This is just a pointer to future posts in the pipeline.
1. I’m still working on Brandom and am confronting the necessity of reading Making It Explicit from cover to cover rather than perpetually skipping around. Consequently, expect a post on some of the methodological presuppositions and explanatory structure of Brandom’s project, and a second on the reading of the Enlightenment and the disenchantment of the world outlined in the first chapter. Hopefully both of those will be up in the next week.
2. Other than Brandom, I’m still reading Bernstein’s book on Adorno, which is sustaining my initial enthusiasm on the strength of the engaging strategy it pursues in diagnosing and attempting to overcome problems in modern ethical life, but I am finding many of the details less than convincing. I might leave this one to percolate before writing on it though.
3. I’ve been thinking about the notion of form in relation to German idealism, being drawn back to the question of the Kant-Hegel relation once more. So after finishing up on Brandom, I want to write something about the role of form in Hegel’s critique of Kant, focusing on the claim that Kant is a subjective idealist rather than the claim that he ends up with an empty formalism. In doing so, I’ll comment on some of the neo-Kantian attempts to rescue Kant from this charge, saying something about why I don’t think they work. That post will be a prolegomena to another that tries to say something about the relation of the Phenomenology to the Logic, commenting in a very general way about some of Hegel’s philosophical ambitions. Hopefully, that might be of some interest to those following the posts on the Logic over at Roughtheory and Perverse Egalitarianism.
Now the tricky bit, doing it all.