In response to the Sun08Jun03 post by Andrew Hunter:

> Hello Omar,
>
> One of God's putative capacities we are able to possess:
> Reason. 'He is known by his works ...' etc. We can know
> God, not by deductive or inductive method, but through
> Reason.

Excellent, Andrew. That is a correct response to Omar.

I realize this debate is not only difficult, and requires
knowledge of both Kant and Hegel, but it is also an
emotional one. The doxic reality of individuals as
regards their Theism or their Atheism is challenged
here, and that is a formidable challenge for any thinker,
layman or professional.

So, Andrew, thanks for bringing this thread back on
track.

Omar, Andrew's reply to you is a concentrated reply
from Hegel's System. Reason is not as limited as Kant
say it is. That is the challenge. Hegel does not merely
assert this, but he proves it in plentiful texts. The goal
of this thread is to review those texts. Let the texts
themselves drive the conent of the debate.

Furthermore, on the Hegel List (as opposed to the
Hegel-Intro List) the members are pre-supposed to
have already *read* Kant thoroughly before coming
to a reading of Hegel. The members are pre-supposed
to have already *read* Hegel or are willing to *read*
Hegel within a current thread.

These are the parameters of this thread: (a) the members
are familiar with Kant's three critiques of Reason; (b) the
members are familiar with or are becoming familiar with
Hegel's defense of Reason and his criticism of Kant.
(To those who are not interested in this thread, or who
cannot stand the heat, please refrain from merely posting
insulting remarks. We are fully aware the tension is high.)

> This is a hyper-logical step, hence Hegel's
> re-description of metaphysics as Logic.

Excellent, Andrew. You've hit the nail on the head.
The debate between Kant and Hegel may be focussed
upon the question of Metaphysics. Kant has held
Metaphysics to be strictly limited by Antinomy, and
Hegel has denied this. One key focus of their conflict
is the famous Ontological Problem. Hegel solution is
radically different from Kant's. Our purpose here is
to review Hegel's Ontological Solution.

> If you want to stay at the level of Kantian transcendence,
> abandon intuition. Hegel says that speculative rationality
> begins with the assumption of rationality.

Yes, Andrew, that is also excellent. Hegel's famous quip
to Kantianism is the story of the boy who refused to go
into the water until he knew how to swim!

Kant claims that Reason has specific limits. We all know
that. Hegel denies those limits, and finds Reason to be
infinite, and thus capable of returning to its Source, the
infinite Spirit. Perhaps only a few of us know that.
Hegel rescues Reason from the artificial limits that Kant
imposed upon it. This is a revolutionary attitude. This
is what will emerge from this thread over time.

> Given that, searching for logical fallacy in the way
> that you have (in this and other emails), as if trying
> to undermine the House of Hegel by criticising a few
> bricks, will prevent you from even seeing the structure
> of the house, and therefore from criticising it.
>
> Regards Andrew Hunter.

That is a fair analogy, Andrew. The challenge to Omar
is to understand Hegel's objection to Kant in full before
drawing a conclusion in a debate that exists precisely to
provide an exposition of Hegel's objection to Kant.

The Ontological Argument is a good starting point. I
believe that the reader will learn more in a shorter period
of time about: (a) Hegel's approach to Kant; (b) Hegel's
approach to dialectic method; and (c) Hegel's approach
to religious phenomena, than any other reading.

This is an important thread but a difficult one, so I
thank you, Andrew, for a calm response to Omar that
is based on Hegel's actual writings. This is only the
beginning. There are seven readings from Hegel that
I identified, and a formal review of Hegel's texts by the
several members of this thread will clarify this issue
for many, I predict.

Best regards,
--Paul Trejo, M.A.