Vaihinger, Hermann Cohen, and the Problem of the “As If” in Jewish Philosophy
Abstract
Abstract In his Philosophie des Als-Ob, Hans Vaihinger treats religion as a fiction, that is, as a false belief that is nonetheless useful to us. He developed this view initially through his interpretation of Kant’s postulates of practical reason, which assert beliefs that are morally necessary yet theoretically empty. Against those who claimed that he was undermining religious belief, whether on literal or pragmatic grounds, Vaihinger argued that he was defending a new kind of religion that was compatible with his view of science. Hermann Cohen also developed his view on religion through an interpretation of Kant’s postulates. Yet, he comes to a quite different conclusion, in which religious beliefs are not fictions but metaphysically justified moral claims on human agents. This paper argues that, while one reason why Vaihinger might have avoided Cohen’s critique was sociological, the main philosophical reason was rooted in their different readings of Kant’s postulates. While Vaihinger understood the postulates as useful fictions in a naturalist framework, Cohen claimed that they were justified through a Maimonidean negative theology based on a moral conception of God.