interpreting kantian religious judgment for the twenty-first century

This article clears a path for employing the affirmative way of interpreting kant’s general theory of religion as a guidepost for twenty-first century religious practitioners. before attempting such an employment, i correct several misconceptions regarding the affirmative way of interpreting kant’s theory that, if adopted as mainstream, would risk weakening its universal applicability. with this purpose in mind, i consider and respond to a misplaced criticism of my interpretation of kant’s theory of grace, advanced by douglas mcgaughey in 2013. i then assess the current state of a debate that has arisen between several key affirmative interpreters, concerning kant’s reference to the two &experiments& that guide the argument in his religion. i give special attention to lawrence pasternack’s 2017 attempt to &dismantle& this whole line of interpretation as one that &may very well not be worth our time.& after identifying several serious flaws in pasternack’s argument, i conclude by backing a better alternative developed by brandon love. by clearing away two very different sorts of potential roadblocks that could stand in the way of a reader of kant gaining a fair understanding of the affirmative approach to interpreting his theory of religion, these arguments prepare the way for a concluding attempt to catch a glimpse of how kant’s theory of religious judgment (especially his four guidelines for designing the constitution of a church), if adopted widely by practitioners of various historical religions, could benefit the fractured world we find ourselves in, a quarter of the way through the twenty-first century.

interpreting kantian religious judgment for the twenty-first century

this article clears a path for employing the affirmative way of interpreting kant’s general theory of religion as a guidepost for twenty-first century religious practitioners. before attempting such an employment, i correct several misconceptions regarding the affirmative way of interpreting kant’s theory that, if adopted as mainstream, would risk weakening its universal applicability. with this purpose in mind, i consider and respond to a misplaced criticism of my interpretation of kant’s theory of grace, advanced by douglas mcgaughey in 2013. i then assess the current state of a debate that has arisen between several key affirmative interpreters, concerning kant’s reference to the two &experiments& that guide the argument in his religion. i give special attention to lawrence pasternack’s 2017 attempt to &dismantle& this whole line of interpretation as one that &may very well not be worth our time.& after identifying several serious flaws in pasternack’s argument, i conclude by backing a better alternative developed by brandon love. by clearing away two very different sorts of potential roadblocks that could stand in the way of a reader of kant gaining a fair understanding of the affirmative approach to interpreting his theory of religion, these arguments prepare the way for a concluding attempt to catch a glimpse of how kant’s theory of religious judgment (especially his four guidelines for designing the constitution of a church), if adopted widely by practitioners of various historical religions, could benefit the fractured world we find ourselves in, a quarter of the way through the twenty-first century.