Strauss stated that "Philosophic interest in theology linked me with Gerhard Kueger; his review of my Spinoza book ["Spinoza's Critique of Religion"] expressed my intention and result more clearly than I myself had done. The final sentence of his [Krueger's] Kant book, which corresponded completely to my view at that time and with which I would still today, with certain reservations, agree, explains why I directed myself wholly to the "true politics", and why I did not write about Hobbes as a Hobbesian." This review therefore, according to Strauss himself, expresses more clearly his own "intention and result". Gerhard Krueger, "Review of Leo Strauss, Die Religionskritik Spinozas als Gruendlage seiner Bibelwissenschaft: Untersuechungen zu Spinozas Theologisch-politischen Traktat," Independent Journal of Philosophy 5/6 (1988): 173-75. The last several paragraphs of Krueger's "Philosophie und Moral in der Kantischen Kritik" (Tuebingen: Verlag J.C.B. Mohr, 1931), attempt to state the basis for a "philosophical, that is, unlimited questioning," in the light of the fact that, since Kant, "the aporias of the Enlightenment have become greater." Krueger argues that "Kant's problem is thoroughly contemporary," in that "the unpenetrated opposition of 'dogmatism' and 'skepticism' has become prominent in thought as in life itself with new sharpness, while the living and unifying tradition, upon which the Enlightenment fed, has disappeared and been replaced by the historicism of knowledge." The concluding sentences of Krueger's book may be translated as follows: "The question will only be in reality unlimited if it inquires into the good in the knowledge of the historical passion. Let the answer to this question-and thus also the Christian answer of Augustine--be left undecided. That the decisive question remains true, even if it finds no answer, can be taught him who questions thus by the example of Socrates."