Can the ontological and cosmological arguments for the existence of God, whose complex relationship was discussed by Kant, achieve more together than they can achieve apart? Yes, but what they achieve is not necessarily a proof of monotheism.

In his study entitled “The Beginning and the Method of the Logic,” Dieter Henrich assumes an interpretive stance with regard to the beginning of Hegel’s Logic which is in staunch opposition to the scholarly tradition. That tradition, as Henrich tries to show, has almost unanimously rejected the dialectic of Becoming as untenable. This holds true not only for those critics whose ultimate aim was to discredit speculative dialectical method in general, but even for the members of Hegel’s own school, who (...) wished to salvage as much of the Logic as possible. (shrink)

The late Richard Rorty was no stranger to provocation, and many an analytic philosopher would surely count as extremely provocative comments he had made on Robert Brandom’s highly regarded book from 1994, Making It Explicit.1 Brandom’s book was, Rorty asserted “an attempt to usher analytic philosophy from its Kantian to its Hegelian stage.”2 The reception of Kant within analytic philosophy has surely been, at best, patchy, but if it is difficult to imagine exactly what Rorty could have had in mind (...) by analytic philosophy’s “Kantian phase,” the idea of an immanent Hegelian one would strike many as ludicrous. Given that the beginnings of analytic philosophy are conventionally described in terms of the radical break initiated by Russell and Moore with the Hegel-inspired idealism of their teachers at Cambridge in the closing years of the 19th century, the distinctly anti-Hegelian character of analytic philosophy has been held to be central. Moreover, the increasing naturalistic tenor of recent analytic philosophy would seem hardly propitious for a revival of 19th century idealism. And yet Rorty’s description should not be dismissed as mere provocation. (shrink)