This volume presents the theory of culture of the Russian‑born German Jewish social philosopher David Koigen (1879-1933). Heir to Hermann Cohen's neo‑Kantian interpretation of Judaism, he transforms the religion of reason into an ethical Intimitätsreligion. He draws upon a great variety of intellectual currents, among them, Max Scheler's philosophy of values, the historical sociology of Max Weber, the sociology of religion of Émile Durkheim, Ernst Troeltsch and Georg Simmel and American pragmatism. Influenced by his personal experience of marginality in German (...) academia yet the same time unconstrained by the dictates of the German Jewish discourse, Koigen shapes these theoretical strands into an original argument which unfolds along two trajectories: theodicy of culture and ethos. Distinguished from ethics, ethos identifies the non-formal factors that foster a group's sense of collective identity as it adapts to continuous change. From a Jewish perspective, ethos is grounded in the biblical covenant as the paradigm of a social contract and corporate liability. Although the normative content of the covenantal ethos is subject to gradual secularization, its metaphysical and existential assumptions, Koigen argues, continue to inform Jewish self-understanding. The concept of ethos identifies the dialectic of tradition as it shapes Jewish religious consciousness, and, in turn, is shaped by the evolving cultural and axiological sensibilities. In consonance, Jewish identity cannot be reduced to ethnicity or a purely secular culture. Urban develops these fragmentary and inchoate theories into a sociology of religious knowledge and suggests to read Koigen not just as a Jewish sociologist but as the first sociologist of Judaism who proposes to overcome the dogmatic anti-metaphysical stance of European sociology. (shrink)

Whereas some of the critics of Hermann Cohen's strictly rational foundation of religious consciousness promoted a turn to subjectivism, others endorsed an ethicotheology while seeking to revise the "Religion of Reason." Among the latter was the Ukrainian-born social philosopher David Koigen (1877-1933), author of Der moralische Gott. Eine Abhandlung über die Beziehungen zwischen Kultur und Religion/The Moral God: An essay on the relations between culture and religion (Berlin: Jüdischer Verlag, 1922). This article examines Koigen's reevaluation of Jewish monotheism as a (...) culture-forming religion (Kulturreligion) grounded in a religious ethos which integrates the rational will, ethics and emotion. (shrink)

In his early interpretation and representation of the oral teachings of the Hasidic masters, Martin Buber engaged in issues pertinent to the critique of language (Sprachkritik,) of the fin-de-siècle. Associated pre-eminently with Fritz Mauthner and his circle, the critique of language (Sprachkritik) questioned the epistemological status of language, wedded as it is to the divisive Erfahrungswelt. By drawing attention to ecstatic speech, which paradoxically gives expression to the experience (Erlebnis) of the ineffable unity of existence, Buber adumbrates a solution to (...) the cognitive limitations of language. Refracted through Lebensphilosophie, he distinguishes between language as bound to Erfahrung and speech as nurtured by Erlebnis. Whereas language is propelled by conceptual and propositional forms of cognition, speech, principally sustained by metaphors evoked by an experience of the noumenal. Through an examination of his interpretive translation of a well-known Hasidic parable, this article explores how he amplifies this distinction by means of a semantic transformation of the key mystical metaphor of 'ahizat ' enayim (lit. seizing the eyes). Discerning the hermeneutical layers of Buber's rendition of the parable, we argue that his own ambiguous propositional casting of the metaphor entraps him into the very problem he sought to overcome. /// O presente artigo tem como ponto de partida o facto de que na interpretação e representação que dos mestres do Hasidismo fez logo na primeira fase da sua actividade como intelectual, Martin Buber assumiu como próprias questões especialmente pertinentes para uma crítica da linguagem (Sprachkritik) típica da época fin-de-siècle. Associada de modo particular a Fritz Mauthner e ao seu círculo, a Sprachkritik interrogava-se sobretudo acerca do estatuto epistemológico da linguagem, conectada como ela estava com uma Erfahrungswelt que era, desde logo, fonte de divisão. Nesse sentido, a autora do artigo defende que ao chamar a atenção para o discurso ecstático, o qual de modo paradoxal dá expressão à experiência (Erlebnis,) da unidade inefável da existência, Martin Buber pretende fazer vir ao de cima uma solução para o problema das limitações cognitivas da linguagem. Com efeito, mediante recurso à Lebensphilosophie, Buber distingue entre linguagem enquanto ligada à Erfahrung e discurso enquanto que propriamente alimentado pela Erlebnis. Ou seja, Buber reconhece que a linguagem esta animada por formas conceptuais e proposicionais de cognição, ao passo que o discurso aparece sobretudo sustentado por metáforas evocadas por uma experiência do noumenal Em suma, ao focar a sua atenção numa análise da tradução interpretativa que Buber faz de uma bem conhecida parábola Hasídica, o presente artigo explora de que modo o pensador judeu amplifica esta distinção mediante uma transformação semântica da principal metáfora mística do 'ahizaí 'enayim, ou seja, literalmente, da confiscação dos olhos. Tudo isso de modo a discernir os estratos hermenêuticos da interpretação buberiana da parábola, acabando a autora por mostrar de que modo Martin Buber ao dar uma forma propo-sicional ambígua à metáfora acabou por se encerrar no exacto problema que, desde logo, tinha procurado ultrapassar. (shrink)