Moses Mendelssohn

When nature has then unfolded under this rough rind the germ of which she takes the most tender care namely the propensity and the call to thinking freely this gradually reacts on the minds of the people whereby they become by degrees more capable of the liberty of acting and finally even on the principles of the government which finds it profitable for itself to treat man who is now more than a mere machine conformably to his dignity.

Footnote In Bushling's Weekly Intelligencer of the 13th September I read today the 30th instant the notice of the Berlin monthly publication of this month September 1784 wherein Mr. Moses Mendelssohn's answer to this very question is mentioned.

It has not yet reached me else it would have prevented the present which may now remain for the purpose of experimenting how far chance can effectuate a consonancy of sentiments.

End of footnote End of Answer to the Question What is Enlightening by Immanuel Kant 1784

Who had thought that this acknowledgement of the potency of the speculative use of reason would have been so pernicious in matters of theology, which in fact was inevitable? But even the common sound reason, on account of the ambiguity in which he left the exercise of this faculty in contradistinction to speculation, would be in danger of serving as a principle of fanaticism and of the total dethroning of reason.

And yet this happened in the dispute between Mendelssohn and Jacobi, chiefly in the by no means insignificant conclusion of the author of the result, the understanding of the latter as an argumentum ad hominem, which one is entitled to use as a mere defense in order to profit by the adversary's weakness to his disadvantage.

Footnote, Jacobi on the Doctrine of Spinoza in Letters to Moses Mendelssohn, Breslau, 1785, Leipzig, 1786.

End of footnote.

They were restricted to their own quarters of the great cities, exposed to rough treatment if they ventured beyond their limits.

Thus, the philosopher Moses Mendelssohn, grandfather of the musician, and his children were actually pelted with stones one day when walking outside the Jewish quarters.

The Jews, on their side, naturally hated their persecutors.

Shut in upon themselves, they became more and more narrow, intolerant, fanatic.

To such a point was this carried that a Jewish boy was solemnly excommunicated because he had carried a German book for a Christian from one street to another.

But the same Moses Mendelssohn, who had been stoned in the street, rose, like his namesake of old, to help his people.

He roused them to a consciousness of their position and inspired them to fight against it.

The Jews, he said, had been too long content to pray and suffer, not to act.

When nature has then unfolded under this rough rind the germ of which she takes the most tender care, namely the propensity and the call to thinking freely, this gradually reacts on the minds of the people, whereby they become by degrees more capable of the liberty of acting, and finally even on the principles of the government, which finds it profitable for itself to treat man, who is now more than a mere machine, conformably to his dignity.

Footnote In Bushling's Weekly Intelligencer of the 13th September, I read today, the 30th instant, the notice of the Berlin monthly publication of this month, September 1784, wherein Mr. Moses Mendelssohn's answer to this very question is mentioned.

It has not yet reached me, else it would have prevented the present, which may now remain for the purpose of experimenting how far chance can effectuate a consonancy of sentiments.

End of footnote End of Answer to the Question, What is Enlightening? By Immanuel Kant, 1784

Who had thought that this acknowledgement of the potency of the speculative use of reason would have been so pernicious in matters of theology, which in fact was inevitable? But even the common sound reason, on account of the ambiguity in which he left the exercise of this faculty in contradistinction to speculation, would be in danger of serving as a principle of fanaticism and of the total dethroning of reason.

And yet this happened in the dispute between Mendelssohn and Jacobi, chiefly in the by no means insignificant conclusion of the author of the result, the understanding of the latter as an argumentum ad hominem, which one is entitled to use as a mere defense in order to profit by the adversary's weakness to his disadvantage.

Footnote, Jacobi on the doctrine of Spinoza in letters to Moses Mendelssohn, Breslau, 1785, Leipzig, 1786.

End of footnote.

They shared a boyfriend for a while, and then they were friends for the rest of their lives.

And Anne Mendelssohn was a descendant of Moses Mendelssohn, who was the author of the Jewish Enlightenment and really good friends with Kant.

So you have this kind of story which is starts with these two men who are trying to think for themselves and think across boundaries, along with our third character here, which of course is Lessing, who was another great believer in friendship and universalism and all those kind of values that we're trying to redefine and hang on to right now.

And then you have the descendants, which are two women, [chuckles] young women walking the same bridges, having the same conversations about what does it mean to think? What does it mean to think when you come from a minority? What does it mean to think when you're a woman from a minority? What does it mean to think when people are openly hostile to you? Which was Arendt's question.

Shlomo Maimon was a real Apikores.

Grew up in a religious home, went to Germany, became friends with Mendelssohn, wrote a biography, went to the Ram...

And he met the Maggid of Mezritch, and he hated, he hated Hasidim.

He hated.

When nature has then unfolded under this rough rind the germ of which she takes the most tender care, namely the propensity and the call to thinking freely, this gradually reacts on the minds of the people, whereby they become by degrees more capable of the liberty of acting, and finally even on the principles of the government, which finds it profitable for itself to treat man, who is now more than a mere machine, conformably to his dignity.

Footnote In Buschling's Weekly Intelligencer of the 13th September, I read today, the 30th instant, the notice of the Berlin monthly publication of this month, September 1784, wherein Mr. Moses Mendelssohn's answer to this very question is mentioned.

It has not yet reached me, else it would have prevented the present, which may now remain for the purpose of experimenting how far chance can effectuate a consonancy of sentiments.

End of footnote End of Answer to the Question, What is Enlightening? By Immanuel Kant, 1784

Who had thought that this acknowledgment of the potency of the speculative use of reason would have been so pernicious in matters of theology, which in fact was inevitable? But even the common sound reason, on account of the ambiguity in which he left the exercise of this faculty in contradistinction to speculation, would be in danger of serving as a principle of fanaticism and of the total dethroning of reason.

And yet this happened in the dispute between Mendelssohn and Jacobi, chiefly in the by no means insignificant conclusion of the author of the result, the understanding of the latter as an argumentum ad hominem, which one is entitled to use as a mere defense in order to profit by the adversary's weakness to his disadvantage.

Footnote, Jacobi on the Doctrine of Spinoza in Letters to Moses Mendelssohn, Breslau 1785, Leipzig 1786.

End of footnote.

Of the relation which the theory bears to the praxis and the law of nations, contemplated in an universal philanthropic, that is, cosmopolitical, view.

Against Moses Mendelssohn.

Translated by Hastie.

1891. in his Kant's Principles of Politics, including his essay on Perpetual Peace, a Contribution to Political Science, under Hastie's title, The Principle of Progress Considered in Connection with the Relation of Theory to Practice in International Law.

Not that this dislike of human evil would prompt us to inflict evil upon men, but it would at least lead us to have as little to do with them as

possible.

was of this latter opinion, and he has opposed it

and second, the success of a whole variety of Jewish thinkers in re-describing Jewish law as not law, but religion.

In the 18th century, Moses Mendelssohn was the first to do so in explicit terms.

He maintained that Jewish law was in no way tied to the political realm, which he defined in terms of the sovereign state.

Mendelssohn used the word religion in characterizing what he called Judaism's ceremonial law, and stressed that Jewish religion was different from Christian religion because it focused on practice and not dogma.

All the classical mefarshim.

He's also using the Bayer of Mendelssohn as well.

And so that was something that he did.

As you mentioned, he also published the...

That's...

I wanna show you that to show the world that he comes from.

That's not the world of Moses Mendelssohn.

That's a different world.