"The God in us and God for us in Kant" by Reinhard Brandt

The second era of the German Enlightenment ca (1750-1800) is characterized by a seemingly minor change in the notion of faith.
.
While in Testament talked about the three Christian virtues of
faith,
hope and
love,
constitutes one (following the English model for now) to make the order:

First comes the
love, or morality,then follow the
internal logic of morals,
faith in God and the
hope for immortality (with the appropriate proportion of happiness and morality).
.
Today's claim against all religions, morality and the first independent constitutional right of states to recognize and then act in the space provided between morality and law, is in this era of enlightenment was newly founded.
It should be outlined how this idea is developed in Kant.

----

1. "God in us" in the late Kant

In Conflict of the Faculties (1798) states:
"In this way, all interpretations of Scripture, so far as they relate to religion, According to the principle of morality in the revelation purposed to be made and are without either virtually empty, or even refusal of the good. - Even then, they are only really authentic, Ie, the God within us is itself the boom, because we understand no one than the one by our own minds and our own reason speaks to us of a decision addressed to the divinity that is, by teaching us nothing, than by notions our Reason, so far as they are morally pure and thereby infallibly be recognized."

The God in us is the authentic interpreter of the revelation. The interpretation of sacred texts by scribes is disconnected from the practical hermeneutics in religion does not follow our understanding of the text but the text of our minds: what's in the Bible, the book does not say in front of us, but the God within us.

Without this "Copernican revolution" revelations are "virtually empty, or even refusal of goodness" - here the old theology of the Word of God to the homage of the moral self is coerced, not the privilege of studying Scripture and the Amtsmacht is crucial, but the confirmation before the God in us, in the community, in all human beings as moral beings. The God in us, not primarily the God in me, and it is not an isolated I mention that delivers the authentic Bible reading, but we surely the community. It is easy to be taken here as the French Revolution in the churches, Throne and Altar suffer the same fate. The 'God in us, "the Enlightenment marked the great turning point in human history, the turning point of the naive immaturity of thought and belief from our own enlightened reason. We are the people, and the God within us is the only North Star and Compass, which is guided by our faith and our Bible reading. Everything else is empty, or even an obstacle for good. Assuming the "we" of course, that each individual who, as they say, infallible knowledge of morality. The categorical imperative is so straightforward and irrtumsimmun as the perception of space and time.

Deus est in nobis.

In Kant's late work this phrase frequently encountered, especially in the last convolution of the Opus postumum and in various formulations.
"Whether religion is possible without any requirement of the existence of God.
Est Deus in nobis. "(XXII 130,4-5)

But also:
" The word of God is the concept of a binding Subject besides me. "(XXI, 15,26-27)

Then again:
"It's a god. It's a creature inside me was different from me in the causal conditions of effectiveness (effectivus nexus) to me is (agit, facit, operatur) which, even without the frey di natural laws in space and time to be dependent on myself inwardly directed (justified or condemned) and I, man, I'm this character and this is not about a matter outside of me [...]. "(XXI, 25,1-8)

The God in me is an infallible conscience.

There is obviously a reflection amphiboly in terms of space and metaphorical relations "in" and "out" and we see that Kant is fighting in relation to the concept of God with the same difficulties as with the theoretical concept of the world:
the transcendental idealism on the one hand threatens the world a phenomenon "in us" to do so, why Kant renewed efforts in fighting the bad idealism, though this makes the transcendental idealism to empirical realism, the "outside ourselves", albeit "makes in us," it all possible:
the world is not within us but outside us in space, of course, is nothing but the transcendental form our Intuition, that is in us. If the in-or out-of-being of our world and God to rely on a transcendental schema, which is always just a product of the imagination "(A 140)?
This is perhaps the result, but obviously not the intention of the Kantian considerations.

Descartes had made God a "idea" of the human spirit and was accused of atheism, although it meets two existence proofs in the Meditations was cited and should allow God to the 'res cogitans' in their conception of 'res extensa' is dealt not only with their own ideas, but with the real world and for this reason God could not be a mere idea in us.

The same accusation is leveled against Kant, and the government bureaucracy in Kassel Hellhörige forbidding events on the critical philosophy in Marburg, precisely because they perceived as the most proto-Kantian, what the implications of philosophy from Konigsberg for the throne and the altar would be.
(What a blessing that such a ban would be today, because the students would fight for their rights and full of courage masse into the most difficult Kantvorlesungen come).

In the following, not on the issue "in" and "extra" and are actually meant "praeter received", it is inherent in the transcendental idealism, and could be only in the context of its genesis and Kantian shape closer articulated. Building on the quoted statement in Conflict of the Faculties I do not turn to God, the problem of theoretical knowledge but practical reason. It presupposes that God is the theoretical point of fact, think, but can not be recognized, however, proved that its objective reality in practical terms is a new way. The moral is the-alternative approach to God, but not the god itself except our own, but in us and for us.

To this end, I go back to Scripture and the thoughts of figure in which the "God within us" of the Dispute of the faculties is preformed, John James, Spalding Reflections on the destiny of man from 1748th She has been the construction of Critique of Practical Reason.

Comparison of Kant's critical turn with the Copernican revolution of theoretical agnosticism and practical knowledge should be demonstrated, and it presents some difficulties with the Kantian Kippfigur a God outside of us, in us and in themselves and are connected to us.



2. What should I do?

If one makes a highly complex process of reflection a solid woodblock, then there is roughly the following picture of the effective to date idea formation in the second half of the 18th Century. Until about 1750, at least on the European continent dominated the medieval metaphysics, with its fundamental system of general ontology and triple metaphysica specialis of theology, cosmology and psychology (or) in a different order. In this triad, Descartes does not change at all, and his res cogitans, the psyche needs, as already indicated, the real knowledge of the res extensa, the cosmos, the goodness of God will not allow ourselves in the knowledge of the world's only meaningless ideas focused. The key innovations come from the economically and politically advanced in Germany, England and will be made public in the area of interest to us through an otherwise little-known author, the Shaftesbury-translator Johann Joachim Spalding. His short work Reflections on the destiny of man the beginning of 1748 constitutes the second phase of the Enlightenment in Germany. The climatic change is that it responds to the dominant Wolffian metaphysics with no word, though there is content overlap, and the book is not intended for scholars but for a lay audience, and begins with what Kant the rational interest of everyone will be called: Everybody wants to know why we are here, what determines this is our existence, more specifically: What can I know what I should do, what I hope? Like about the rules of the people in the sense of "determinatio" the scholars argue, the man himself wants and needs to know for his practice what he speaks of the nature or the foreknowledge certain is.

Spalding uses the traditional three possible ways of life, that of pleasure, and secondly that of the courageous action, and thirdly, the iter vitae of the theory, the triad is anticipated in the Platonic Politeia and kept alive throughout the European feudal system, so officially until 1789. Pleasure deleted option of course, but also the option of pure theory, because this end is based only on personal vanity.
Thus, the path remains the only practical choice, and it can be shown that man, now: every human being without distinction,actually intended to him is:
We want to prove ourselves morally in practical life, therein lies the destiny of man.
Now this way of morality leads eventually to a bitter experience:
The unjust will be rewarded, while the righteous ends in misery, this is the sad summary of life on earth.
In this situation, there is only one salvation:
faith in God and immortality.
We can dramatically than it does Spalding, also put it:
If more than the gateway to life on earth depends on the signboard of the Inferno: "Lasciate ogni speranza", then any claim to moral action is one "ethica chimaerica.
A realistic moral theory thus leads to the essential belief in God and hope for immortality.

The three above-mentioned Kant's questions are on a path that is not here yet traced once, in the trinity of faith, love, hope New Testament (1. Corinthians 13, 3) back.

Belief in God is replaced by the knowledge and modernized, love is doing in the world, and the hope, of course, the immortality of the soul to the subject. It is crucial, however, was the initial position of faith, the belief in the three cardinal Christian virtues, we may paraphrase, the condition of both the good action and the hope of an afterlife.
In this order, the power of the church and the interest of the state ecclesiastical power was based on this, because only faith is necessary for society allows moral conduct of citizens. The atheist can consistently chase out of the country, and also the citizens who have fallen victim to a false belief, or perhaps the Inquisition can promote the morality of life and immortality after death.

As citizens of a world after 1750 we take the religious phenomena of the previous history as aberrations and excesses of note and even though they are from the perspective of the principles of no random deviations of individual terror men, but are rooted in the succession and structure in the condition of faith, love and hope. Already in New Testament found any notion of the enormity of this suggestion, when added to a subordinate clause: "But love is the greatest of them all" - it is only firmly in second, not first, it is due to the faith, not vice versa.

This order with the primacy of faith in the decency and hope will be overturned by Spalding (in the recording of the relevant considerations of Shaftesbury), by asking good action at the beginning. Morality is the condition of faith and not faith the condition of morality. Looking back to Plato, it can be observed an early form of reversal. In the brief dialogue Euthyphro Socrates maintains that the good is good because the gods love it, but conversely, the gods love what is good, because it is good as such.
The Christian idea that tilts back and Platonic knowledge is the belief in the possibility of morality. We'll see how Kant, in the sequence: first, the morality and then holds the belief, however, still must destroy the Platonic Good, the categorical imperative in order to create space.

The thinking behind the Spaldingschen Destiny of Man we have a basic idea of Kant and the investment of Critique of Practical Reason discovered a fundamental idea, which is often spoken of him.
"All religion presupposes morality, therefore, morality can not be derived from religion."

"If people have the morals of religion subordiniren (which only Beyme oppressed populace is both possible and necessary) it will be blessed by anti-hypocritical afterrednerisch but subordiniren the religion of morality so they are kind benevolent and just." (XX 153.9 -- 12)

This concept provides the letter (and draft letter) to Johann Kaspar Lavater, from April 1775 (X 175-180):
The necessary precedence of morality for the faith, which is, as Kant says in the style of the time, was the original teaching of the Gospel. It has become nothing could be imposed upon me to religion, "which is not already by the sacred law [in me ...] is my duty" (X 179,19-21). This "law within me" is addressed in 1798 using the old formula even as "God in me." "Religion is not a cause of morality, but rather the reverse." (XIX 150.25 - refl. 6759, sa 35,5-12 - refl. 6499)

This epochal change also marks the attachment of Critique of Practical Reason. In the "Analysis" answers the question "What should I do?" The categorical imperative, which is provided as a fact of consciousness at the beginning, is a comprehensive answer to this question. Then comes the beginning of the "dialectics" of the hinge to faith in God and hope for immortality: "Is it impossible for the highest good, practical rules, so does the moral law, which requires transporting the same, fantastic and has to empty imaginary purpose made, therefore, be wrong in itself. "(V postulated 114,6-9) Morals are objective practical reality of God and immortality, since it is an irrefutable fact must also be practically the one given to the execution of the categorical imperative necessary is essential.

A condition of the postulate of teaching is the result of the dialectic in the Critique of Pure Reason. It says that theoretical reason can win without any knowledge of the human space-time perception, and thus any purported knowledge in the field of metaphysica specialis, God, world and soul, a mere appearance is, in reality, the first criticism teaches Although these three entities are necessary objects of our theoretical thought, but just thinking, not of knowledge.

So can some insights into the alleged non-existence of God based only on a fundamental error, knows the critical philosopher, even before he is the subtle proof of the atheist closer look. Thus, a conflict between the theoretical and practical reason is excluded. So God and immortality are not compromised in their objective reality postulated by claims of theoretical reason and can therefore be of real objects for the morality necessary rational faith.

The primacy of ethics for the faith leads to a further modification: The authority, which obliges us can no longer be God, but we impose on ourselves, Deus est in nobis. All duties are at all justified in the voluntary, or they are just ratcheted up name for the submission to a higher external force, whether it be a presupposed external God or, later, the human society. If I can not commit themselves, if not all obligatio an obligatio sibi contracta, it underpins the whole explanation of this second epoch, and especially the Kantian idea of autonomy spectacular on an error.

As Kant transforms into an external relationship Binnenrelation and founded the outside in the inside, it does show the Erhabenheitsanalyse in the CJ.
First, nature itself seems to be of noble size and power to be a man submits to the violence, which he takes for a divine. In fact, however, is the source of true feeling of the sublime "humanity in us" (P 262.1). "So the elevation is not contained within the things of nature, but only in our minds, if we are of nature within us and thereby also the nature (if they are to us) flows to be superior to us but ourselves can become aware." (P 264 ,13-16)



3. The Copernican revolution

"Try it a try, if we did not get along in the tasks of metaphysics, so better that we admit that the objects must conform to our cognition, which is so much better accords with the possibility of knowledge demanded of them a priori, on subjects before they are given to us to fix something. It is hereby well as with the first thoughts of the Copernicus bewandt who once wanted to with the explanation of celestial motion not well off, when he assumed the whole of stars revolved around the spectator, tried if it does not would succeed better when the viewer to turn, and against the starry let alone.

(B XVI) Why "with the first Thoughts? There is a second regularly overlooked idea of Copernicus, Kant as the "initial hypothesis", and the Newtons have proven to be true. While the first thought relates to the earth's rotation, is the subject of the initial hypothesis of the heliocentric system of planets. The Earth's rotation is the picture for the Subjektbedingtheit theoretical knowledge of nature, which is directed not at the things in themselves, but their appearances on the condition of our forms of intuition and concepts of understanding, the heliocentric other hand, is the image of our pure practical reason, which the surpassable nothing City of the Sun occupies the categorical laws in the fact of Newtonian gravity is illustrated. While saying the first thought of Copernicus, subjectivity, and therefore relativity of our theoretical knowledge of nature, says the initial hypothesis of the absoluteness and sovereignty of our moral person, there we are mushrooms on a small planet, where everyone is roi soleil and can by no superior knowledge of a person or God shown in his place. Pure practical reason, one thing is for each sovereign legislature in the world of people and thus takes the place of the absolute God who donate in the dissertation of 1770 still had the option of the mundus intelligible, without God, the substances do not have laws of their Kommerziums (II 407.16 et seq), in the critical moral philosophy, however, is the imperative for each person, the intelligible moral world or even realize its own legislation. As moral beings we draw us even themselves, therefore, the legal doctrine begins with the interpretation of honeste vive "as an imperative of self as a person, as a sort of moral substance (VI 236,24-30).

The image of a solar system with a rotating planet, which suggests move in ellipses around the center of the sun, an entity that is not in Kant's metaphysics Zweiwelten there, because the natural laws of the mundus sensibilis and the freedom of the mundus intelligible laws have nothing in to be done, but each form their own ordinances. 1790 Kant definitively assign knowledge of nature to reason and speak from a critique of mind, if the work is from 1781 or 1787, the speech, however, is the heliocentric theme of the second criticism. This face each other criticism and counter criticism, mind and will. The moral will of activity, is our metaphysical activity. The pure will creates an order of its kind, in principle, by any theoretical understanding of knowledge can be conditioned to be promoted or impaired. This dualism of knowledge and will necessarily lead to a pronounced anti-Platonism, for according to Plato, the idea of good was, first, an object of knowledge, and secondly, the practical orientation; accordingly, there was a clear primacy of theoretical reason to all the practices, there is a will without prior knowledge Plato and Aristotle would be absolutely absurd. Kant is making the logical notion of good and evil depends on the will of the previous law, this paradoxical reversal of the Platonic, but also the natural order that the good-to-see (whatever it is, even Plato's idea) the basis for the determination of the will, is a main argument of the KpV: The good is good because we want it, we do not want it, because it is good. Added, however, that the will, which now depends on the good, from a universal and necessary act of will and law is determined, so he is morally qualified and there is no will to live as in subsequent deformations of the 19 and 20 Century.

By the conflict of the two orders and the necessary belief in a harmony is traded in the following.



4. The moral faith in reason

We had tried the considerations Spalding (Spalding and via Shaftesbury) to the beginning. After them, the man follows the rules of natural morality on his middle way of practical action, however, he discovered that the way of the world all reasonable expectation of reward and punishment negates. To hold on to his morale will require faith in God and immortality. Similarly, the combination of freedom, God and immortality in the Critique of Pure Reason. We comply with the laws that say what we should do, and we need to hope for happiness, which corresponds to the morality of our actions. After the experience in this earthly life, this adequacy can only be hoped for in the afterlife. But herewith Kant 1781 combines both the spring of action, ie that the theologiefreien principium dijudications morality can be a principium executionis needs the divine ruler.

Now Kant does in the Critique of Practical Reason of 1788, this concept of republican intentions, and that we are interested in two places, once the external dispensation of God's mission and motivation is the main driver to the subject itself incorporated, on the other hand, Kant changes the concept of the highest good and will retrieve it from heaven to earth down.

For moral motivation, Kant turned on considerations not needed pursuant to which the moral sense, the reason for its realization, but, conversely, the foremost reason leads to a moral sense in terms of respect for the law. Thus, the principium dijudicationis of pure reason to be perceived motive, the principium executionis without having to rely on something looks. The pure practical reason is not only autonomous but also forms an automobile, by the motion creates forces within themselves.

The second issue is more complicated. Kant, God is also excused from the immediate task of ensuring a harmony between morality and happiness, at least, is this context in 1788 and 1790 at the sense of disempowerment of God and the empowerment of people to rethink.

Let us look again at the top of the sentence already quoted KpV: "the highest good is impossible for practical rules, so the moral law, which requires transporting the same, fantastic, and made to empty imaginary ends, therefore, erroneous in itself must to be. "(V 114,6-9)

"[...] Which gives the command to carry the same" - of which we learn for the first time, for in the analysis is the highest good, although brief mention (V 43.32, 64.28 and 35), but it is not an issue. Without delving into the convoluted evidence to postulate doctrine, which derives from this conception of the moral law, we can see two tendencies in the KpV and the CJ. One is aimed at the emancipation of man from God, it was the old metaphysics, whether of the Christian faith. God is dead and alive, because we can incorporate him: We are God, we, ie our practical reason. The other tendency is intended to hold on to one, albeit modified, the real God in the sense of the old theology.

First, then, the tendency, God found only in ourselves and to relieve him of his outer office and his unabhängigren us from existence.

That we should promote the highest good, may somehow plausible from the "analysis" and even the Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals be, But it is not explicitly stated so. So now is the categorical imperative for the bid to promote the highest good, of course, here on earth. Here, it is said, it is taken as given that we have an idea of the highest good, which makes this imperative to understand, such as mustered by the narrow and wide duties, and second, that the transport itself does not exceed our powers so that the moral principle is followed: "ultra posse nemo obligatur. This will not be the case if our transport assumes that the highest good can only be carried by some closed too. But why the carriage which is in our power should be our power exceeds connected with perfection?

Kant has taken over the worldly concept of the summum bonum in the theology of the CJ. "We are determined a priori by reason to promote the world's best, which consists in the combination of the greatest welfare of the rational beings in the world with the highest condition of goodness in them, ie, the general happiness with the regulative morality, after all our might." ( V 453,16-20) Again, is spoken only by a refusal of transport of the highest good, which is within our power, and the idea of a human society in accordance with morality and happiness are possible, without recourse to theological maximum performance at the idea or even the reality of God is entirely possible. Thus, if the transport of the highest good which is in the moral law, then we must also be in autonomy and autocracy able to do so.

The opposing tendency, which aims to establish the necessary Einhilfe when God also reinterpreted the highest good says, this was not within our control, is now our duty to comply with the transport of the highest good, it needed the practical reality of a moral God, whose existence we therefore compelled to accept on the basis of the categorical imperative, and ergo are entitled. The moral purpose leads our practical reflective judgment a subjective practical realities of the first cause of creation (V, 455.32).
"Consequently, we have a moral cause of the world (accept an originator of the world), vorzusetzen to us in accordance with the moral law, a final purpose, and as far as the latter is necessary) is so far (ie in the same degree and for the same reason the former is necessary to assume: namely, there is a God. "(V 450,26-30)

The concept of the highest good in the world itself contains this double tendency in himself, because sometimes only the earthly world is meant, sometimes the 'here and the hereafter. Either way, Kant is the first trend can never completely win, but in 1781 and later was of the opinion by criticizing the ontology, ie the metaphysica generalis, the analysis of the human mind had to acknowledge the place and metaphysica specialis for the morality rational faith in God and immortality are essential, and which therefore are not in us, and which are not of this world.



5. The God for us

1781 Kant represents the three possible only speculative evidence of God (A 590) and refuted purely immanent. In place of evidence in the style of the old metaphysics and theology takes the moral argument: it is a God but one God, one might see him determined not to be secured as metaphysical beings, even in us, as we in the course of investigation found several, but us as the object of our rational belief. The phrase "God be for us," Kant does not seem to use literally, but in the last sentence of KpV is said that "there is the need for a theology that the concept of God in the highest practical use of reason sufficiently certain" (P 485, 16-18), the religious scripture says: "The idea of a moral ruler of the world is a task for our practical reason. We both know it is not because of what God) to himself (his nature, but what he had for us as moral beings [...]. "(VI, 139,13-16) This is a reflection in moral philosophy included the Prolegomena were designed in theory to a "symbolic Anthropomorphism" (IV 357,15-16); we recognize in him the unknown divine beings ", not after what it is in itself, but for what it is for me , namely, in respect of the world, I am a part [...]." (IV 357,22-24) In the CJ, the moral argument is characterized as a belief is not about what the object itself, but " was for us (people in general) "(V, 462.37), cat 'anthropon not kat'aletheian (V 463,1-2; see XX 306,1-6).

These people, God is morally necessary for us, and its provisions did not come about as a thing in itself, nor as a phenomenon, but as a supreme being us. The man God springs from a need of our practical reason, and we can not "meditate on God's special qualities, but it must be morally determined only in relation to our law." (XXIII 71,10-12) This God has for us in some features similar a phenomenon that the thing in itself in the shape of a world object usIs key to our cognitive faculties in space and time. The unknown to us God trod hereby are in a parallel to the world itself, which for us is not clear, so how in the world of knowledge in the place of "in itself" a surrogate subjective cognition under theoretical conditions, namely as Erscheingungen occurs so the god is entirely deprived of us, but it will be seen in practical terms, as God for us.



6. The communicability

The moral is, in Plato, the concept of good, for Kant the moral law binding to all the religious value system, religion has engaged in ethics and can not presume to determine its basic concepts. Moral values can not be under certain conditions, they can not be found by their recognition that the values of a revelation, a mystical experience or religious traditions agree - the question is whether this agreement on the recognized primacy of morality is based, or not, otherwise it is random and unstable. In Kant, this striking phenomenon can be observed that a term was originally used only for natural phenomena and then in the "Critique of aesthetic discernment" and the Religion Within the Limits of Reason Alone used for the relationship of man with man, was that of the message. In the first phase forces are communicated between bodies, in the second phase there is a qualified statement of epistemic, aesthetic and moral judgments. In the Critique of the "universal communicability" (P 217.1) as the criterion of Apriorizität of judgments of taste: "Ginge the lust for the given object before and only the universal communicability of the same should be given in the presentation of the subject matter of taste, it would such a procedure is in contradiction with itself. For such pleasure would be no other than the mere convenience in the sense of emotion and can have their very nature, therefore only Privatgültigkeit, because of the idea, making the subject givenDirectly depended. "(V 216,35-217,7) The communicability of the design will appeal, as is explained later, ensured by the harmony of the epistemic conditions, imagination and intellect, which in turn generates the allgemeinheitsfähige pleasure that we use in pronounce judgments of taste. One can see how Kant here uses the same reversal of character he was already appropriated in the sixties in the sequence of moral faith-hope. Not faith, but the morale is generally communicable, "The pure religious faith indeed is that which alone can form a broad church: because he is a mere rational belief that everyone can communicate to the conviction, [...]. "(VI 102,34-103,1) The particularistic faith is so much skilled miteilungsfähig as the particular pleasure of Geschmackts; therefore have the former, the moral, the second the epistemic conditions have precedence in order to allow the common world. "We have noted that that, although a church is the most important feature, namely that of a legitimate claim to universality is dispensed with, if it is a revelation, as the historic [...] But faith is not generally capable of better communication, based [... ]. "(VI, 109,20-25; see further 123.2, 137 ff, 155).

A qualified statement leads to the establishment of a common world to which we have determined that it was the realization of the aesthetic or moral, always the message is aimed at the creation of a cosmopolitan society, beside, beneath or above the legal peace society of sovereign states. Religion is only tally when their principles can inform us within the limits of reason alone, and do not form a special worlds, inevitably destroy the society of rational beings. However well the primacy of faith may have been meant to morality, it is inevitable in the sense of diaballein diabolically, disperse in the different creed.



7. A concession to the servant lamp?

The Metaphysics of Morals theologiefreies is a practical book and is different on this point from the Aristotelian Politics and Nicomachean Ethics. If neither legal doctrine nor the doctrine of virtue is dependent upon a reference to God, why Kant draws in other domains, not the consequence of his thinking and is committed to republicanism in the faith of reason: We are the people that we are God.

His personal opinion is difficult to ascertain, the theology was certainly so foreign to him as almost all the intellectuals of the second half of the 18th Century. None of them had known about the name of the reigning pope, and, unlike the days of Locke and Leibniz, the church policy was probably no one except through their intrigues at the courts familiar. One can hardly imagine that Kant believed in an afterlife after death. And yet. In Religion Within the Limits of Reason Alone (1793) stated: "[...] for a religion that proclaims the reason the war safely, it will not stand for long against them." (VI 10,19-20) Kant could have said the reverse: "[ ...] as a morality that proclaims religion to war without hesitation, it will not stand for long against them. "" It is impossible that a man without religion would be happy. "(XIX 649,19-20 - refl. 8106 )

Once the idea of God was too strong in the whole idea of the triad Ego-World-anchored God to be eliminated from the new foundation to be able kritischmoralischen. The rigor of morality then puts people in marginal situations before the problem is that the moral claim is absurd in the absence of belief in God and the hope of immortality; here may be a moral elitist help stoic "Still," but this however can be not everyone expect, for example, not the servant lamp. Perhaps Heine met with his comment is right, maybe we should extend the observation in the sense of Kant also: The rational belief in God and immortality is a desire by everyone, because everyone is a servant lamp. But these are guesses. The writings of Kant, we can see that was from the old God is a God, and for us that the consequence of these ideas towards the annexation of God by man, not a fact that "God is dead" followed.



8. What remains?

"Tantum religio potuit suad malorum," writes in a famous line from Lucretius De Rerum Natura (V. I, 101), quoted a thousand times, even in the Religion Within the Limits of Reason Alone (VI, 131,19-20).

The Enlightenment has intensively discussed the phenomenon of religion, especially the religion of revelation, and has come into its main stream to the idea that the primacy of morality and justice can be secured through reflection and can easily be defended against any attempt to reverse the positive religions, and must .

This means that morality can recruit in the pros and cons only from RELIGION considerations. The unconditioned religion will always oppose against this, although its domestication has largely enforced by morality in central Europe, the ancient center of the Enlightenment, the precedence of reason from faith.

The primacy of morality, paradoxically, means that Kant takes no interest in tolerance problems. John Locke and Voltaire nor write treatises on the need for tolerance of the state towards staatsfähigen religions, in Kant, however, even the use of the word is seen as arrogance. "A prince who does not find it unworthy of his saying that he considered it Duty consider to prescribe in matters of religion the people nothing, but rather to allow them complete freedom, so even the arrogant title of the Tolerance declines of himself is enlightened ourselves [...]. "(VIII 40,28-31)

The citizens of a State shall be transferred by virtue of the moral law people, before they were born as embryos and after her death, as a signatory of a will, and holder of a name that can be injured in his honor as a corpse, as recalled by reason of law. The law defines the relationship between people and state power are constituted, as always, the personal religious beliefs, no matter how ludicrous. To say that certain religious sects were tolerated, even in this view is an insult to the laws governing the freedom of action by law and creates the necessary infrastructure such as public schools with compulsory attendance, a limitation of free speech in connection with personal insults and incitement to violence, etc. The religious community will not be tolerated, but enjoys the natural right to freedom of any personal beliefs, or it is prohibited as unlawful. For the realization of law, it may be wise to encourage unincorporated religions, as it may be wise to encourage indigenous customs.

The Enlightenment concept, if we may call it as such, although immune to the phantoms of a political theology, as they have been enabled by Carl Schmitt. A political consensus is indicated by the right approach only, headed by the ruling power in each realization of the impending legislation, and this global law is the only court of appeal in cases of conflict. Today, the law of reason of the Enlightenment is commonly called in the keyword of Human Rights, taking its title, gather the right ideas outlined here.

But perhaps we can be even without awareness of good cheer, for the mightiest plutocrat this world has finally declared war on the evil and fought it with the latest modern weaponry safely from the air, but also by sea and land, so that from shortly Globe is distributed, and the revived Holy Office, the Office for exorcism, so that even the "devil in us" is competently made the finishing stroke. Stunned, let us see how the religions to put up completely and let the intelligence behind it - quantum religio potest suad malorum. The antidote is the time of probate, the Fan Mile, cheering on the millions and are happy to have - then introduced himself to Beckenbauer's own words, God the world really.

The point for us is not to identify the diabolical doings in the fight against evil, but to discover the principles of action. They lie in the idea of the absoluteness of faith, the faith is inherent unless he takes the Copernican revolution and is subject to the condition of morality and law.



Annex

The publication of Gerhard Schwarz: Est Deus in nobis. The identity of God and pure practical reason in Kant's Critique of Practical Reason ``, Berlin 2004 makes attention to a situation which in the standard interpretation of him as a recent interpretation is not known or not fully and consistently detected would Kant do not expect a vernunftexternen God, but he believed God and the pure practical reason for the same, and identify also God and man qua rational being. The identity thesis refers mainly to the analysis of KpV, the identification theory of dialectics. Thus man is not only autonomous in relation to the moral law, but is also the author of moral action corresponding happiness, but not in the sense of empirical happiness, but a noumenal, freiheitserzeugten happiness.

In subtle analysis of relevant texts tried to show that Kant accurately represent the thesis that in the Opus postumum cited dictum of "Est Deus in nobis' catchword was summarized, and this was not only the position of KpV, but also the Critique of Pure Reason. Now Black can not deny that the texts of Kant, neither the first nor the second hypothesis more clearly formulated and that the sentence of the title in the KpV not occur, he would, of course, this is the thesis that may well occur. "Kant could have said" - but he does not say it, so Black must not only against the standard interpretation, but often struggle even against the explicit text of the author, certainly led to the convictions of both of the reader. His arguments are, however, of considerable strength. That pure practical reason in its legislation by vernunftexternen no God or a divine nature to be outdone, is evident, and so is God when it is brought into play within ourselves, that is noumenal in our authentic self, which is phenomenal compared to the and is described by Kant in multiple paraphrases as sublime, adorable and divine. Here, then, can hardly be objected, except in the manner that God would have to be specified by us, "because it is connected to the concept of God usually more than just the moral law. From the perspective of which we used above, follows the unsurpassable moral law from the inversion of the series of faith, love and hope: In the critical moral philosophy is like the love of Spalding and the morale at the beginning and must be logically independent.

More difficult is the identification of God and immortality with the real self of man. Can the principle of autocracy (p. defend 92)? Can we make man the originator of the world? The morality of our proper happiness is meant purely noumenal and a product of the real self of the people who need it as a divine ruler, therefore none - against Kant's explicit statements in all three reviewers. Black offers a proposal which is the conflict between intention and actual text interface that follows the standard interpretation, to resolve. Kant develops his moral theology from the perspective of homo phoenomenon, make the happiness of God alive and to an external system; what is actually meant, however, was the noumenal plane in which the freedom create their happiness and a sui generis subjektexterner God has no place. Kant's statements, which are based on the standard interpretation, drafted on the basis of the hybrid nature of man. "Thus it is entirely logical that Kant considered due to his efforts, the natural and necessary extent subjective Selbstmißverständnislogik the finite rational being (man) to the legitimacy of the identity and Identifizierbarkeitsthese are not directly brings to the representation." (P. 266) There could be other motives, "not to be led Kant to the identity of God and pure practical reason and the identification of God and nature are reasonably visible. So it is not unlikely that Kant, by an explication of both theories abstain because he wants to avoid criticism from his contemporaries, [...]. "(P. 266) We thus arrive at two not in the hermeneutic horizon of the reader, but in the text even sound readings of visible exoteric and esoteric, which can be detected by experts. But they are already exposed from black interpretations of a theorem of incorporation of God is inscribed in a different theology. So it goes to black itself is not needed is to show one level to the second, to enforce the standard interpretation, but juxtaposition and intermingling, and then to interpret.



Literature:
Brandt, Reinhard (1998): D'Artagnan and the table of judgments. About an ordering principle of European cultural history 1, 2, 3, / 4, Munich, Germany.
Brandt, Reinhard (2003): University between self and the heteronomy. Kant's "Conflict of the Faculties. With an appendix to Heidegger's inaugural address in Berlin.
Grapotte, Sophie (2004): La conception de la réalité kantienne, Hildesheim.
Kant, Immanuel (1900 ff): Collected Works, Academy edition, Berlin.
Kant, Immanuel (2004): Lectures on Moral Philosophy, ed. by Werner Stark, Berlin.
Schwarz, Gerhard (2004): Est Deus in nobis. The identity of God and pure practical reason in Kant's Critique of Practical Reason, Berlin.
Spalding, Johann Joachim (1999): Reflections on the destiny of man, in: The Destiny of Man, ed. by Norbert Hinske (Enlightenment 11, Issue 1), Hamburg, 65-95.
Wimmer, Reiner (1992): The Philosophy of Religion in Opus postumum, In: Friedo Ricken and François Marty (ed.): Kant on Religion, Stuttgart, 195-229.
Winter, Aloys (1992): theology, and literary background of the religious philosophy of Kant, in: Friedo Ricken and François Marty (ed.): Kant on religion, Stuttgart, 17-51.