{"title":"Escaping the Anthropological Circle: Kant and Hegel on Madness and Habit","authors":"L. Michael","doi":"10.5281/ZENODO.5018488","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5281/ZENODO.5018488","url":null,"abstract":"Michel Foucault considers the Kantian critical approach to anthropology to end up in a circle, which is only to be surpassed in a direction which has come to be known as posthuman. But there are other ways in which to approach anthropology, which suggest a way out of the circle, or a different way of understanding it. By comparing and contrasting Kant and Hegel on the notions of madness and habit, we find spread out before us a map that might lead us towards the possible future of philosophy itself.","PeriodicalId":41044,"journal":{"name":"Sguardo-Rivista di Filosofia","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-06-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48440638","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Schelling, Nietzsche and (Ir)Rationalizing Religion","authors":"Dennis Vanden Auweele","doi":"10.5281/ZENODO.4430679","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5281/ZENODO.4430679","url":null,"abstract":"F. W. J. Schelling and Friedrich Nietzsche appear for all intents and purposes in opposite philosophical corners, especially when it concerns religion. Nietzsche makes no positive mention of Schelling’s thought and yet, there are strong resonances of Schelling in Nietzsche. In this paper, I will show how the later Schelling’s criticism of the way his contemporaries approach religion is echoed in Nietzsche’s philosophical assessment of religion. This concerns two issues: rationalizing and irrationalizing religion. Schelling and Nietzsche aim both to avoid two extremes, one where religion is the counterfeit double of philosophy and the other wherein religion is the absolute other of philosophy. One could say that they are looking for a non-Hegelian dialectical interaction of philosophy and religion. For Schelling, the first issue is that a rational religion takes away all that is interesting in religion from religion. Schelling’s purpose is to provide a philosophical foundation to take religion and revelation seriously in themselves, not as something that could be explained by reason. At the same time, Schelling advocates against those philosophical approaches of religion that make religion absolutely in excess of reason (fideism, irrationalism). This general strategy is mirrored in Nietzsche. For him, the first of these issues comes up in terms of the demythologization of religion, which evacuates from religion its more tantalizing elements through a historical approach to religion. The second issue regards a religion that refuses to interact dialectically with philosophy, which is discussed under the heading of the sovereignty of religion.","PeriodicalId":41044,"journal":{"name":"Sguardo-Rivista di Filosofia","volume":"111 1","pages":"285-304"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"71080159","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}