875
publishDate 2020-11-01
description Two essential Kantian insights are the significance for rationality of the capacity for criticism and the limits of cognition, discovered when criticism is pursued methodically, that are due to the perspectival character of the human standpoint. After a period of disparagement, these Kantian insights have been sympathetically construed and are now discussed within contemporary analytic philosophy. However, if Kant’s assumption of a single, immutable, human framework is jettisoned, then the rationality of historical succession is called into question. Moreover, if the revolutionary character of framework transitions is acknowledged, then reason is historicized and even its character as reason is threatened. I argue that Menachem Fisch’s approach to criticism and rationality offers an escape from this post-Kantian predicament that acknowledges revolutionary framework transitions and that draws upon the dialogical traditions of Jewish thought, and I also argue that Fisch’s approach should be seen as thematizing, to use the terms of Kant’s aesthetics and of Fichte’s account of natural right, the reflecting rather than determining status of critical judgement, which involves second-personal address.
url https://doi.org/10.1515/opphil-2020-0141
work_keys_str_mv AT frankspaul therationalityofhistoryandthehistoryofrationalitymenachemfischontheanalyticidealistpredicament
AT frankspaul rationalityofhistoryandthehistoryofrationalitymenachemfischontheanalyticidealistpredicament
_version_ 1717371765499363328