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...
Main Author: | |
---|---|
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 |