Scripture and Philosophy

Kant admits that his philosophical interpretation of the fall is not “intended for Scriptural exegesis, which lies outside the boundaries of the competence of mere reason.” Putting the “historical account” to “moral use” leaves the issue of the writer’s intention, the text’s meaning, historicity to the side.

But perhaps the moral and philosophical use of the narrative is precisely in its historicity – the fact that the fall occurred in time, and was a fall from an original innocence.

How can Kant know otherwise? Only because his interpretation according to “mere reason” and for “moral use” excludes time and history from the outset. He already knows – somehow – that “historical cognition . . . has no intrinsic relation” to moral progress.

Next
YOU MIGHT ALSO LIKE

Deliver Us from Evil

Kari Jenson Gold

In a recent New York Times article entitled “Freedom With a Side of Guilt: How Food Delivery…

Natural Law Needs Revelation

Peter J. Leithart

Natural law theory teaches that God embedded a teleological moral order in the world, such that things…

Letters

Glenn C. Loury makes several points with which I can’t possibly disagree (“Tucker and the Right,” January…