F.H. Jacobi's "On divine things and their revelation." A study and translation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This dissertation presents the first English translation, together with commentary, of F.H. Jacobi´s On Divine Things and their Revelation (1811; henceforth, Divine Things). This work marked for Jacobi the emancipation of rational thinking from the bounds set to it by the Enlightenment in matters of religion. Jacobi’s goal was to develop a new definition of rationality. And this is a goal that he sought to achieve indirectly by drawing from different but consonant sources. The intention of this dissertation is twofold: to examine Jacobi’s efforts at introducing a new form of rationality; to make explicit the limits of this rationality inasmuch as Jacobi succeeded in defining it.In general, my analysis shows that, while Jacobi relies heavily on Kant’s doctrine of postulates to lay out his position, his considered concept of rationality seeks to distance itself from the Kantian transcendental mode of thinking – indeed, to distance itself from the entire tradition of modern philosophy. Nevertheless, since Jacobi still operates within the frameworks of thought typical of the Enlightenment, despite his opposition to it, his thought is ultimately continuous with it.More specifically, I demonstrate that reason for Jacobi is properly defined, not by the act of postulating, but the act of perceiving things which are truly external to the perceiving of them. This perceiving, whether reason- or sense-based, is intuitive. Jacobi recognizes, of course, that the perceiving itself, and even more so the system of conceptual representations based on it, is a subjective product. It is the undue interest in this subjective aspect of cognition that obscures the objective apprehension of reality that reason (as redefined by Jacobi) otherwise houses, and thus gives rise to at times useful, but always illusory, representations of reality. Jacobi’s Divine Things is the manifesto of a new realism. This is a realism, however, that in order to be true to itself requires according to Jacobi the assent to divine things. Where for Kant rational theology can be only the product of subjective postulation, for Jacobi it is rather where realism is rather achieved. In this, while countering Kant, Jacobi still operates within the terms of a problematic as set by him
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".