Page History

...

It is right on, first of all, in distinguishing clearly and sharply between (in my terms) the broadly physical and the broadly moral-and, correspondingly, between two principal uses of reason: theoretical (or, as Kant himself also sometimes says, and as I would prefer to say, speculative) and practical.

Wiki MarkupIt is right on, secondly, in inverting   "the familiar scheme of Protestant orthodoxyof Protestant orthodoxy," with the result that "\[special\] revelation does not, after all,  clarify our confused natural knowledge of  clarify our confused natural knowledge of God," but, "quite the contrary, our innate knowledge of God enables us to judge of every pretended revelation and to sort out truth and error even in Christianity itself"  (Gerrish).  Perhaps another way of saying this is that Kant is right on in consistently upholding the distinction between constitution and representation (or manifestation) as precisely the distinction between end and means. our innate knowledge of God enables us to judge of every pretended revelation and to sort out truth and error even in Christianity itself"  (Gerrish).  Perhaps another way of saying this is that Kant is right on in consistently upholding the distinction between constitution and representation (or manifestation) as precisely the distinction between end and means. 

14 June 2000