This fall Jürgen Habermas offers two courses at the Department of Philosophy, Northwestern University:
His course descriptions:
1. International Foundations of International Law
After a brief historical account of early modern jus gentium , we will examine Kant's idea of a cosmopolitan order; trace the ambivalence of international law in the period of imperialism around 1900; discuss the opposition between the two foremost legal theorists of the German Weimer period, Hans Kelsen and Carl Schmitt; and pursue two complementary trends in the post-World War II period: on one hand, the criticism of the influential "realist school" of international relations, which fit the constellation of the Cold War; and on the other hand, the legal evolution spurred by the United Nations human-rights policy and the spread of an ever denser network of international organizations. This historical background will provide us with a philosophical perspective for analyzing present discussions of the strengths and weaknesses of the "idealistic" project of moving from international to cosmopolitan law.
2. Philosophy of Religion Versus Religious Philosophy
This seminar will compare crypto-religious philosophies with philosophies that insist on a clear distinction between religious faith and self-limiting reason. ln this context, we will discuss relevant works of Kant, Schleiermacher, Jaspers and Heidegger. Kant's philosophy of religion attempts a rational appropriation of religious "truths" from an allegedly postmetaphysical perspective. As a philosopher, Schleiermacher observes similarly strict differentiations; but as a theologian, he is at the same time more sensitive to religious experience. He also locates religion within modern society and relates theology to the system of secular knowledge, thus is the first thinker to reconcile Christian doctrine and the Christian Church with the modern condition. In the post-Nietzschean situation of the 20th century, Karl Jaspers can be understood as a philosophical heir to both Kant and Schleiermacher. Finally, selected works of the later Heidegger (and perhaps of the later Wittgenstein) will enable us to compare two modes of thought: the self- limitation of reason vis-a-vis faith; and the fusion of a self-transcending reason with pseudonyms for religious experience. In contrast to Hegel and his followers, the transcending move that blurs the limits of reason is not carried out in the name of a more comprehensive reason but by an unconspicuous assimilation to religious traditions stripped of reason.