Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-p9bg8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T09:44:16.155Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Hamann–Hume Connection

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 October 2008

M. Redmond
M. Redmond
Affiliation:
Rutgers – The State University of New jersey, U.S.A.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

It is well known that the eighteenth century Scottish philosopher and sceptic David Hume was a severe critic of religious belief, but what may not be so familiar, and has been brought to our attention in recent years by Isaiah Berlin, is that some religious believers have found in Hume's sceptical arguments a source of nurture for their religious faith. In particular, Berlin singles out the example of Hume's contemporary, Johann Georg Hamann (17388), a devout but unconventional believer as well as one of the leaders of the German Counter-Enlightenment. Hamann's primary claim to fame, however, rests upon his influence upon the Danish theologian, Soren Kierkegaard. Although Kierkegaard never met Hamann, he was familiar with his writings, and calls Hamann ‘his only teacher.’ Kierkegaard's vast influence on modern Christianity, especially Protestantism, is, of course, a commonplace. What, though, is often overlooked, and Berlin calls our attention to, is that this man who influenced Kierkegaard was himself deeply influenced by Hume. The student of religion, as well as the philosopher, cannot help but be struck by this historical connection between Hume and believers such as Johann Hamann and thus, ultimately, between David Hume and modern Protestantism.

Type
Articles
Information
Religious Studies , Volume 23 , Issue 1 , March 1987 , pp. 95 - 107
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1987

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

page 95 note 1 Berlin, Isaiah, ‘Hume and the Sources of German Anti-Rationalism,’ David Hume: Bicentenary Papers, ed. Morice, G. P. (Austin: University of Texas Press, 1977), pp. 95–116.Google Scholar

page 95 note 2 Smith, Ronald Gregor, J. G. Hamann: A Study in Christian Existence (New York: Harper, 1960), pp. 18–20.Google Scholar

page 95 note 3 In addition to the Berlin article, see Anderson, Albert Bernt, ‘Ignorance and Enlightenment: A Study in the Religious Philosophy of Johann Georg Hamann,’ Ph.D. diss, Harvard University, 1964.Google Scholar

page 96 note 1 Alexander, W. M., Johann Georg Hamann: Philosophy and Faith (The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff, 1966), Pp. 6, 7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

page 97 note 1 Alexander, , pp. 28, 29.Google Scholar

page 97 note 2 Leibrecht, Walter, God and Man in the Thought of Hamann, trans. Stam, James and Bertram, Martin (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1966), p. 13.Google Scholar

page 99 note 1 Hamann, Johann Georg, Briefwechsel, ed. Ziesemer, Walther and Henkel, Arthur, vol. I, p. 356Google Scholar, cited by Leibrecht, , p. 14.Google Scholar

page 99 note 2 Hume, David, An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding, ed. Selby-Bigge, (Oxford: Clarendon Press, [1894]; 2nd ed., 1962), p. 165.Google Scholar

page 100 note 1 Alexander, , p. 152.Google Scholar

page 100 note 2 Hume, David, Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion, ed. Smith, Kemp (New York: Bobbs-Merrill, 1947), pp. 130, 131.Google Scholar Future references to the Dialogueswill be to the Kemp Smith edition and the appropriate page numbers will be placed in the text in square brackets.

page 101 note 1 Letter to Hartknoch, an English merchant, living in Königsberg, as cited by Berlin, p. 107. Also, see Leibrecht, , p. 14.Google Scholar

page 101 note 2 See, for instance, Kemp Smith's comments in his Preface to Hume's Dialogues, p. vi.

page 101 note 3 Berlin, p. 93.

page 101 note 4 See, for instance, Mossner, E. C., ‘Hume and the Legacy of the Dialogues,’ in David Hume: Bicentenary Papers, p. 1;Google Scholar and Price, John, The Ironic Hume (Austin, Texas: University of Texas Press, 1965).Google Scholar

page 102 note 1 Hamann, , Briefwechsel, vol. 1, p. 356Google Scholar, as quoted by Leibrecht, , p. 14.Google Scholar

page 102 note 2 Ibid.

page 102 note 3 Ibid.

page 102 note 4 Redmond, Michael D., ‘Philosophical Scepticism: A Foundation for Religious Belief’ A Textual Study in Hume's Dialogues and the Miracle Essay (Ann Arbor, Michigan: University Microfilms International, 1984).Google Scholar

page 102 note 5 For an excellent discussion of this general point see Ricoeur, Paul, Interpretation Theory: Discourse and the Surplus of Meaning (Fort Worth, Texas: Texas Christian University Press, 1976).Google Scholar

page 103 note 1 Hume, , Enquiry, p. 155.Google Scholar

page 103 note 2 See Hume, David, A Treatise of Human Nature, ed. Selby-Bigge, (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1888;Google Scholar reprint ed. Oxford: University Press, 1973), book 1, part IV and the Enquiry, section XII, part II.

page 105 note 1 Berlin p. 93. Also, see pp. 102, 103.

page 105 note 2 Alexander, , pp. 25 ff.Google Scholar

page 107 note 1 It goes far beyond the scope of this paper to explore much less evaluate these efforts. In regards to the failure of the Wittgensteinian approach, I refer the reader to Gutting's, GaryReligious Belief and Religious Scepticism (Notre Dame: University Press, 1982), especially pp. 12, 13;Google Scholar the details of the positivists' challenge are, of course, well-known.

page 107 note 2 This paper is based upon a chapter of my dissertation. I would like to express my appreciation to the members of my committee, Charles Courtney and John Knox of Drew University for their help, and especially to Pheroze Wadia of Rutgers University who read an earlier draft of this paper.