BARTH AFTER KANT?

Barth consistently comments on Kant's importance for his early thought in his autobiographical sketches, letters, and even more explicitly in his 1930 lectures on Kant in his Protestant Theology in the Nineteenth Century. Interestingly, however, little attention has been paid to these latter lectures on Protestant history in the secondary literature. In part, this oversight has been due to the manner in which Barth's theology has been thought to overcome Kant's influence much earlier on in his intellectual development. Hence, although commentators such as Merold Westphal, Simon Fisher and Bruce McCormack have developed keen interest in Kant's influence upon Barth's early work, even engaging Barth's Neo‐Kantian context in great detail, my contention is that Barth's later interpretation of Kant is crucial to his intellectual development, and gives further insight into Barth's legacy for contemporary theology today. My aim in what follows is to refigure the relationship between Barth's early appropriation and critique of Kant, and the more onto‐theological issues at stake in his later Protestant history lectures. In so doing, we can begin to discern in Barth, not an abandonment or disregard for the metaphysical questions of being, but rather, the call to face them all the more rigorously.     

EFFECTS OF DOMINANCE TENDENCIES ON FLOOR HOLDING AND INTERRUPTION BEHAVIOR IN DYADIC INTERACTION1

Eighteen dyads (10 female and eight male), each composed so as to have one member who scored high and one who scored low on a test of personality dominance, were given a cooperative problem-solving discussion task lasting fifteen minutes. The persons with the more dominant personalities held the floor more and attempted more interruptions in proportion to their partners’ total amounts of speaking time than did those with less dominant personalities. There was also evidence that the high dominant subjects were more successful in completing their interruption attempts, although this result fell somewhat short of statistical significance. Despite the fact that the trend of the results appeared to be consistently stronger among males, there were no significant sex differences. Implications of the findings for the interpersonal communication theory of Watzlawick, Beavin, and Jackson (1967) are discussed.     

RETURNING BARTH TO ANSELM

This article focuses on Barth's explication of Anselm's Proslogion 2-4 in his book on Anselm and attempts to show how Anselm helped clarify for Barth the ontological nature of his own early theology, in particular what he meant by the "is" in his affirmation "God is God." Our contention is that Barth's continual pointing to Anselm's Fides Quaerens Intellectum as a vital key to his own theology should not be overlooked. In fact, we argue that only by returning Barth to Anselm in this way can we begin to understand more thoroughly one of the key contributions of Barth's theology generally and its potential relevance to contemporary onto-theological debates.