Recensie op NDPR van Beth Lord's 'Kant and Spinozism'

In twee blogs van eind 2010 had ik aandacht voor het boek van Beth Lord, Kant and Spinozism: Transcendental Idealism and Immanence from Jacobi to Deleuze [Palgrave Macmillan, 2011, 214pp.]

Op 29-12-2010: Nieuw licht op Kant en Spinoza

Op 31-12-2010: Kwam Kant met z’n Opus Posthumum dichter bij Spinoza’s Opera Posthuma?

Deze week, zo ontving ik als tip, verscheen een review van Paul Davies van de University of Sussex op Notre Dame Philosophical Reviews. Davies geeft een informatieve beschouwing. Daaruit: 

“[…] German idealism after Kant often finds itself re-engaging with Spinozism. Beth Lord's short but ambitious comparative study offers a reading of these re-engagements. It takes us from Jacobi's "provocative suggestion" that Kant and Spinoza be reconciled through Herder's and Maimon's diagnoses, respectively, of Spinoza's naturalism and idealism, and brings us finally to Kant's ether, and to the posthumous outline of a partnership: Kant with Spinoza contra the world of (German) idealism. This movement does not seek finally to align Kant with Spinozism, as though the two thinkers say the same thing, but rather to understand the changes in the means by which Kant continues to distinguish himself from Spinoza. In contrast to the tradition (ultimately of course a Hegelian tradition) in which Kant, Spinoza and their idealisms are contextualised and absolutized, and in which thought and being are reconciled in an absolute identification, Lord invites us to see Spinoza and Kant, the latter no doubt despite himself, as insisting on the non-negotiable realism of thought's impact on being and being's impact on thought, and the realism here is threefold: real thought, real being, real interruptive impact. It is an intriguing and suggestive narrative, and Lord tells it well. Kant's critical project, generally understood as a protective and legitimizing one, is interrupted at crucial moments and on crucial topics where transcendental reason must yield a positive result or description.”

Hij eindigt zijn recensie met: “This is a well written book, of help and interest to anyone concerned with Deleuze, German Idealism, Spinoza, and Kant. It handles its extensive primary literature admirably, and attempts to weave together at least two arguments, one historical, the other philosophical. Sometimes each of these arguments is called on to complete or to underwrite the other in a manner that perhaps begs the question, and more should certainly have been said to clarify the role Deleuze is playing in each. But what we have is never less than thought-provoking and I have no doubt that Lord has much more to say on these matters. I look forward to hearing what it is.” [Op NDPR]