Immanuel Kant: Difference between revisions
Historian7 (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
style edits |
||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{Short description|German philosopher (1724–1804)}} |
|||
{{redirect|Kant|other uses|Kant (disambiguation)}} |
|||
{{Redirect|Kant|other uses|Kant (disambiguation)}} |
|||
{{pp|small=yes}} |
|||
{{Use dmy dates|date= |
{{Use dmy dates|date=November 2024}} |
||
{{Infobox philosopher |
{{Infobox philosopher |
||
<!--PLEASE EDIT ONLY IF FAMILIAR WITH THE POLICIES OUTLINED AT [[MOS:INFOBOX]]. |
|||
| name = Immanuel Kant |
|||
| image = Kant gemaelde 3.jpg |
|||
In particular: |
|||
| birth_date = {{birth date|1724|4|22|df=yes}} |
|||
* "The less information it contains, the more effectively it serves that purpose, allowing readers to identify key facts at a glance. Of necessity, some infoboxes contain more than just a few fields; however, wherever possible, present information in short form, and exclude any unnecessary content." |
|||
| birth_place = [[Königsberg]], [[Kingdom of Prussia|Prussia]] |
|||
* Everything in the Infobox must be supported by the article itself. Anything that requires a citation does not belong. |
|||
| death_date = {{nowrap|{{death date and age|df=yes|1804|02|12|1724|04|22}}}} |
|||
* With respect to lists or catalogs, longer is not better. If it is not possible to be comprehensive, a list will invariably become arbitrary. Unless it is clear from the article itself what does and does not belong, that category probably should not be in the Infobox at all. |
|||
| death_place = [[Königsberg]], [[Prussia]] |
|||
* Those interested in creating and tending longer lists might consider [[Wikipedia:Stand-alone lists]], to which the article could then link with a "See also" wherever most appropriate. |
|||
| education = [[Collegium Fridericianum]]<br>[[University of Königsberg]]<br><small>([[Bachelor of Arts|BA]]; [[Master of Arts|MA]], 1755; [[PhD]], 1755; PhD,<ref name="RGT"/> 1770)</small> |
|||
Thank you for helping to minimize bloat and keep everything reader-friendly! |
|||
--> |
|||
| name = Immanuel Kant |
|||
| image = Immanuel Kant - Gemaelde 1.jpg |
|||
| caption = Portrait of Kant, 1768 |
|||
| birth_date = {{birth date|1724|4|22|df=yes}} |
|||
| birth_place = [[Königsberg]], [[Kingdom of Prussia]] |
|||
| death_date = {{nowrap|{{death date and age|df=yes|1804|2|12|1724|4|22}}}} |
|||
| death_place = Königsberg, [[East Prussia]], Kingdom of Prussia |
|||
| education = {{Plain list| |
|||
* [[University of Königsberg]] ([[Bachelor of Arts|BA]]; [[Master of Arts|MA]], 1755; [[PhD]], 1755; [[PhD]], 1770) |
|||
}} |
|||
| institutions = University of Königsberg |
| institutions = University of Königsberg |
||
| thesis1_title = New Elucidation of the First Principles of Metaphysical Cognition |
|||
| residence = Königsberg, Prussia |
|||
| thesis1_url = https://korpora.zim.uni-duisburg-essen.de/kant/aa01/385.html |
|||
| nationality = Prussian<!--In "Infobox philosopher", nationality is used instead of citizenship; Prussia had never been part of the Holy Roman Empire of the German Nation.--> |
|||
| thesis1_year = September 1755 |
|||
| thesis2_title = On the Form and Principles of the Sensible and Intelligible Worlds |
|||
| thesis2_url = https://books.google.com/books?id=dNRKAQAAMAAJ&pg=PA123&redir_esc=y |
|||
| thesis2_year = August 1770 |
|||
| region = [[Western philosophy]] |
| region = [[Western philosophy]] |
||
| era |
| era = [[Age of Enlightenment]] |
||
| main_interests |
| main_interests = [[Aesthetics]], [[epistemology]], [[ethics]], [[metaphysics]], [[systematic philosophy]] |
||
| school_tradition = {{Plainlist| |
|||
| school_tradition = {{ublist|class=nowrap |[[Kantianism]] |[[Age of Enlightenment|Enlightenment philosophy]] |[[German idealism]]<ref>[[Frederick C. Beiser]], ''German Idealism: The Struggle Against Subjectivism, 1781-1801'', Harvard University Press, 2002, part I.</ref> |[[Kantian ethics]] |[[Classical liberalism]]}} |
|||
* [[Enlightenment philosophy]] |
|||
| notable_ideas = {{plainlist}} |
|||
* [[Kantianism]] |
|||
*[[Abstract and concrete|Abstract–concrete distinction]]<ref>''[[Critique of Pure Reason|KrV]]'' A51/B75–6. See also: Edward Willatt, ''Kant, Deleuze and Architectonics'', Continuum, 2010 p. 17: "Kant argues that cognition can only come about as a result of the union of the abstract work of the understanding and the concrete input of sensation."</ref> |
|||
| style = padding-bottom: 4px; |
|||
*[[Analytic–synthetic distinction]] |
|||
*[[Categorical imperative|Categorical]] and [[hypothetical imperative]] |
|||
*[[Category (Kant)|Categories]] |
|||
*[[Critical philosophy]] |
|||
*[[Kant's antinomies]] |
|||
*[[Kingdom of Ends]] |
|||
*Mathematical and dynamical [[Sublime (philosophy)|sublimity]]<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.iep.utm.edu/kantaest/|title=Immanuel Kant: Aesthetics – Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy|website=www.iep.utm.edu}}</ref> |
|||
*[[Nebular hypothesis]] |
|||
*[[Noogony]] and [[noology]] |
|||
*[[Noumenon]]/[[thing-in-itself]] |
|||
*[[Ontotheology]] |
|||
*Primacy of [[practical reason|the practical]]<ref>''[[Critique of Practical Reason|KpV]]'' 101–2 (=''Ak'' V, 121–2). See also: Paul Saurette, ''The Kantian Imperative: Humiliation, Common Sense, Politics'', University of Toronto Press, 2005, p. 255 n. 32.</ref> |
|||
*[[Public reason#Immanuel Kant|Public reason]] |
|||
*''[[Rechtsstaat#Immanuel Kant|Rechtsstaat]]'' |
|||
*''[[Sapere aude]]'' |
|||
*[[Schema (Kant)|Transcendental schema]] |
|||
*[[Transcendental idealism]] |
|||
*[[Understanding (Kant)|Understanding–reason distinction]] |
|||
{{endplainlist}} |
|||
| influences = {{hlist |[[Christian Wolff (philosopher)|Wolff]] |[[Alexander Baumgarten|Baumgarten]] |[[Plato]] |[[Aristotle]] |[[Sextus Empiricus|Empiricus]] |[[David Hume|Hume]] |[[Adam Smith|Smith]] |[[René Descartes|Descartes]] |[[Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz|Leibniz]] |[[John Locke|Locke]]| [[Jean-Jacques Rousseau|Rousseau]] |[[Isaac Newton|Newton]] |[[Johannes Nikolaus Tetens|Tetens]]<ref>Kuehn 2001, p. 251.</ref> |[[Emanuel Swedenborg|Swedenborg]] |[[Euclid]]}} |
|||
| influenced = Virtually all subsequent [[Western philosophy]] |
|||
| signature = Immanuel Kant signature.svg |
|||
| academic_advisors = [[Martin Knutzen]], [[Johann Gottfried Teske]], [[:s:de:ADB:Marquardt, Konrad Gottlieb|Konrad Gottlieb Marquardt]]<ref>[http://users.manchester.edu/FacStaff/SSNaragon/Kant/bio/biokon2.htm Biographies: Königsberg Professors – Manchester University]: "His lectures on logic and metaphysics were quite popular, and he still taught theology, philosophy, and mathematics when Kant studied at the university. The only textbook found in Kant's library that stems from his student years was Marquardt's book on astronomy."</ref> |
|||
| notable_students = [[Jakob Sigismund Beck]], [[Johann Gottlieb Fichte]] |
|||
}} |
}} |
||
{{Collapsible list|title={{nobold|''Other schools''}} |
|||
| [[Classical liberalism]] |
|||
| [[Empirical realism]] |
|||
| [[German idealism]] |
|||
| [[Liberal naturalism]] |
|||
| [[Transcendental idealism]] |
|||
}} |
|||
| notable_ideas = {{collapsible list|title={{nothing}} |
|||
| [[Aesthetic judgment|Aesthetic]]–[[teleological judgment]]s |
|||
| [[Analytic–synthetic distinction]] |
|||
| [[Categorical imperative|Categorical]] and [[hypothetical imperative]] |
|||
| [[Category (Kant)|Categories]] |
|||
| [[Critical philosophy]] |
|||
| [[Copernican Revolution#Immanuel Kant|Copernican revolution]] in philosophy |
|||
| [[Aesthetic distance|Disinterested delight]] |
|||
| [[Empirical realism]] |
|||
| [[Kant's antinomies]] |
|||
| [[Kantian ethics]] |
|||
| [[Kingdom of Ends]] |
|||
| [[Nebular hypothesis]] |
|||
| [[Schema (Kant)|Transcendental schema]] |
|||
| [[Theoretical philosophy|Theoretical]] vs. [[practical philosophy]] |
|||
| [[Transcendental idealism]] |
|||
| [[Transcendental subject]] |
|||
| [[Understanding (Kant)|Understanding–reason distinction]] |
|||
}} |
|||
| signature = Immanuel Kant signature.svg |
|||
| signature_alt = Signature written in ink in a flowing script |
|||
| academic_advisors = [[Martin Knutzen]], [[Johann Gottfried Teske]] (M.A. advisor), [[:s:de:ADB:Marquardt, Konrad Gottlieb|Konrad Gottlieb Marquardt]] |
|||
| notable_students = [[Jakob Sigismund Beck]], [[Johann Gottfried Herder]], [[Karl Leonhard Reinhold]] (epistolary correspondent) |
|||
|birth_name=Emanuel Kant}} |
|||
{{Immanuel Kant}} |
{{Immanuel Kant}} |
||
'''Immanuel Kant''' ({{IPAc-en|k|æ|n|t}};<ref>[http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/kant "Kant"]. ''[[Random House Webster's Unabridged Dictionary]]''.</ref> {{IPA-de|ɪˈmaːnu̯eːl kant|lang}}; 22 April 1724 – 12 February 1804) was a German [[List of German-language philosophers|philosopher]] who is a central figure in [[modern philosophy]].<ref>{{cite web|title=Immanuel Kant|url=http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/kant/|publisher=Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy|accessdate=6 October 2015|date=20 May 2010}}</ref> Kant argued that the human mind creates the structure of human experience, that [[reason]] is the source of [[morality]], that [[aesthetics]] arises from a faculty of disinterested [[judgment]], that [[space]] and [[time]] are forms of human sensibility, and that the world as it is [[thing-in-itself|"in-itself"]] is independent of humanity's concepts of it. Kant took himself to have effected a "[[Copernican Revolution#Immanuel Kant|Copernican revolution]]" in [[philosophy]], akin to [[Copernicus]]' reversal of the [[geocentric model|age-old belief]] that the sun revolves around the earth. Kant's beliefs continue to have a major influence on contemporary philosophy, especially the fields of [[metaphysics]], [[epistemology]], [[ethics]], [[political theory]], and [[aesthetics]]. |
|||
'''<span lang="sje" dir="ltr">Immanuel</span> Kant'''{{efn|{{IPAc-en|UK|k|æ|n|t}},<ref>[https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/kant "Kant"] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190927133528/https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/kant |date=27 September 2019 }}. ''[[Collins English Dictionary]]''.</ref><ref>[http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/kant "Kant"] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20141023143832/http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/kant |date=23 October 2014 }}. ''[[Random House Webster's Unabridged Dictionary]]''.</ref> {{IPAc-en|US|k|ɑː|n|t}},<ref>{{cite LPD|3}}</ref><ref>{{cite EPD|18}}</ref> {{IPA|de|ɪˈmaːnu̯eːl kant|lang}};<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.duden.de/rechtschreibung/Immanuel_maennlicher_Vorname|title=Immanuel|work=[[Duden]]|access-date=20 October 2018|language=de|archive-date=20 December 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201220055817/https://www.duden.de/rechtschreibung/Immanuel_maennlicher_Vorname|url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.duden.de/rechtschreibung/Kant|title=Kant|work=Duden|access-date=20 October 2018|language=de|archive-date=20 October 2018|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20181020182053/https://www.duden.de/rechtschreibung/Kant|url-status=live}}</ref>}} (born '''Emanuel Kant'''; 22 April 1724 – 12 February 1804) was a German<!--"German" is the consensus after intensive talking--> [[Philosophy|philosopher]] and one of the central [[Age of Enlightenment|Enlightenment]] thinkers. Born in [[Königsberg]], Kant's comprehensive and systematic works in [[epistemology]], [[metaphysics]], [[ethics]], and [[aesthetics]] have made him one of the most influential and controversial figures in modern [[Western philosophy]]. He has been called the "father of modern ethics",<ref>{{cite journal |last=Jemberie |first=Abraham Tsehay |date=2017 |title=A Critical Analysis of Immanuel Kant's Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals |url=https://philarchive.org/rec/JEMACA-2 |journal=International Journal of Research and Review |volume=4 |issue=3 |pages=54–75}}</ref> the "father of modern aesthetics",<ref>{{cite web |last=Grenfell |first=Michael |date=2017 |title=Bourdieu, Kant and Art – Michael Grenfell |url=http://www.michaelgrenfell.co.uk/bourdieu/bourdieu-kant-and-art/ |access-date=22 April 2024 |website=Michael Grenfell}}</ref> and for bringing together rationalism and empiricism, the "father of [[modern philosophy]]".<ref>{{cite web |last1=Bird |first1=Otto Allen |last2=Duignan |first2=Brian |date=20 July 1998 |title=Immanuel Kant |url=https://www.britannica.com/biography/Immanuel-Kant |access-date=23 April 2024 |website=Encyclopedia Britannica Online }}</ref><ref>{{cite book | url=https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/abs/modern-german-thought-from-kant-to-habermas/immanuel-kant-17241804/148CBBC8FBD283D8E3F199CDDE11CE78 | isbn=9781571137708 | title=Modern German Thought from Kant to Habermas: An Annotated German-Language Reader | chapter=Immanuel Kant (1724–1804) | series=Studies in German Literature Linguistics and Culture | date=16 August 2023 | pages=21–56 | publisher=Boydell & Brewer }}</ref> |
|||
Politically, Kant is one of the earliest exponents of the idea that [[perpetual peace]] could be secured through universal [[democracy]] and [[international cooperation]]. He believed that this will be the eventual outcome of [[universal history]], although it is not rationally planned.<ref>[[Idea for a Universal History with a Cosmopolitan Purpose]].</ref> The exact nature of Kant's religious ideas continues to be the subject of especially heated philosophical dispute, as viewpoints are ranging from the idea that Kant was an early and radical exponent of [[atheism]] who finally exploded the [[ontological argument]] for God's existence, to more critical treatments epitomized by [[Friedrich Nietzsche|Nietzsche]] who claimed that Kant had "theologian blood"<ref>Friedrich Nietzsche, [[The Antichrist (book)|''The Anti-Christ'']] (1895), [https://books.google.com/books?id=DcVl57jzP2gC&pg=PA9&lpg=PA9&dq=%22theologian+blood%22+the+antichrist&source=bl&ots=CzqxPveANg&sig=A-X36l8mmYUUI3wT56qpkBnVwpc&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0CCwQ6AEwA2oVChMIm-iS_d_UxwIVA3Y-Ch2mGgvo#v=onepage&q=%22theologian%20blood%22%20the%20antichrist&f=false para. 10].</ref> and that Kant was merely a sophisticated [[apologist]] for traditional [[Christian]] religious belief, writing that "Kant wanted to prove, in a way that would dumbfound the common man, that the common man was right: that was the secret joke of this soul."<ref>Friedrich Nietzsche (trans. [[Walter Arnold Kaufmann]]), ''The Portable Nietzsche'', 1976, p. 96.</ref> |
|||
In his doctrine of [[transcendental idealism]], Kant argued that [[space]] and [[time]] are mere "forms of intuition" that structure all [[experience]], and that the objects of experience are mere "appearances". The nature of things as they are in themselves is unknowable to us. Nonetheless, in an attempt to counter the philosophical doctrine of [[Philosophical skepticism|skepticism]], he wrote the ''[[Critique of Pure Reason]]'' (1781/1787), his best-known work. Kant drew a parallel to the [[Copernican Revolution#Immanuel Kant|Copernican Revolution]] in his proposal to think of the objects of experience as conforming to our spatial and temporal forms of [[Anschauung|intuition]] and the [[Category (Kant)|categories]] of our understanding, so that we have ''a priori'' cognition of those objects. These claims have proved especially influential in the social sciences, particularly sociology and anthropology, which regard human activities as pre-oriented by cultural norms.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Khan |first1=Naveeda |date=25 March 2021 |title=Kant and Anthropology |url=https://d1wqtxts1xzle7.cloudfront.net/66103774/KhanKantandAnthropology-libre.pdf |journal=Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Anthropology |volume= |issue= |pages= |doi=10.1093/acrefore/9780190854584.013.311 |isbn=978-0-19-085458-4 |url-access=subscription |access-date=9 November 2023}}</ref> |
|||
In one of Kant's major works, the ''[[Critique of Pure Reason]]'' (''Kritik der reinen Vernunft'', 1781),<ref>{{cite book |last1=Kant |first1=Immanuel |last2=Kitcher |first2=Patricia (intro.) |last3=Pluhar |first3=W. (trans.) |title=Critique of Pure Reason |publisher=Hackett |year=1996 |location=Indianapolis |page=xxviii |isbn= |nopp=true}}</ref> he attempted to explain the relationship between reason and human experience and to move beyond the failures of traditional philosophy and metaphysics. Kant wanted to put an end to an era of futile and speculative theories of human experience, while resisting the [[Philosophical skepticism|skepticism]] of thinkers such as [[David Hume]]. Kant regarded himself as ending and showing the way beyond the impasse which modern philosophy had led to between [[rationalists]] and [[empiricists]],<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Vanzo|first1=Alberto|title=Kant on Empiricism and Rationalism|journal=History of Philosophy Quarterly|volume=30|issue=1|pages=53–74|url=http://wrap.warwick.ac.uk/id/eprint/59913}}</ref> and is widely held to have synthesized these two early modern traditions in his thought.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/kant/quote|title=He synthesized early modern rationalism and empiricism|publisher=}}{{dead link|date=March 2018 |bot=InternetArchiveBot |fix-attempted=yes }}</ref> |
|||
Kant believed that [[reason]] is the source of [[morality]], and that aesthetics arises from a faculty of disinterested judgment. Kant's religious views were deeply connected to his moral theory. Their exact nature remains in dispute. He hoped that perpetual peace could be secured through an international federation of [[Republicanism|republican]] states and [[Multilateralism|international cooperation]]. His [[Cosmopolitanism|cosmopolitan]] reputation is called into question by his promulgation of [[scientific racism]] for much of his career, although he altered his views on the subject in the last decade of his life. |
|||
Kant argued that our experiences are structured by necessary features of our minds. In his view, the mind shapes and structures experience so that, on an abstract level, all human experience shares certain essential structural features. Among other things, Kant believed that the concepts of ''space'' and ''time'' are integral to all human experience, as are our concepts of ''cause'' and ''effect''.<ref name= Warburton> |
|||
{{cite book |title=A little history of philosophy |author=Nigel Warburton |publisher=Yale University Press |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=X2uIzqoT-ncC&pg=PA110 |pages=111 ''ff'' |chapter=Chapter 19: Rose-tinted reality: Immanuel Kant |isbn=0300152086 |year=2011}}</ref> One important consequence of this view is that our experience of things is always of the ''phenomenal'' world as conveyed by our senses: we do not have direct access to things in themselves, the so-called ''noumenal'' world. Kant published other important works on ethics, religion, law, aesthetics, astronomy, and history. These included the ''[[Critique of Practical Reason]]'' (''Kritik der praktischen Vernunft'', 1788), the ''[[Metaphysics of Morals]]'' (''Die Metaphysik der Sitten'', 1797), which dealt with [[ethics]], and the ''[[Critique of Judgment]]'' (''Kritik der Urteilskraft'', 1790), which looks at [[aesthetics]] and [[teleology]]. |
|||
==Biography== |
==Biography== |
||
Immanuel Kant was born on 22 April 1724 into a [[Prussia]]n German family of [[Lutheranism|Lutheran]] faith in [[Königsberg]], East Prussia. His mother, Anna Regina Reuter (1697–1737), was born in Königsberg to a father from [[Nuremberg]].<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.koenigsberg-is-dead.de/I_Cosmopolis.html |title=Cosmopolis |publisher=Koenigsberg-is-dead.de |date=23 April 2001 |access-date=24 July 2009 |archive-date=22 March 2009 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090322094741/http://www.koenigsberg-is-dead.de/I_Cosmopolis.html |url-status=live}}</ref> Her surname is sometimes erroneously given as Porter. Kant's father, Johann Georg Kant (1682–1746), was a German harness-maker from [[Klaipėda|Memel]],{{sfn|Kuehn|2001|p=26}} at the time Prussia's most northeastern city (now [[Klaipėda]], [[Lithuania]]). It is possible that the Kants got their name from the village of Kantvainiai (German: ''Kantwaggen'' – today part of [[Priekulė, Lithuania|Priekulė]]) and were of [[Kursenieki]] origin.<ref>R.K. Murray, "The Origin of Immanuel Kant's Family Name", ''Kantian Review'' '''13'''(1), March 2008, pp. 190–193.</ref><ref>Rosa Kohlheim, Volker Kohlheim, ''Duden – Familiennamen: Herkunft und Bedeutung von 20.000 Nachnamen'', Bibliographisches Institut & F.A. Brockhaus AG, Mannheim 2005, p. 365.</ref> |
|||
Immanuel Kant was born on April 22, 1724 in [[Königsberg]], Prussia (since 1946 the city of [[Kaliningrad]], [[Kaliningrad Oblast]], [[Russia]]). His mother, Anna Regina Reuter<ref> |
|||
{{cite web| url=http://www.koenigsberg-is-dead.de/I_Cosmopolis.html| title=Cosmopolis| publisher=Koenigsberg-is-dead.de| date=23 April 2001| accessdate=24 July 2009}}</ref> (1697–1737), was also born in Königsberg to a father from [[Nuremberg]]. (Her name is sometimes erroneously given as Anna Regina Porter.) His father, Johann Georg Kant (1682–1746), was a German harness maker from [[Klaipėda|Memel]], at the time Prussia's most northeastern city (now [[Klaipėda]], [[Lithuania]]). Immanuel Kant believed that his paternal grandfather Hans Kant was of Scottish origin.<ref>Mortensen, Hans and Gertrud, ''Kants väterliche Ahnen und ihre Umwelt, Rede von 1952 in Jahrbuch der Albertus-Universität zu Königsberg'', Pr., Holzner-Verlag, Kitzingen, Main 1953, Vol. 3, p. 26.</ref> While scholars of Kant's life long accepted the claim, there is no evidence that Kant's paternal line was Scottish; it is more likely that the Kants got their name from the village of Kantwaggen (today part of [[Priekulė, Lithuania|Priekulė]]) and were of [[Curonians|Curonian]] origin.<ref>R. K. Murray, "The Origin of Immanuel Kant's Family Name", ''Kantian Review'' '''13'''(1), March 2008, pp. 190-193.</ref><ref>Rosa Kohlheim, Volker Kohlheim, ''Duden – Familiennamen: Herkunft und Bedeutung von 20.000 Nachnamen'', Bibliographisches Institut & F. A. Brockhaus AG, Mannheim 2005, p. 365.</ref> Kant was the fourth of nine children (four of them reached adulthood).<ref>[http://www.freunde-kants.com/attachments/article/137/Bohnenrede%202015%20(de).pdf freunde-kants.com] {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150925124214/http://www.freunde-kants.com/attachments/article/137/Bohnenrede%202015%20%28de%29.pdf |date=25 September 2015 }}</ref> Baptized 'Emanuel', he changed his name to 'Immanuel'<ref>Kuehn 2001, p. 26.</ref> after learning [[Hebrew]]. |
|||
Young Kant was a solid, albeit unspectacular, student{{Citation needed |date=July 2017}}. Kant was born into a [[Prussian]] [[Germans|German]] family of [[Lutheran]] [[Protestant]] faith in East Prussia. He was brought up in a [[Pietism|Pietist]] household that stressed religious devotion, humility, and a literal interpretation of the [[Bible]]{{Citation needed |date=June 2017}}. His education was strict, punitive and disciplinary, and focused on [[Latin]] and religious instruction over mathematics and science.<ref>Kuehn 2001, p. 47.</ref> Kant maintained a belief in [[Christianity]],<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.iep.utm.edu/kant-rel/|title=Immanuel Kant: Philosophy of Religion – Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy|website=www.iep.utm.edu}}</ref> in his work ''[[Groundwork of the Metaphysic of Morals]]'' he reveals a belief in human immortality as the necessary condition of our continued approach to the highest good possible.<ref>Metaphysics, p. 131</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.equip.org/article/immanuel-kant/|title=Immanuel Kant - Christian Research Institute|publisher=}}</ref> However, as Kant was skeptical about some of the arguments used prior to him in defence of [[Theism]] and maintained that human understanding is limited and can never attain knowledge about God or the [[soul]], various commentators have labelled him a philosophical [[agnostic]].<ref>"While this sounds skeptical, Kant is only agnostic about our knowledge of metaphysical objects such as God. And, as noted above, Kant's agnosticism leads to the conclusion that we can neither affirm nor deny claims made by traditional metaphysics." Andrew Fiala, [[J. M. D. Meiklejohn]], ''Critique of Pure Reason'' – Introduction, page xi. |
|||
</ref><ref> |
|||
{{cite encyclopedia|encyclopedia=The Popular Encyclopedia of Apologetics: Surveying the Evidence for the Truth of Christianity|year=2008|publisher=Harvest House Publishers|isbn=9780736920841|editor1=Ed Hindson|editor2= Ergun Caner|author= Edward J. Verstraete|page=82|quote=It is in this sense that modern atheism rests heavily upon the skepticism of David Hume and the agnosticism of Immanuel Kant.}} |
|||
</ref><ref> |
|||
{{cite book|title=I Don't Have Enough Faith to Be an Atheist |year=2004|publisher=Crossway|isbn=9781581345612|pages=59–60|author1=Norman L. Geisler|author2=Frank Turek|chapter=Kant's Agnosticism: Should We Be Agnostic About It? |quote=Immanuel Kant's impact has been even more devastating to the Christian worldview than David Hume's. For if Kant's philosophy is right, then there is no way to know anything about the real world, even empirically verifiable things!}} |
|||
</ref><ref> |
|||
{{cite book|title=Light of Truth and Fire of Love: A Theology of the Holy Spirit|year=1997|publisher=Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing|isbn=9780802842886|author=Gary D. Badcock|page=113|quote=Kant has no interest in prayer or worship, and is in fact agnostic when it comes to such classical theological questions as the doctrine of God or of the Holy Spirit.}} |
|||
</ref><ref> |
|||
{{cite book|title=Why I Am a Christian: Leading Thinkers Explain Why They Believe |year=2006|publisher=Baker Books|isbn=9780801067129|editor=Norman L. Geisler, Paul K. Hoffman|page=45|chapter=The Agnosticism of Immanuel Kant}} |
|||
</ref><ref> |
|||
{{cite book|title=Encyclopedia of Catholicism|year=2007|publisher=Infobase Publishing|isbn=9780816075652|author=Frank K. Flinn|page=10|quote=Following Locke, the classic agnostic claims not to accept more propositions than are warranted by empirical evidence. In this sense an agnostic appeals to Immanuel Kant (1724–1804), who claims in his Critique of Pure Reason that since God, freedom, immortality, and the soul can be both proved and disproved by theoretical reason, we ought to suspend judgement about them.}} |
|||
</ref> |
|||
Common myths about Kant's personal mannerisms are listed, explained, and refuted in Goldthwait's introduction to his translation of ''[[Observations on the Feeling of the Beautiful and Sublime]]''.<ref> |
|||
Kant, Immanuel. ''[[Observations on the Feeling of the Beautiful and Sublime]]''. Trans. John T. Goldthwait. University of California Press, 1961, 2003. {{ISBN|0-520-24078-2}} |
|||
</ref> It is often held that Kant lived a very strict and disciplined life, leading to an oft-repeated story that neighbors would set their clocks by his daily walks. He never married, but seemed to have a rewarding social life — he was a popular teacher and a modestly successful author even before starting on his major philosophical works. He had a circle of friends whom he frequently met, among them [[Joseph Green (merchant)|Joseph Green]], an English merchant in Königsberg. |
|||
Kant was baptized as Emanuel and later changed the spelling of his name to Immanuel after learning [[Hebrew language|Hebrew]].{{sfn|Kuehn|2001|p=26}} He was the fourth of nine children (six of whom reached adulthood).<ref>{{cite web |last=Haupt |first=Viktor |title=Rede des Bohnenkönigs – Von Petersburg bis Panama – Die Genealogie der Familie Kant |url=https://www.freunde-kants.com/kopie-von-kant-war-ostpreusse-1 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150925124214/http://www.freunde-kants.com/attachments/article/137/Bohnenrede%202015%20%28de%29.pdf |archive-date=25 September 2015 |website=freunde-kants.com |page=7 |language=de}}</ref> The Kant household stressed the [[Pietism|pietist]] values of religious devotion, humility, and a literal interpretation of the [[Bible]].<ref>{{Cite encyclopedia |last1=Pasternack |first1=Lawrence |title=Kant's Philosophy of Religion |date=2020 |url=https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2020/entries/kant-religion/ |encyclopedia=The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy |editor-last=Zalta |editor-first=Edward N. |edition=Spring 2020 |publisher=Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University |access-date=25 February 2021 |last2=Fugate |first2=Courtney}}</ref> The young Immanuel's education was strict, punitive and disciplinary, and focused on Latin and religious instruction over mathematics and science.<ref>Kuehn 2001, p. 47.</ref> In his later years, Kant lived a strictly ordered life. It was said that neighbors would set their clocks by his daily walks. He never married but seems to have had a rewarding social life; he was a popular teacher as well as a modestly successful author, even before starting on his major philosophical works.{{sfn|Kuehn|2001|p=169}} |
|||
A common myth is that Kant never traveled more than {{convert|16|km}} from Königsberg his whole life.<ref>Lewis, Rick. 2005. [https://philosophynow.org/issues/49/Kant_200_Years_On 'Kant 200 Years On']. ''Philosophy Now''. No. 49.</ref> In fact, between 1750 and 1754 he worked as a tutor (''Hauslehrer'') in Judtschen<ref>{{cite web|last=Vorländer|first=Karl|url=http://www.textlog.de/35594.html|title=Immanuel Kant: Bei Pfarrer Andersch in Judtschen|publisher=}}</ref> (now Veselovka, [[Russia]], approximately 20 km) and in Groß-Arnsdorf<ref>{{cite web|last=Vorländer|first=Karl|url=http://www.textlog.de/35593.html|title=Immanuel Kant: Bei Major von Hülsen in Arnsdorf|publisher=}}</ref> (now [[Jarnołtowo]] near [[Morąg]] (German: Mohrungen), [[Poland]], approximately 145 km). |
|||
===Young scholar=== |
===Young scholar=== |
||
Kant showed a great aptitude for study at an early age. He first attended the [[Collegium Fridericianum]] from which he graduated at the end of the summer of 1740. In 1740, aged 16, he enrolled at the [[University of Königsberg]], where he |
Kant showed a great aptitude for study at an early age. He first attended the [[Collegium Fridericianum]], from which he graduated at the end of the summer of 1740. In 1740, aged 16, he enrolled at the [[University of Königsberg]], where he would later remain for the rest of his professional life.<ref>''The American International Encyclopedia'' (New York: J.J. Little & Ives, 1954), Vol. IX.</ref> He studied the philosophy of [[Gottfried Leibniz]] and [[Christian Wolff (philosopher)|Christian Wolff]] under [[Martin Knutzen]] (Associate Professor of Logic and Metaphysics from 1734 until he died in 1751), a [[rationalism|rationalist]] who was also familiar with developments in British philosophy and science and introduced Kant to the new mathematical physics of [[Isaac Newton]]. Knutzen dissuaded Kant from the theory of [[pre-established harmony]], which he regarded as "the pillow for the lazy mind".<ref>{{cite book|title=What the Tortoise Taught Us: The Story of Philosophy|url=https://archive.org/details/whattortoisetaug00port|url-access=limited|last=Porter|first=Burton|publisher=Rowman & Littlefield Publishers|year=2010|page=[https://archive.org/details/whattortoisetaug00port/page/n145 133]}}</ref> He also dissuaded Kant from [[idealism]], the idea that reality is purely mental, which most philosophers in the 18th century regarded negatively. The theory of [[transcendental idealism]] that Kant later included in the ''[[Critique of Pure Reason]]'' was developed partially in opposition to traditional idealism. Kant had contacts with students, colleagues, friends and diners who frequented the local [[Masonic lodge]].<ref>{{cite web|url=https://library.oapen.org/bitstream/id/9c2c6b4d-7481-4e73-b443-bf29054680c2/497779.pdf|title=Die Freimaurer im Alten Preußen 1738–1806|language=de|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201119104900/https://library.oapen.org/bitstream/id/9c2c6b4d-7481-4e73-b443-bf29054680c2/497779.pdf|archive-date=19 November 2020|url-status=live}}</ref> |
||
His father's stroke and subsequent death in 1746 interrupted his studies. Kant left Königsberg shortly after August 1748 |
His father's stroke and subsequent death in 1746 interrupted his studies. Kant left Königsberg shortly after August 1748;{{sfn|Kuehn|2001|p=94}} he would return there in August 1754.{{sfn|Kuehn|2001|p=98}} He became a private tutor in the towns surrounding Königsberg, but continued his scholarly research. In 1749, he published his first philosophical work, ''[[Thoughts on the True Estimation of Living Forces]]'' (written in 1745–1747).<ref>Eric Watkins (ed.), ''Immanuel Kant: Natural Science'', Cambridge University Press, 2012: [http://assets.cambridge.org/97805213/63945/excerpt/9780521363945_excerpt.pdf "Thoughts on the true estimation..."] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160307213516/http://assets.cambridge.org/97805213/63945/excerpt/9780521363945_excerpt.pdf |date=7 March 2016 }}.</ref> |
||
===Early work=== |
===Early work=== |
||
[[File:Immanuel Kant- Physical Monadology. Preliminary Considerations..webm|thumb|A reading from one of Kant's early writings in Latin, ''Physical Monadology: Preliminary Considerations''.]] Kant is best known for his work in the philosophy of ethics and metaphysics, but he made significant contributions to other disciplines. In 1754, while contemplating on a prize question by the [[Prussian Academy of Sciences|Berlin Academy]] about the problem of Earth's rotation, he argued that the Moon's gravity would slow down Earth's spin and he also put forth the argument that gravity would eventually cause the Moon's [[tidal locking]] to [[orbital resonance|coincide]] with the Earth's rotation.{{efn|Kant himself seems to have found his contribution not significant enough that he published his arguments in a newspaper commentary on the prize question and did not submit them to the Academy: {{cite book|chapter-url=https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.54018/page/n113/mode/2up|chapter=Whether the Earth has Undergone an Alteration of its Axial Rotation|title=Kant's Cosmogony|translator-last=Hastie|translator-first=William|location=Glasgow|publisher=James Maclehose|orig-date=1754|year=1900|pages=1–11|access-date=29 March 2022}}. The prize was instead awarded in 1756 to P. Frisi, who incorrectly argued against the slowing down of the spin.<ref>{{cite book |last=Schönfeld |first=Martin |title=The Philosophy of the Young Kant: The Precritical Project |publisher=Oxford University Press |page=84 |isbn=978-0-19-513218-2 |year=2000 }}</ref>}}<ref name="nebulous">{{cite book|last=Brush|first=Stephen G.|title=A History of Modern Planetary Physics: Nebulous Earth|year=2014|isbn=978-0-521-44171-1|page=[https://archive.org/details/historyofmodernp0000brus/page/7 7]|publisher=Cambridge University Press |url=https://archive.org/details/historyofmodernp0000brus/page/7}}</ref> The next year, he expanded this reasoning to the [[formation and evolution of the Solar System]] in his ''[[Universal Natural History and Theory of the Heavens]]''.<ref name="nebulous"/> In 1755, Kant received a license to lecture in the University of Königsberg and began lecturing on a variety of topics including mathematics, physics, logic, and metaphysics. In his 1756 essay on the theory of winds, Kant laid out an original insight into the [[Coriolis force]]. |
|||
Kant is best known for his work in the philosophy of ethics and metaphysics,<ref name=iep>{{cite web|title=Immanuel Kant: Metaphysics – Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy |url=http://www.iep.utm.edu/kantmeta/|website=www.iep.utm.edu|accessdate=6 February 2015}}</ref> but he made significant contributions to other disciplines. He made an important astronomical discovery about the nature of Earth's rotation, for which he won the [[Prussian Academy of Sciences|Berlin Academy]] Prize in 1754. According to [[William Thomson, 1st Baron Kelvin|Lord Kelvin]] in 1897, Kant made contributions useful to mathematicians or physical astronomers. According to [[Thomas Henry Huxley|Thomas Huxley]] in 1867 Kant made contributions to geology as well when, in 1775 [1755], he wrote his ''General Natural History and Theory of the Celestial Bodies; or, an Attempt to Account for the Constitutional and Mechanical Origin of the Universe, upon Newtonian Principles.''" |
|||
In 1756, Kant also published three papers on the [[1755 Lisbon earthquake]].<ref>See: |
|||
[[File:Kant wohnhaus 2.jpg|thumb|Kant's house in Königsberg]] |
|||
* Kant, I. (1756a) [https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=umn.31951001073880s;view=1up;seq=448 "Von den Ursachen der Erderschütterungen bei Gelegenheit des Unglücks, welches die westliche Länder von Europa gegen das Ende des vorigen Jahres betroffen hat"] [On the causes of the earthquakes on the occasion of the disaster which affected the western countries of Europe towards the end of last year] In: Königlich Preussischen Akademie der Wissenschaften (Royal Prussian Academy of Sciences), ed.s (1902) ''Kant's gesammelte Schriften'' [Kant's collected writings] (in German) Berlin, Germany: G. Reimer. vol. 1, pp. 417–427. |
|||
In the ''General History of Nature and Theory of the Heavens'' (''Allgemeine Naturgeschichte und Theorie des Himmels'') (1755), Kant laid out the [[Nebular hypothesis]], in which he deduced that the [[Solar System]] formed from a large cloud of gas, a [[nebula]]. Thus he tried to explain the order of the solar system, which [[Isaac Newton]] had explained as imposed from the beginning by God. Kant also correctly deduced that the [[Milky Way]] was a large disk of stars, which he theorized also formed from a (much larger) spinning cloud of gas. He further suggested that other nebulae might also be similarly large and distant disks of stars. These postulations opened new horizons for astronomy: for the first time extending astronomy beyond the solar system to galactic and extragalactic realms.<ref>George Gamow, ''One, Two, Three... Infinity'', pp. 300ff. Viking Press, 1954</ref> |
|||
* Kant, I. (1756b) [https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=umn.31951001073880s;view=1up;seq=460 "Geschichte und Naturbeschreibung der merkwürdigsten Vorfälle des Erdbebens, welches an dem Ende des 1755sten Jahres einen großen Theil der Erde erschüttert hat"] [History and description of the nature of the most remarkable events of the earthquake which shook a large part of the Earth at the end of the year 1755], ibid. pp. 429–461. |
|||
* Kant, I. (1756c) [https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=umn.31951001073880s;view=1up;seq=494 "Immanuel Kants fortgesetzte Betrachtung der seit einiger Zeit wahrgenommenen Erderschütterungen"] [Immanuel Kant's continued consideration of the earthquakes that were felt some time ago], ibid. pp. 463–472. |
|||
* Amador, Filomena (2004) "The causes of 1755 Lisbon earthquake on Kant" In: Escribano Benito, J.J.; Español González, L.; Martínez García, M.A., ed.s. ''Actas VIII Congreso de la Sociedad Española de Historia de las Ciencias y de las Técnicas'' [Proceedings of the Eighth Congress of the Spanish Society of the History of the Sciences and Technology] (in English) Logroño, Spain: Sociedad Española de Historia de las Ciencias y de las Técnicas (Universidad de la Rioja), vol. 2, pp. 485–495.</ref> Kant's theory, which involved shifts in huge caverns filled with hot gases, though inaccurate, was one of the first systematic attempts to explain earthquakes in natural rather than supernatural terms. In 1757, Kant began lecturing on geography making him one of the first lecturers to explicitly teach geography as its own subject.<ref name="Richards-1974">{{Cite journal|last=Richards|first=Paul|date=1974|title=Kant's Geography and Mental Maps|journal=Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers|issue=61|pages=1–16|doi=10.2307/621596|jstor=621596| issn=0020-2754 }}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal|last=Elden|first=Stuart|date=2009|title=Reassessing Kant's geography|journal=Journal of Historical Geography|language=en|volume=35|issue=1|pages=3–25|doi=10.1016/j.jhg.2008.06.001|url=http://dro.dur.ac.uk/6836/1/6836.pdf|access-date=27 September 2019|archive-date=1 August 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200801205430/http://dro.dur.ac.uk/6836/1/6836.pdf|url-status=live}}</ref> Geography was one of Kant's most popular lecturing topics and, in 1802, a compilation by Friedrich Theodor Rink of Kant's lecturing notes, ''Physical Geography'', was released. After Kant became a professor in 1770, he expanded the topics of his lectures to include lectures on natural law, ethics, and anthropology, along with other topics.<ref name="Richards-1974" /> |
|||
[[File:Kant wohnhaus 2.jpg|thumb|Kant's house in Königsberg in an 1842 painting]] |
|||
From then on, Kant turned increasingly to philosophical issues, although he continued to write on the sciences throughout his life. In the early 1760s, Kant produced a series of important works in philosophy. ''[[The False Subtlety of the Four Syllogistic Figures]]'', a work in logic, was published in 1762. Two more works appeared the following year: ''Attempt to Introduce the Concept of Negative Magnitudes into Philosophy'' and ''[[The Only Possible Argument in Support of a Demonstration of the Existence of God]]''. In 1764, Kant wrote ''[[Observations on the Feeling of the Beautiful and Sublime]]'' and then was second to [[Moses Mendelssohn]] in a Berlin Academy prize competition with his ''Inquiry Concerning the Distinctness of the Principles of Natural Theology and Morality'' (often referred to as "The Prize Essay"). In 1766 Kant wrote ''Dreams of a Spirit-Seer'' which dealt with the writings of [[Emanuel Swedenborg]]. On 31 March 1770, aged 45, Kant was finally appointed Full Professor of Logic and Metaphysics (''Professor Ordinarius der Logic und Metaphysic'') at the University of Königsberg. In defense of this appointment, Kant wrote his [[inaugural dissertation]] (''Inaugural-Dissertation'') ''De Mundi Sensibilis atque Intelligibilis Forma et Principiis'' (''On the Form and Principles of the Sensible and the Intelligible World)''.<ref name="RGT">Since he had written his last [[habilitation thesis]] 14 years earlier, a new habilitation thesis was required (see S. J. McGrath, Joseph Carew (eds.), ''Rethinking German Idealism'', Palgrave Macmillan, 2016, p. 24).</ref> This work saw the emergence of several central themes of his mature work, including the distinction between the faculties of intellectual thought and sensible receptivity. To miss this distinction would mean to commit the error of [[subreption]], and, as he says in the last chapter of the dissertation, only in avoiding this error does metaphysics flourish. |
|||
In the ''Universal Natural History'', Kant laid out the [[nebular hypothesis]], in which he deduced that the [[Solar System]] had formed from a large cloud of gas, a [[nebula]]. Kant also correctly deduced that the [[Milky Way]] was a [[galaxy|large disk of stars]], which he theorized formed from a much larger spinning gas cloud. He further suggested that other distant "nebulae" might be other galaxies. These postulations opened new horizons for astronomy, for the first time extending it beyond the solar system to galactic and intergalactic realms.<ref>{{cite book|last=Gamow|first=George|title=One Two Three... Infinity|location=New York|publisher=Viking P.|date=1947|pages=300ff|title-link=One Two Three... Infinity}}</ref> |
|||
From then on, Kant turned increasingly to philosophical issues, although he continued to write on the sciences throughout his life. In the early 1760s, Kant produced a series of important works in philosophy. ''[[The False Subtlety of the Four Syllogistic Figures]]'', a work in logic, was published in 1762. Two more works appeared the following year: ''Attempt to Introduce the Concept of Negative Magnitudes into Philosophy'' and ''[[The Only Possible Argument in Support of a Demonstration of the Existence of God]]''. By 1764, Kant had become a notable popular author, and wrote ''[[Observations on the Feeling of the Beautiful and Sublime]]''; he was second to [[Moses Mendelssohn]] in a Berlin Academy prize competition with his ''Inquiry Concerning the Distinctness of the Principles of Natural Theology and Morality'' (often referred to as "The Prize Essay"). In 1766 Kant wrote a critical piece on [[Emanuel Swedenborg]]'s ''Dreams of a Spirit-Seer''. |
|||
The issue that vexed Kant was central to what 20th-century scholars called "the [[philosophy of mind]]". The flowering of the natural sciences had led to an understanding of how data reaches the brain. Sunlight falling on an object is reflected from its surface in a way that maps the surface features (color, texture, etc.). The reflected light reaches the human eye, passes through the cornea, is focused by the lens onto the retina where it forms an image similar to that formed by light passing through a pinhole into a [[camera obscura]]. The retinal cells send impulses through the [[optic nerve]] and then they form a mapping in the brain of the visual features of the object. The interior mapping is not the exterior object, and our belief that there is a meaningful relationship between the object and the mapping in the brain depends on a chain of reasoning that is not fully grounded. But the uncertainty aroused by these considerations, by optical illusions, misperceptions, delusions, etc., are not the end of the problems. |
|||
In 1770, Kant was appointed Full Professor of Logic and Metaphysics at the University of Königsberg. In defense of this appointment, Kant wrote his [[inaugural dissertation]] ''On the Form and Principles of the Sensible and the Intelligible World''{{efn|Since he had written his last [[habilitation thesis]] 14 years earlier, a new habilitation thesis was required (see S.J. McGrath, Joseph Carew (eds.), ''Rethinking German Idealism'', Palgrave Macmillan, 2016, p. 24).}} This work saw the emergence of several central themes of his mature work, including the distinction between the faculties of intellectual thought and sensible receptivity. To miss this distinction would mean to commit the error of [[subreption]], and, as he says in the last chapter of the dissertation, only in avoiding this error does metaphysics flourish. |
|||
Kant saw that the mind could not function as an empty container that simply receives data from outside. Something must be giving order to the incoming data. Images of external objects must be kept in the same sequence in which they were received. This ordering occurs through the mind's intuition of time. The same considerations apply to the mind's function of constituting space for ordering mappings of visual and tactile signals arriving via the already described chains of physical causation. |
|||
It is often claimed that Kant was a late developer, that he only became an important philosopher in his mid-50s after rejecting his earlier views. While it is true that Kant wrote his greatest works relatively late in life, there is a tendency to underestimate the value of his earlier works. Recent Kant scholarship has devoted more attention to these "pre-critical" writings and has recognized a degree of continuity with his mature work.<ref>Cf., for example, Susan Shell, ''The Embodiment of Reason'' (Chicago, 1996)</ref> |
It is often claimed that Kant was a late developer, that he only became an important philosopher in his mid-50s after rejecting his earlier views. While it is true that Kant wrote his greatest works relatively late in life, there is a tendency to underestimate the value of his earlier works. Recent Kant scholarship has devoted more attention to these "pre-critical" writings and has recognized a degree of continuity with his mature work.<ref>Cf., for example, Susan Shell, ''The Embodiment of Reason'' (Chicago, 1996)</ref> |
||
===Publication of the ''Critique of Pure Reason''=== |
|||
===Work hiatus=== |
|||
{{Main|Critique of Pure Reason}} |
|||
At age 46, Kant was an established scholar and an increasingly influential philosopher, as much was expected of him. |
|||
[[File:Painting of David Hume.jpg|thumb|Portrait of philosopher [[David Hume]]]] |
|||
At age 46, Kant was an established scholar and an increasingly influential philosopher, and much was expected of him. In correspondence with his ex-student and friend [[Markus Herz]], Kant admitted that, in the inaugural dissertation, he had failed to account for the relation between our sensible and intellectual faculties.<ref>{{Cite book|last=Watkins|first=Erik|title=Kant's Critique of Pure Reason: Background Source Materials|publisher=Cambridge University Press|year=2009|isbn=978-0-521-78162-6|location=Cambridge, UK|pages=276}}</ref> He needed to explain how we combine what is known as sensory knowledge with the other type of knowledge—that is, reasoned knowledge—these two being related but having very different processes. Kant also credited [[David Hume]] with awakening him from a "dogmatic slumber" in which he had unquestioningly accepted the tenets of both religion and [[natural philosophy]].<ref name="Smith-1952">{{cite book|last=Smith|first=Homer W.|url=https://archive.org/details/manhisgods00smit|title=Man and His Gods|publisher=[[Grosset & Dunlap]]|year=1952|location=New York|page=[https://archive.org/details/manhisgods00smit/page/404 404]|author-link=Homer W. Smith|url-access=registration}}</ref><ref>Kant, ''PFM'' 4:260</ref> Hume, in his 1739 ''[[Treatise on Human Nature]]'', had argued that we only know the mind through a subjective, essentially illusory series of perceptions. Ideas such as [[causality]], [[morality]], and [[Object (philosophy)|objects]] are not evident in experience, so their reality may be questioned. Kant felt that reason could remove this skepticism, and he set himself to solving these problems. Although fond of company and conversation with others, Kant isolated himself, and resisted friends' attempts to bring him out of his isolation.{{efn|It has been noted that in 1778, in response to one of these offers by a former pupil, Kant wrote, "Any change makes me apprehensive, even if it offers the greatest promise of improving my condition, and I am persuaded by this natural instinct of mine that I must take heed if I wish that the threads which the Fates spin so thin and weak in my case to be spun to any length. My great thanks, to my well-wishers and friends, who think so kindly of me as to undertake my welfare, but at the same time a most humble request to protect me in my current condition from any disturbance."<ref>Christopher Kul-Want and Andrzej Klimowski, ''Introducing Kant'' (Cambridge: Icon Books, 2005).{{page needed|date=October 2011}} {{ISBN|978-1-84046-664-5}}</ref>}} When Kant emerged from his silence in 1781, the result was the ''Critique of Pure Reason'', printed by [[Johann Friedrich Hartknoch]]. Kant countered Hume's [[empiricism]] by claiming that some knowledge exists inherently in the mind, independent of experience.<ref name="Smith-1952" /> He drew a parallel to the [[Copernican Revolution#Immanuel Kant|Copernican revolution]] in his proposal that worldly objects can be intuited ''[[A priori and a posteriori|a priori]]'', and that [[Anschauung|intuition]] is consequently distinct from [[Objectivity (philosophy)|objective reality]]. Perhaps the most direct contested matter was Hume's argument against any necessary connection between causal events, which Hume characterized as the "cement of the universe." In the ''Critique of Pure Reason'', Kant argues for what he takes to be the ''a priori'' justification of such necessary connection.<ref>Kant, ''CPuR'' A188-211/B233-56</ref> |
|||
In correspondence with his ex-student and friend [[Markus Herz]], Kant admitted that, in the inaugural dissertation, he had failed to account for the relation between our sensible and intellectual faculties. He needed to explain how we combine what is known as sensory knowledge with the other type of knowledge – i.e. reasoned knowledge. These two being are related but have very different processes. |
|||
Kant also credited [[David Hume]] with awakening him from ''dogmatic slumber'' (circa 1771).<ref>{{cite web|url=http://hardproblem.ru/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/Vasilyev-The-Origin.pdf|title=Vadim V. Vasilyev, "The Origin of Kant's Deduction of the Categories"|publisher= }}</ref> Hume had stated that experience consists only of sequences of feelings, images or sounds. Ideas such as "cause", goodness, or objects were not evident in experience, so why do we believe in the reality of these? Kant felt that reason could remove this skepticism, and he set himself to solving these problems. He did not publish any work in philosophy for the next 11 years. |
|||
[[File:Immanuel Kant 3.jpg|thumb|Immanuel Kant]] |
|||
[[File:Immanuel Kant (1724-1804) engraving.jpg|thumb|left|Engraving of Kant]] |
|||
Although fond of company and conversation with others, Kant isolated himself, and resisted friends' attempts to bring him out of his isolation. It's been noted that in 1778, in response to one of these offers by a former pupil, Kant wrote: |
|||
Although now recognized as one of the greatest works in the history of philosophy, the ''Critique'' disappointed Kant's readers upon its initial publication.<ref>{{Cite book|last=Dorrien|first=Gary|title=Kantian Reason and Hegelian Spirit: The Idealistic Logic of Modern Theology|publisher=John Wiley & Sons|year=2012|isbn=978-0-470-67331-7|location=Malden, MA|pages=37}}</ref> The book was long, over 800 pages in the original German edition, and written in a convoluted style. Kant was quite upset with its reception.{{sfn|Kuehn|2001|pp=250–254}} His former student, [[Johann Gottfried Herder]] criticized it for placing reason as an entity worthy of criticism by itself instead of considering the process of reasoning within the context of language and one's entire personality.<ref>[[Frederick Copleston|Copleston, Frederick Charles]] (2003). ''The Enlightenment: Voltaire to Kant''. p. 146.</ref> Similarly to [[Christian Garve]] and [[Johann Georg Heinrich Feder]], he rejected Kant's position that space and time possess a form that can be analyzed. Garve and Feder also faulted the ''Critique'' for not explaining differences in perception of sensations.<ref>Sassen, Brigitte. ''Kant's Early Critics: The Empiricist Critique of the Theoretical Philosophy''. 2000.</ref> Its density made it, as Herder said in a letter to [[Johann Georg Hamann]], a "tough nut to crack", obscured by "all this heavy gossamer".<ref>''Ein Jahrhundert deutscher Literaturkritik'', vol. III, ''Der Aufstieg zur Klassik in der Kritik der Zeit'' (Berlin, 1959), p. 315; as quoted in Gulyga, Arsenij. ''Immanuel Kant: His Life and Thought''. Trans. Marijan Despaltović. Boston: Birkhäuser, 1987.</ref> Its reception stood in stark contrast to the praise Kant had received for earlier works, such as his ''Prize Essay'' and shorter works that preceded the first ''Critique''. Recognizing the need to clarify the original treatise, Kant wrote the ''[[Prolegomena to any Future Metaphysics]]'' in 1783 as a summary of its main views. Shortly thereafter, Kant's friend Johann Friedrich Schultz (1739–1805), a professor of mathematics, published ''Explanations of Professor Kant's Critique of Pure Reason'' (Königsberg, 1784), which was a brief but very accurate commentary on Kant's ''Critique of Pure Reason''.{{sfn|Kuehn|2001|pp=268–269}} |
|||
{{quote| |
|||
Any change makes me apprehensive, even if it offers the greatest promise of improving my condition, and I am persuaded by this natural instinct of mine that I must take heed if I wish that the threads which the Fates spin so thin and weak in my case to be spun to any length. My great thanks, to my well-wishers and friends, who think so kindly of me as to undertake my welfare, but at the same time a most humble request to protect me in my current condition from any disturbance.<ref>Christopher Kul-Want and Andrzej Klimowski, ''Introducing Kant'' (Cambridge: Icon Books, 2005).{{page needed|date=October 2011}} {{ISBN|1-84046-664-2}}</ref>}} |
|||
Kant's reputation gradually rose through the latter portion of the 1780s, sparked by a series of important works: the 1784 essay, "[[Answer to the Question: What is Enlightenment?]]"; 1785's ''[[Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals]]'' (his first work on moral philosophy); and ''[[Metaphysical Foundations of Natural Science]]'' from 1786. Kant's fame ultimately arrived from an unexpected source. In 1786, [[Karl Leonhard Reinhold]] published a series of public letters on Kantian philosophy. In these letters, Reinhold framed Kant's philosophy as a response to the central intellectual controversy of the era: the [[pantheism controversy]]. [[Friedrich Jacobi]] had accused the recently deceased [[Gotthold Ephraim Lessing]] (a distinguished dramatist and philosophical essayist) of [[Spinozism]]. Such a charge, tantamount to an accusation of atheism, was vigorously denied by Lessing's friend [[Moses Mendelssohn]], leading to a bitter public dispute among partisans. The controversy gradually escalated into a debate about the values of the Enlightenment and the value of reason. Reinhold maintained in his letters that Kant's ''Critique of Pure Reason'' could settle this dispute by defending the authority and bounds of reason. Reinhold's [[Letter (message)|letters]] were widely read and made Kant the most famous philosopher of his era.<ref>{{Cite book|last=Guyer|first=Paul|title=The Cambridge Companion to Kant and Modern Philosophy|publisher=Cambridge University Press|year=2006|isbn=978-0-521-82303-6|location=Cambridge, UK|pages=631}}</ref> |
|||
When Kant emerged from his silence in 1781, the result was the ''[[Critique of Pure Reason]]''. Although now uniformly recognized as one of the greatest works in the history of philosophy, this ''Critique'' was largely ignored upon its initial publication. The book was long, over 800 pages in the original German edition, and written in a convoluted style. It received few reviews, and these granted it no significance. Kant's former student, [[Johann Gottfried Herder]] criticized it for placing reason as an entity worthy of criticism instead of considering the process of reasoning within the context of language and one's entire personality.<ref>[[Frederick Copleston|Copleston, Frederick Charles]]. ''The Enlightenment: Voltaire to Kant''. 2003. p. 146.</ref> Similar to [[Christian Garve]] and [[Johann Georg Heinrich Feder]], he rejected Kant's position that space and time possessed a form that could be analyzed. Additionally, Garve and Feder also faulted Kant's Critique for not explaining differences in perception of sensations.<ref>Sassen, Brigitte. ''Kant's Early Critics: The Empiricist Critique of the Theoretical Philosophy''. 2000.</ref> Its density made it, as Herder said in a letter to [[Johann Georg Hamann]], a "tough nut to crack", obscured by "all this heavy gossamer".<ref>''Ein Jahrhundert deutscher Literaturkritik'', vol. III, ''Der Aufstieg zur Klassik in der Kritik der Zeit'' (Berlin, 1959), p. 315; as quoted in Gulyga, Arsenij. ''Immanuel Kant: His Life and Thought.'' Trans., Marijan Despaltović. Boston: Birkhäuser, 1987.</ref> Its reception stood in stark contrast to the praise Kant had received for earlier works, such as his ''Prize Essay'' and shorter works that preceded the first Critique. These well-received and readable tracts include one on the [[1755 Lisbon earthquake|earthquake in Lisbon]] that was so popular that it was sold by the page.<ref>Gulyga, Arsenij. ''Immanuel Kant: His Life and Thought.'' Trans., Marijan Despaltović. Boston: Birkhäuser, 1987 pp. 28–9.</ref> Prior to the change in course documented in the first Critique, his books sold well, and by the time he published ''[[Observations on the Feeling of the Beautiful and Sublime]]'' in 1764 he had become a notable popular author.<ref>Gulyga, Arsenij. ''Immanuel Kant: His Life and Thought.'' Trans., Marijan Despaltović. Boston: Birkhäuser, 1987, p. 62.</ref> Kant was disappointed with the first Critique's reception. Recognizing the need to clarify the original treatise, Kant wrote the ''[[Prolegomena to any Future Metaphysics]]'' in 1783 as a summary of its main views. Shortly thereafter, Kant's friend Johann Friedrich Schultz (1739–1805) (professor of mathematics) published ''Erläuterungen über des Herrn Professor Kant Critik<!--[sic]--> der reinen Vernunft'' (Königsberg, 1784), which was a brief but very accurate commentary on Kant's ''Critique of Pure Reason''. |
|||
===Later work=== |
|||
Kant's reputation gradually rose through the latter portion of the 1780s, sparked by a series of important works: the 1784 essay, "[[What is Enlightenment?|Answer to the Question: What is Enlightenment?]]"; 1785's ''[[Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals]]'' (his first work on moral philosophy); and, from 1786, ''[[Metaphysical Foundations of Natural Science]].'' But Kant's fame ultimately arrived from an unexpected source. In 1786, [[Karl Leonhard Reinhold]] published a series of public letters on Kantian philosophy. In these letters, Reinhold framed Kant's philosophy as a response to the central intellectual controversy of the era: the [[Pantheism Dispute]]. [[Friedrich Jacobi]] had accused the recently deceased [[Gotthold Ephraim Lessing]] (a distinguished dramatist and philosophical essayist) of [[Spinozism]]. Such a charge, tantamount to atheism, was vigorously denied by Lessing's friend [[Moses Mendelssohn]], leading to a bitter public dispute among partisans. The [[scandal|controversy]] gradually escalated into a debate about the values of the Enlightenment and the value of reason. |
|||
Kant published a second edition of the ''Critique of Pure Reason'' in 1787, heavily revising the first parts of the book. Most of his subsequent work focused on other areas of philosophy. He continued to develop his moral philosophy, notably in 1788's ''[[Critique of Practical Reason]]'' (known as the second ''Critique''), and 1797's ''[[Metaphysics of Morals]]''. The 1790 ''[[Critique of the Power of Judgment]]'' (the third ''Critique'') applied the Kantian system to aesthetics and [[teleology]]. In 1792, Kant's attempt to publish the Second of the four Pieces of ''[[Religion within the Bounds of Bare Reason]]'',<ref name="KReligion">Werner S. Pluhar, ''[https://books.google.com/books?id=da8RrM-qkiwC&pg=PR7 Religion within the Bounds of Bare Reason] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200304020309/https://books.google.com/books?id=da8RrM-qkiwC&pg=PR7 |date=4 March 2020 }}''. 2009. [https://books.google.com/books?id=da8RrM-qkiwC Description] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200201192948/https://books.google.com/books/about/Religion_Within_the_Bounds_of_Bare_Reaso.html%3Fid%3Dda8RrM-qkiwC |date=1 February 2020 }} & [https://books.google.com/books?id=da8RrM-qkiwC&pg=PR7 Contents.] With an [https://books.google.com/books?id=da8RrM-qkiwC&pg=PR15 Introduction] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200803085237/https://books.google.com/books?id=da8RrM-qkiwC&pg=PR15 |date=3 August 2020 }} by Stephen Palmquist. Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing Company,</ref> in the journal ''Berlinische Monatsschrift'', met with opposition from the King's [[censorship]] commission, which had been established that same year in the context of the [[French Revolution]].<ref name="DerridaKantCensorship"/> Kant then arranged to have all four pieces published as a book, routing it through the philosophy department at the University of Jena to avoid the need for theological censorship.<ref name="DerridaKantCensorship">Derrida, ''Vacant Chair'' p. 44.</ref> This insubordination earned him a now-famous reprimand from the King.<ref name="DerridaKantCensorship"/> When he nevertheless published a second edition in 1794, the censor was so irate that he arranged for a royal order that required Kant never to publish or even speak publicly about religion.<ref name="DerridaKantCensorship"/> Kant then published his response to the King's reprimand and explained himself in the preface of ''The Conflict of the Faculties''.<ref name="DerridaKantCensorship"/> |
|||
[[File:Kant doerstling2.jpg|thumb|Kant with friends, including [[Christian Jakob Kraus]], [[Johann Georg Hamann]], [[Theodor Gottlieb von Hippel the Elder|Theodor Gottlieb von Hippel]], and [[Karl Gottfried Hagen]]]] |
|||
Reinhold maintained in his letters that Kant's ''[[Critique of Pure Reason]]'' could settle this dispute by defending the authority and bounds of reason. Reinhold's [[Letter (message)|letter]]s were widely read and made Kant the most famous philosopher of his era. |
|||
He also wrote a number of semi-popular essays on history, religion, politics, and other topics. These works were well received by Kant's contemporaries and confirmed his preeminent status in eighteenth-century philosophy. There were several journals devoted solely to defending and criticizing Kantian philosophy. Despite his success, philosophical trends were moving in another direction. Many of Kant's most important disciples and followers (including [[Karl Leonhard Reinhold|Reinhold]], [[Jakob Sigismund Beck|Beck]], and [[Johann Gottlieb Fichte|Fichte]]) transformed the Kantian position. The progressive stages of revision of Kant's teachings marked the emergence of [[German idealism]]. In what was one of his final acts expounding a stance on philosophical questions, Kant opposed these developments and publicly denounced Fichte in an open letter in 1799.<ref name="Fichte">{{cite web|url=http://www.korpora.org/Kant/aa12/370.html|title=Open letter by Kant denouncing Fichte's Philosophy|language=de|website=Korpora.org|access-date=24 July 2009|archive-date=19 July 2011|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110719150635/http://www.korpora.org/Kant/aa12/370.html|url-status=live}}</ref> |
|||
In 1800, a student of Kant named Gottlob Benjamin Jäsche (1762–1842) published a manual of logic for teachers called ''Logik'', which he had prepared at Kant's request. Jäsche prepared the ''Logik'' using a copy of a textbook in logic by [[Georg Friedrich Meier]] entitled ''Excerpt from the Doctrine of Reason'', in which Kant had written copious notes and annotations. The ''Logik'' has been considered of fundamental importance to Kant's philosophy, and the understanding of it. The great 19th-century logician [[Charles Sanders Peirce]] remarked, in an incomplete review of [[Thomas Kingsmill Abbott]]'s English translation of the introduction to ''Logik'', that "Kant's whole philosophy turns upon his logic."<ref>Peirce, C.S., ''Collected Papers of Charles Sanders Peirce'', v. 1, (HUP, 1960), 'Kant and his Refutation of Idealism' p. 15 |
|||
===Later work and death=== |
|||
</ref> Also, [[Robert Schirokauer Hartman]] and Wolfgang Schwarz wrote in the translators' introduction to their English translation of the ''Logik'', "Its importance lies not only in its significance for the ''Critique of Pure Reason'', the second part of which is a restatement of fundamental tenets of the ''Logic'', but in its position within the whole of Kant's work."<ref>Kant, Immanuel, ''Logic'', G.B. Jäsche (ed), R.S. Hartman, W. Schwarz (translators), Indianapolis, 1984, p. xv.</ref> |
|||
Kant published a second edition of the ''[[Critique of Pure Reason]]'' (''Kritik der reinen Vernunft'') in 1787, heavily revising the first parts of the book. Most of his subsequent work focused on other areas of philosophy. He continued to develop his moral philosophy, notably in 1788's ''[[Critique of Practical Reason]]'' (known as the second ''Critique'') and 1797's ''[[Metaphysics of Morals]]''. The 1790 ''[[Critique of Judgment]]'' (the third ''Critique'') applied the Kantian system to aesthetics and [[teleology]]. |
|||
===Death and burial=== |
|||
In 1792, Kant's attempt to publish the Second of the four Pieces of ''[[Religion within the Bounds of Bare Reason]]'', in the journal ''Berlinische Monatsschrift'', met with opposition from the King's [[censorship]] commission, which had been established that same year in the context of the [[French Revolution]].<ref name="DerridaKantCensorship"/> Kant then arranged to have all four pieces published as a book, routing it through the philosophy department at the University of Jena to avoid the need for theological censorship.<ref name="DerridaKantCensorship">Derrida ''Vacant Chair'' p. 44.</ref> This insubordination earned him a now famous reprimand from the King.<ref name="DerridaKantCensorship"/> When he nevertheless published a second edition in 1794, the censor was so irate that he arranged for a royal order that required Kant never to publish or even speak publicly about religion.<ref name="DerridaKantCensorship"/> Kant then published his response to the King's reprimand and explained himself, in the preface of ''The Conflict of the Faculties''.<ref name="DerridaKantCensorship"/> |
|||
Kant's health, long poor, worsened. He died at Königsberg on 12 February 1804, uttering ''Es ist gut'' ("It is good") before his death.<ref>Karl Vorländer, ''Immanuel Kant: Der Mann und das Werk'', Hamburg: Meiner, 1992, p. II 332.</ref> His unfinished final work was published as ''[[Opus Postumum]]''. Kant always cut a curious figure in his lifetime for his modest, rigorously scheduled habits, which have been referred to as clocklike. [[Heinrich Heine]] observed the magnitude of "his destructive, world-crushing thoughts" and considered him a sort of philosophical "executioner", comparing him to [[Maximilien Robespierre|Robespierre]] with the observation that both men "represented in the highest the type of provincial bourgeois. Nature had destined them to weigh coffee and sugar, but Fate determined that they should weigh other things and placed on the scales of the one a king, on the scales of the other a god."<ref>{{cite web |url=http://philosophy.uchicago.edu/resources/files/On%20Kant.pdf |title=Heine on Immanuel Kant |access-date=10 July 2015 |archive-date=23 November 2015 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20151123060538/http://philosophy.uchicago.edu/resources/files/On%20Kant.pdf |url-status=live }}</ref> |
|||
When his body was transferred to a new burial spot, his skull was measured during the exhumation and found to be larger than the average German male's with a "high and broad" forehead.<ref>''Examined Lives, From Socrates to Nietzsche'', James Miller p. 284</ref> His forehead has been an object of interest ever since it became well known through his portraits: "In Döbler's portrait and in Kiefer's faithful if expressionistic reproduction of it—as well as in many of the other late eighteenth- and early nineteenth-century portraits of Kant—the forehead is remarkably large and decidedly retreating."<ref>Immanuel Kant and the Bo(a)rders of Art History Mark Cheetham, in ''The Subjects of Art History: Historical Objects in Contemporary Perspectives'', p. 16</ref> |
|||
[[File:Kant doerstling2.jpg|thumb|Kant with friends, including [[Christian Jakob Kraus]], [[Johann Georg Hamann]], [[Theodor Gottlieb von Hippel the Elder|Theodor Gottlieb von Hippel]] and [[Karl Gottfried Hagen]]]] |
|||
He also wrote a number of semi-popular essays on history, religion, politics and other topics. These works were well received by Kant's contemporaries and confirmed his preeminent status in 18th-century philosophy. There were several journals devoted solely to defending and criticizing Kantian philosophy. Despite his success, philosophical trends were moving in another direction. Many of Kant's most important disciples and followers (including [[Karl Leonhard Reinhold|Reinhold]], [[Jakob Sigismund Beck|Beck]] and [[Johann Gottlieb Fichte|Fichte]]) transformed the Kantian position into increasingly radical forms of idealism. The progressive stages of revision of Kant's teachings marked the emergence of [[German Idealism]]. Kant opposed these developments and publicly denounced Fichte in an open letter in 1799.<ref name = "Fichte">{{cite web|url=http://www.korpora.org/Kant/aa12/370.html|title=Open letter by Kant denouncing Fichte's Philosophy (in German)|publisher=Korpora.org|date=|accessdate=24 July 2009}}</ref> It was one of his final acts expounding a stance on philosophical questions. In 1800, a student of Kant named Gottlob Benjamin Jäsche (1762–1842) published a manual of logic for teachers called ''Logik'', which he had prepared at Kant's request. Jäsche prepared the ''Logik'' using a copy of a textbook in logic by [[Georg Friedrich Meier]] entitled ''Auszug aus der Vernunftlehre'', in which Kant had written copious notes and annotations. The ''Logik'' has been considered of fundamental importance to Kant's philosophy, and the understanding of it. The great 19th-century logician [[Charles Sanders Peirce]] remarked, in an incomplete review of [[Thomas Kingsmill Abbott]]'s English translation of the introduction to ''Logik'', that "Kant's whole philosophy turns upon his logic."<ref>Peirce, C.S., ''Collected Papers of Charles Sanders Peirce'', v.1, (HUP, 1960), 'Kant and his Refutation of Idealism' p. 15 |
|||
</ref> Also, [[Robert Schirokauer Hartman]] and Wolfgang Schwarz, wrote in the translators' introduction to their English translation of the ''Logik'', "Its importance lies not only in its significance for the ''Critique of Pure Reason'', the second part of which is a restatement of fundamental tenets of the ''Logic'', but in its position within the whole of Kant's work."<ref>Kant, Immanuel, ''Logic'', G.B. Jäsche (ed), R.S. Hartman, W. Schwarz (translators), Indianapolis, 1984, p. xv.</ref> |
|||
[[File:Kaliningrad 05-2017 img05 Kant Island.jpg|upright|thumb|Kant's tomb in [[Kaliningrad]], Russia]] |
|||
Kant's health, long poor, worsened and he died at Königsberg on 12 February 1804, uttering "''Es ist gut'' (It is good)" before expiring.<ref>Karl Vorländer, ''Immanuel Kant: Der Mann und das Werk'', Hamburg: Meiner, 1992, p. II 332.</ref> His unfinished final work was published as ''Opus Postumum''. |
|||
Kant's [[mausoleum]] adjoins the northeast corner of [[Königsberg Cathedral]] in [[Kaliningrad]], Russia. The mausoleum was constructed by the architect [[Friedrich Lahrs]] and was finished in 1924, in time for the bicentenary of Kant's birth. Originally, Kant was buried inside the cathedral, but in 1880 his remains were moved to a [[neo-Gothic]] chapel adjoining the northeast corner of the cathedral. Over the years, the chapel became dilapidated and was demolished to make way for the mausoleum, which was built on the same location. The tomb and its mausoleum are among the few artifacts of German times preserved by the [[Soviets]] after they captured the city.<ref>{{Cite news|url=http://www.spiegel.de/international/zeitgeist/architectural-competition-held-to-rebuild-koenigsberg-city-center-a-980260.html|title=Resurrecting Königsberg: Russian City Looks to German Roots|last=Beyer|first=Susanne|date=25 July 2014|work=Spiegel Online|access-date=3 February 2018|archive-date=4 February 2018|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180204192755/http://www.spiegel.de/international/zeitgeist/architectural-competition-held-to-rebuild-koenigsberg-city-center-a-980260.html|url-status=live}}</ref> |
|||
Into the 21st century, many newlyweds bring flowers to the mausoleum. Artifacts previously owned by Kant, known as ''Kantiana'', were included in the [[Königsberg City Museum]]; however, the museum was destroyed during [[World War II]]. A replica of the statue of Kant that in German times stood in front of the main [[University of Königsberg]] building was donated by a German entity in the early 1990s and placed in the same grounds. After [[Flight and expulsion of Germans (1944–1950)|the expulsion]] of [[Königsberg]]'s German population at the end of [[World War II]], the University of Königsberg where Kant taught was replaced by the Russian-language Kaliningrad State University, which appropriated the campus and surviving buildings. In 2005, the university was renamed Immanuel Kant State University of Russia.<ref>{{cite journal |last=Zieliński |first=Miłosz J. |date=2018 |title=Kant's Future: Debates about the Identity of Kaliningrad Oblast |url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/26644305 |journal=Slavic Review |volume=77 |issue=4 |pages=937–956 |doi=10.1017/slr.2018.291 |jstor=26644305 |issn=0037-6779}}</ref> The name change, which was considered a politically-charged issue due to the residents having mixed feelings about its German past,<ref>{{cite news |date=2 July 2005 |title=Kaliningrad Struggles With German Legacy |url=https://www.dw.com/en/kaliningrad-struggles-with-german-legacy/a-1635700 |access-date=23 April 2024 |work=DW News }}</ref> was announced at a ceremony attended by Russian president [[Vladimir Putin]] and German chancellor [[Gerhard Schröder]],<!--http://en.kremlin.ru/events/president/news/33684/photos--><ref>{{cite news |last=Dempsey |first=Judy |date=1 July 2005 |title=Russian enclave lands in diplomatic donnybrook |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2005/07/01/world/europe/russian-enclave-lands-in-diplomatic-donnybrook.html |access-date=23 April 2024 |work=The New York Times |issn=0362-4331}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |date=3 July 2005 |title=Iran the Topic in Baltic Sea Meeting |url=https://www.dw.com/en/iran-the-topic-in-baltic-sea-meeting/a-1637921 |access-date=23 April 2024 |agency=Agence-France Press|via=DW News}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |last=Ypi |first=Lea |date=20 April 2024 |title=Kant and the case for peace |url=https://www.ft.com/content/c7432bdc-3449-421e-8045-701ac16a3d07 |access-date=23 April 2024 |website=Financial Times |issn=0307-1766}}</ref> and the university formed a Kant Society, dedicated to the study of [[Kantianism]]. In 2010, the university was again renamed to [[Immanuel Kant Baltic Federal University]].<ref>{{cite web |date=13 October 2010 |title=Executive order on establishing Immanuel Kant University |url=http://en.kremlin.ru/events/president/news/9234<!--http://eng.kremlin.ru/news/1131--> |access-date=23 April 2024 |website=President of Russia}}</ref> |
|||
Kant wrote a book discussing his theory of virtue in terms of independence which he believed was "a viable modern alternative to more familiar Greek views about virtue". This book is often criticized for its hostile tone and for not articulating his thoughts about autocracy comprehensibly. In the self-governance model of Aristotelian virtue, the non-rational part of the soul can be made to listen to reason through training. Although Kantian self-governance appears to involve "a rational crackdown on appetites and emotions" with lack of harmony between reason and emotion, Kantian virtue denies requiring "self-conquest, self-suppression, or self-silencing". They dispute that "the self-mastery constitutive of virtue is ultimately mastery over our tendency of will to give priority to appetite or emotion unregulated by duty, it does not require extirpating, suppressing, or silencing sensibility in general".<ref>{{cite journal|last1=McAleer|first1=Sean|title=Kant's Theory of Virtue: The Value of Autocracy. Ethics|journal=Heythrop Journal}}</ref> |
|||
==Philosophy== |
==Philosophy== |
||
[[File:Immanuel Kant by Emanuel Bardou, view 2, Berlin, 1798, marble - Bode-Museum - DSC02884.JPG|thumb|200px|Bust of Kant by [[Emanuel Bardou]], 1798]] |
|||
{{refimprove section|date=April 2017}} |
|||
Like many of his contemporaries, Kant was greatly impressed with the scientific advances made by [[Isaac Newton|Newton]] and others. This new evidence of the power of human reason called into question for many the traditional authority of politics and religion. In particular, the modern mechanistic view of the world called into question the very possibility of morality; for, if there is no agency, there cannot be any responsibility.<ref>Kant ''CPuR'' Bxxviii–Bxxx</ref>{{sfn|di Giovanni|2005}} |
|||
The aim of Kant's critical project is to secure human autonomy, the basis of religion and morality, from this threat of mechanism—and to do so in a way that preserves the advances of modern science.{{sfn|Rohlf|2020|loc = §2.1}} In the ''Critique of Pure Reason'', Kant summarizes his philosophical concerns in the following three questions: |
|||
In Kant's essay "[[What is Enlightenment?|Answering the Question: What is Enlightenment?]]", |
|||
# What can I know? |
|||
Kant defined the Enlightenment as an age shaped by the [[Latin]] motto ''[[Sapere aude]]'' ("Dare to be wise"). Kant maintained that one ought to think autonomously, free of the dictates of external [[authority]]. His work reconciled many of the differences between the [[rationalism|rationalist]] and [[empiricism|empiricist]] traditions of the 18th century. He had a decisive impact on the [[Romanticism|Romantic]] and [[German Idealism|German Idealist]] philosophies of the 19th century. His work has also been a starting point for many 20th century philosophers. |
|||
# What should I do? |
|||
# What may I hope?<ref>Kant, ''CPuR'' A804–05/B833</ref> |
|||
The ''[[Critique of Pure Reason]]'' focuses upon the first question and opens a conceptual space for an answer to the second question. It argues that even though we cannot strictly ''know'' that we are free, we can—and for practical purposes, must—''think'' of ourselves as free. In Kant's own words, "I had to deny knowledge in order to make room for faith."<ref>Kant, ''CPuR'' Bxxx</ref> Our rational faith in morality is further developed in the ''[[Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals]]'' and the ''[[Critique of Practical Reason]]''.{{sfn|Guyer|2014|pp=7–8}}{{sfn|Jankowiak|2023}} |
|||
The ''[[Critique of Judgment|Critique of the Power of Judgment]]'' argues we may ''rationally'' hope for the harmonious unity of the theoretical and practical domains treated in the first two ''Critiques'' on the basis, not only of its conceptual possibility, but also on the basis of our affective experience of natural beauty and, more generally, the organization of the natural world.{{sfn|Guyer|2014|pp=6–8}} In ''[[Religion within the Bounds of Bare Reason|Religion within the Bounds of Mere Reason]]'', Kant endeavors to complete his answer to this third question.<ref>di Giovanni, George. (1996) "Translator's Introduction", In ''Religion and Rational Theology''. Cambridge University Press. p.49, citing Kant in correspondence with Stäudlin.</ref> |
|||
Kant asserted that, because of the limitations of argumentation in the absence of irrefutable [[Evidence#Evidence in Problems|evidence]], no one could really know whether there is a God and an afterlife or not. For the sake of morality and as a ground for reason, Kant asserted, people are justified in believing in God, even though they could never know God's presence empirically. He explained: |
|||
These works all place the active, rational human [[subject (philosophy)|subject]] at the center of the cognitive and moral worlds. In brief, Kant argues that the [[mind]] itself necessarily makes a constitutive contribution to [[knowledge]], that this contribution is transcendental rather than psychological, and that to act autonomously is to act according to rational moral principles.{{sfn|Rohlf|2020}} |
|||
{{quote|text=All the preparations of reason, therefore, in what may be called pure philosophy, are in reality directed to those three problems only [God, the soul, and freedom]. However, these three elements in themselves still hold independent, proportional, objective weight individually. Moreover, in a collective relational context; namely, to know ''what ought to be done'': if the will is free, if there is a God, and if there is a future [[world (philosophy)|world]]. As this concerns our actions with reference to the highest aims of life, we see that the ultimate intention of nature in her wise provision was really, in the constitution of our reason, directed to moral interests only.<ref name = "CPR A801">''[[Critique of Pure Reason]]'', A801.</ref>}} |
|||
===Kant's critical project=== |
|||
[[File:Kant017.jpg|thumb|Immanuel Kant by [[Carle Vernet]] (1758–1836)]] |
|||
{{See also|Critique of Pure Reason}} |
|||
[[File:Kant017.jpg|thumb|Kant by [[Carle Vernet]] (1758–1836)]] |
|||
Kant's 1781 (revised 1787) ''Critique of Pure Reason'' has often been cited as the most significant volume of metaphysics and [[epistemology]] in modern philosophy.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Rohlf |first=Michael |title=Immanuel Kant |url=https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/kant/ |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20191114014720/https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/kant/ |archive-date=14 November 2019 |access-date=29 May 2019 |website=[[Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy]]}}</ref> In the first ''Critique'', and later on in other works as well, Kant frames the "general" and "real problem of pure reason" in terms of the following question: "How are synthetic judgments ''a priori'' possible?"<ref>Kant, ''CPuR'' B135</ref>{{sfn|Guyer|2014|p=51}} To understand this claim, it is necessary to define some terms. First, Kant makes a distinction between two sources of knowledge: |
|||
The sense of an enlightened approach and the [[scientific method|critical method]] required that "If one cannot prove that a thing ''is,'' he may try to prove that it is ''not.'' If he fails to do either (as often occurs), he may still ask whether it is in his ''interest'' to ''accept'' one or the other of the alternatives hypothetically, from the theoretical or the practical point of view. Hence the question no longer is as to whether [[perpetual peace]] is a real thing or not a real thing, or as to whether we may not be deceiving ourselves when we adopt the former alternative, but we must ''act'' on the supposition of its being real."<ref name = "SoR Concl">''The Science of Right,'' Conclusion.</ref> The presupposition of God, soul, and freedom was then a practical concern, for "Morality, by itself, constitutes a system, but happiness does not, unless it is distributed in exact proportion to morality. This, however, is possible in an intelligible world only under a wise author and ruler. Reason compels us to admit such a ruler, together with life in such a world, which we must consider as future life, or else all moral laws are to be considered as idle dreams... ."<ref name = "CPR A811">''Critique of Pure Reason'', A811.</ref> |
|||
# Cognitions ''a priori'': "cognition independent of all experience and even of all the impressions of the senses". |
|||
Kant drew a parallel between the "[[Copernican Revolution#Immanuel Kant|Copernican revolution]]" and the epistemology of his new [[transcendental philosophy]], although, according to [[Tom Rockmore]],<ref>Tom Rockmore, ''Marx After Marxism: The Philosophy of Karl Marx'' (2002), p. 184.</ref> Kant himself never used the "Copernican revolution" phrase about himself, though it was "routinely" applied to his work by others. |
|||
# Cognitions ''a posteriori'': cognitions that have their sources in experience{{mdash}}that is, which are empirical.<ref>Kant, ''CPuR'' B1–3</ref> |
|||
Second, he makes a distinction in terms of the ''form'' of knowledge: |
|||
Kant's Copernican revolution involved two interconnected foundations of his "[[critical philosophy]]": |
|||
* the [[epistemology]] of [[transcendental idealism]] and |
|||
* the [[moral philosophy]] of the autonomy of practical reason. |
|||
# Analytic judgements: judgements in which the predicate concept is contained in the subject concept; e.g., "All bachelors are unmarried", or "All bodies take up space". These can also be called "judgments of clarification". |
|||
These teachings placed the active, rational human [[subject (philosophy)|subject]] at the center of the cognitive and moral worlds. Kant argued that the rational order of the world as known by science was not just the accidental accumulation of sense perceptions. |
|||
# Synthetic judgements: judgements in which the predicate concept is not contained in the subject concept; e.g., "All bachelors are alone", "All swans are white", or "All bodies have weight". These can also be called "judgments of amplification".<ref>Kant, ''CPuR'' A6–8/B10–12</ref> |
|||
An analytic judgement is true by nature of strictly conceptual relations. All analytic judgements are ''a priori'' since basing an analytic judgement on experience would be absurd.<ref>Kant, ''CPuR'' B11</ref> By contrast, a synthetic judgement is one the content of which includes something new in the sense that it is includes something not already contained in the subject concept. The truth or falsehood of a synthetic statement depends upon something more than what is contained in its concepts. The most obvious form of synthetic judgement is a simple empirical observation.{{sfn|Guyer|2014|pp=52–54}} |
|||
Conceptual unification and integration is carried out by the mind through [[concept]]s or the "categories of the [[Understanding (Kant)|understanding]]" operating on the perceptual manifold within [[space and time]]. The latter are not concepts,<ref>In the first edition of the ''Critique of Pure Reason'' Kant refers to space as "no discursive or...general conception of the relation of things, but a pure intuition" and maintained that "We can only represent to ourselves one space". The "general notion of spaces...depends solely upon limitations" (Meikeljohn trans., A25). In the second edition of the CPR, Kant adds, "The original representation of space is an ''a priori'' intuition, not a concept" (Kemp Smith trans., B40). In regard to time, Kant states that "Time is not a discursive, or what is called a general concept, but a pure form of sensible intuition. Different times are but parts of one and the same time; and the representation which can be given only through a single object is intuition" (A31/B47). For the differences in the discursive use of reason according to concepts and its intuitive use through the construction of concepts, see ''Critique of Pure Reason'' (A719/B747 ff. and A837/B865). On "One and the same thing in space and time" and the mathematical construction of concepts, see A724/B752.</ref> but are forms of sensibility that are ''a priori'' necessary conditions for any possible experience. Thus the objective order of nature and the causal necessity that operates within it depend on the mind's processes, the product of the rule-based activity that Kant called, "[[A priori and a posteriori|synthesis]]." There is much discussion among Kant scholars about the correct interpretation of this train of thought. |
|||
Philosophers such as [[David Hume]] believed that these were the only possible kinds of human reason and investigation, which Hume called "relations of ideas" and "matters of fact".<ref>Hume, David. ''An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding''. Section 4; Part 1.</ref> Establishing the synthetic ''a priori'' as a third mode of knowledge would allow Kant to push back against Hume's skepticism about such matters as causation and metaphysical knowledge more generally. This is because, unlike ''a posteriori'' cognition, ''a priori'' cognition has "true or strict ... universality" and includes a claim of "necessity".<ref>Kant, ''CPuR'' B3–4</ref>{{sfn|Guyer|2014|pp=52–54}} Kant himself regards it as uncontroversial that we do have synthetic ''a priori'' knowledge{{mdash}}most obviously, that of mathematics. That 7 + 5 = 12, he claims, is a result not contained in the concepts of seven, five, and the addition operation.<ref>Kant, ''CPuR'' B14–17</ref> Yet, although he considers the possibility of such knowledge to be obvious, Kant nevertheless assumes the burden of providing a philosophical proof that we have ''a priori'' knowledge in mathematics, the natural sciences, and metaphysics. It is the twofold aim of the ''Critique'' both ''to prove'' and ''to explain'' the possibility of this knowledge.{{sfn|Guyer|2014|p=55}} Kant says "There are two stems of human cognition, which may perhaps arise from a common but to us unknown root, namely sensibility and understanding, through the first of which objects are ''given'' to us, but through the second of which they are ''thought''."<ref>Kant, ''CPuR'' A15/B29, emphases added</ref> |
|||
The 'two-world' interpretation regards Kant's position as a statement of epistemological limitation, that we are not able to transcend the bounds of our own mind, meaning that we cannot access the "[[thing-in-itself]]". However, Kant also speaks of the thing in itself or ''transcendental object'' as a product of the (human) understanding as it attempts to conceive of objects in abstraction from the conditions of sensibility. Following this line of thought, some interpreters have argued that the thing in itself does not represent a separate ontological domain but simply a way of considering objects by means of the understanding alone{{spaced ndash}}this is known as the two-aspect view. |
|||
Kant's term for the object of sensibility is intuition, and his term for the object of the understanding is concept. In general terms, the former is a non-discursive representation of a ''particular'' object, and the latter is a discursive (or mediate) representation of a ''general type'' of object.{{sfn|Guyer|2014|pp=32, 61}} The conditions of possible experience require both intuitions and concepts, that is, the affection of the receptive sensibility and the actively synthesizing power of the understanding.{{sfn|Rohlf|2020|loc=§2.12}}{{efn|More technically, Kant puts his general point that all genuine knowledge requires both sensory input and intellectual organization by saying that all knowledge requires both "intuitions" and "concepts" (e.g., A 50 / B 74). Intuitions and concepts are two different species of the genus "representation" (''Vorstellung''), Kant's most general term for any cognitive state (see A 320 / B 376–7). At the outset of the "Transcendental Aesthetic", Kant states that an "intuition" is our most direct or "immediate" kind of representation of objects, in contrast to a "concept" which always represents an object "through a detour (''indirecte'')"{{mdash}}that is, merely by some "mark" or property that the object has (A 19 / B 33). In his logic textbook, Kant defines an intuition as a "''singular'' representation"{{mdash}}that is, one that represents a particular object{{mdash}}while a concept is always a "''universal'' (''repraesentation per notas communes'')", which represents properties common to many objects (''Logic'', §1, 9:91).{{sfn|Guyer|2014|pp=60–61}}}} Thus the statement: "Thoughts without content are empty, intuitions without concepts are blind."<ref>Kant, ''CPuR'' A51/B75</ref> Kant's basic strategy in the first half of his book will be to argue that some intuitions and concepts are pure{{mdash}}that is, are contributed entirely by the mind, independent of anything empirical. Knowledge generated on this basis, under certain conditions, can be synthetic ''a priori''. This insight is known as Kant's "Copernican revolution", because, just as Copernicus advanced astronomy by way of a radical shift in perspective, so Kant here claims do the same for metaphysics.<ref>Kant, ''CPuR'' Bxvi–xviii</ref>{{sfn|Rohlf|2020|loc=§2.2}} The second half of the ''Critique'' is the explicitly ''critical'' part. In this "transcendental dialectic", Kant argues that many of the claims of traditional rationalist metaphysics violate the criteria he claims to establish in the first, "constructive" part of his book.{{sfn|Jankowiak|2023|loc=2(g)}}{{sfn|Guyer|2014|loc=ch. 4}} As Kant observes, however, "human reason, without being moved by the mere vanity of knowing it all, inexorably pushes on, driven by its own need to such questions that cannot be answered by any experiential use of reason".<ref>Kant, ''CPuR'' B21</ref> It is the project of "the critique of pure reason" to establish the limits as to just how far reason may legitimately so proceed.<ref>Kant, ''CPuR'' Axi–xii</ref> |
|||
The notion of the "[[thing in itself]]" was much discussed by philosophers after Kant. It was argued that because the "thing in itself" was unknowable, its existence must not be assumed. Rather than arbitrarily switching to an account that was ungrounded in anything supposed to be the "real," as did the German Idealists, another group arose to ask how our (presumably reliable) accounts of a coherent and rule-abiding universe were actually grounded. This new kind of philosophy became known as [[Phenomenology (philosophy)|Phenomenology]], and its founder was [[Edmund Husserl]]. |
|||
=== Doctrine of transcendental idealism === |
|||
With regard to [[morality]], Kant argued that the source of the [[Goodness and value theory|good]] lies not in anything outside the [[human]] subject, either in [[nature]] or given by [[God]], but rather is only the good will itself. A good will is one that acts from duty in accordance with the universal moral law that the autonomous human being freely gives itself. This law obliges one to treat humanity{{spaced ndash}}understood as rational agency, and represented through oneself as well as others{{spaced ndash}}as an [[end in itself]] rather than (merely) as [[means (philosophy)|means]] to other ends the individual might hold. This necessitates practical self-reflection in which we universalize our reasons. |
|||
{{See also | Transcendental idealism}} |
|||
The section of the ''Critique'' entitled "The transcendental aesthetic" introduces Kant's famous metaphysics of [[transcendental idealism]]. Something is "transcendental" if it is a necessary condition for the possibility of experience, and "idealism" denotes some form of mind-dependence that must be further specified. The correct interpretation of Kant's own specification remains controversial.{{sfn|Jankowiak|2023|loc= §2(d)}} The metaphysical thesis then states that human beings only experience and know phenomenal appearances, not independent things-in-themselves, because space and time are nothing but the subjective forms of intuition that we ourselves contribute to experience.{{sfn|Rohlf|2020|loc=§3}}<ref>Kant ''CPuR'' A43/B59–60, A369</ref> Nevertheless, although Kant says that space and time are "transcendentally ideal"—the ''pure forms'' of human sensibility, rather than part of nature or reality as it exists in-itself—he also claims that they are "empirically real", by which he means "that 'everything that can come before us externally as an object' is in both space and time, and that our internal intuitions of ourselves are in time".<ref>Kant ''CPuR'' A28/B44, A34–35/B51–51</ref>{{sfn|Rohlf|2020|loc=§3}} However Kant's doctrine is interpreted, he wished to distinguish his position from the [[subjective idealism]] of [[George Berkeley|Berkeley]].{{sfn|Stang|2022|loc=§2.3}} |
|||
[[Paul Guyer]], although critical of many of Kant's arguments in this section, writes of the "Transcendental Aesthetic" that it "not only lays the first stone in Kant's constructive theory of knowledge; it also lays the foundation for both his critique and his reconstruction of traditional metaphysics. It argues that all genuine knowledge requires a sensory component, and thus that metaphysical claims that transcend the possibility of sensory confirmation can never amount to knowledge."{{sfn|Guyer|2014|p=60}} |
|||
These ideas have largely framed or influenced all subsequent philosophical discussion and analysis. The specifics of Kant's account generated immediate and lasting controversy. Nevertheless, his theses{{spaced ndash}}that the [[mind]] itself necessarily makes a constitutive contribution to its [[knowledge]], that this contribution is transcendental rather than psychological, that philosophy involves self-critical activity, that morality is rooted in human freedom, and that to act autonomously is to act according to rational moral principles{{spaced ndash}}have all had a lasting effect on subsequent philosophy. |
|||
=== |
====Interpretive disagreements==== |
||
One interpretation, known as the "two-world" interpretation, regards Kant's position as a statement of epistemological limitation, meaning that we are not able to transcend the bounds of our own mind, and therefore cannot access the "[[thing-in-itself]]". On this particular view, the thing-in-itself is not numerically identical to the phenomenal empirical object.<ref>{{cite book |last=Allison |first=Henry E. |title=Kant's Transcendental Idealism: An Interpretation and Defense |year=2004 |publisher=Yale University Press |isbn=978-0300102666 |pages=25–28}}</ref> Kant also spoke, however, of the thing-in-itself or ''transcendent object'' as a product of the (human) understanding as it attempts to conceive of objects in abstraction from the conditions of sensibility. Following this line of thought, a different interpretation argues that the thing-in-itself does not represent a separate ontological domain but simply a way of considering objects by means of the understanding alone; this is known as the "two-aspect" view.{{sfn|Rohlf|2020|loc = §§3.1–3.2}}{{sfn|Stang|2022|loc = §§4–5}} On this alternative view, the same objects to which we attribute empirical properties like color, size, and shape are also, when considered as they are in themselves, the things-in-themselves, otherwise inaccessible to human knowledge.<ref>{{cite book |last=Langton |first=Rae |title=Kantian Humility: Our Ignorance of Things in Themselves |year=1998 |publisher=Oxford University Press |isbn=9780199243174|pages=105–107}}</ref> |
|||
{{Main|Critique of Pure Reason}} |
|||
Kant defines his theory of perception in his influential 1781 work the ''[[Critique of Pure Reason]]'', which has often been cited as the most significant volume of metaphysics and [[epistemology]] in modern philosophy. Kant maintains that our understanding of the external world had its foundations not merely in experience, but in both experience and [[A priori knowledge|''a priori'' concepts]], thus offering a ''non-empiricist critique of rationalist philosophy'', which is what he and others referred to as his "[[Copernican Revolution#Immanuel Kant|Copernican revolution]]".<ref>{{cite web|url=http://encyclopedia2.thefreedictionary.com/Kant%2c+Immanuel |title=Kant, Immanuel definition of Kant, Immanuel in the Free Online Encyclopedia |publisher=Encyclopedia2.thefreedictionary.com |date= |accessdate=26 February 2014}}</ref> |
|||
Firstly, Kant [[Analytic–synthetic distinction|distinguishes between analytic and synthetic propositions]]: |
|||
# Analytic proposition: a proposition whose predicate concept is contained in its subject concept; ''e.g.'', "All bachelors are unmarried," or, "All bodies take up space." |
|||
# Synthetic proposition: a proposition whose predicate concept is not contained in its subject concept; ''e.g.'', "All bachelors are alone," or, "All bodies have weight." |
|||
An analytic proposition is true by nature of the meaning of the words in the sentence — we require no further knowledge than a grasp of the language to understand this proposition. On the other hand, a synthetic statement is one that tells us something about the world. The truth or falsehood of synthetic statements derives from something outside their linguistic content. In this instance, weight is not a necessary [[predicate (grammar)|predicate]] of the body; until we are told the heaviness of the body we do not know that it has weight. In this case, experience of the body is required before its heaviness becomes clear. Before Kant's first Critique, empiricists (cf. [[David Hume|Hume]]) and rationalists (cf. [[Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz|Leibniz]]) assumed that all synthetic statements required experience to be known. |
|||
Kant, however, contests this: he claims that elementary mathematics, like arithmetic, is synthetic ''a priori'', in that its statements provide new knowledge not derived from experience. This becomes part of his over-all argument for [[transcendental idealism]]. That is, he argues that the possibility of experience depends on certain [[necessary and sufficient conditions|necessary conditions]] — which he calls ''a priori'' forms — and that these conditions structure and hold true of the world of experience. His main claims in the "[[Critique of Pure Reason#I. Transcendental Doctrine of Elements|Transcendental Aesthetic]]" are that mathematic judgments are synthetic ''a priori'' and that [[Space]] and [[Time]] are not derived from experience but rather are its preconditions. |
|||
Once we have grasped the functions of basic arithmetic, we do not need empirical experience to know that 100 + 100 = 200, and so it appears that arithmetic is analytic. However, that it is analytic can be disproved by considering the calculation 5 + 7 = 12: there is nothing in the numbers 5 and 7 by which the number 12 can be inferred. Thus "5 + 7" and "the cube root of 1,728" or "12" are not analytic because their reference is the same but their sense is not — the statement "5 + 7 = 12" tells us something new about the world. It is self-evident, and undeniably ''a priori'', but at the same time it is synthetic. Thus Kant proved that a proposition can be synthetic and a priori. |
|||
Kant asserts that experience is based on the perception of external objects and ''a priori'' knowledge.<ref>The German word ''Anschauung'', which Kant used, literally means 'looking at' and generally means what in philosophy in English is called "perception". However it sometimes is rendered as "intuition": not, however, with the vernacular meaning of an indescribable or mystical experience or sixth sense, but rather with the meaning of the direct perception or grasping of sensory phenomena. In this article, both terms, "perception" and "intuition" are used to stand for Kant's ''Anschauung''.</ref> The external world, he writes, provides those things that we sense. But our mind processes this information and gives it order, allowing us to comprehend it. Our mind supplies the conditions of space and time to experience objects. According to the "transcendental unity of apperception", the concepts of the mind (Understanding) and perceptions or intuitions that garner information from phenomena (Sensibility) are synthesized by comprehension. Without concepts, perceptions are nondescript; without perceptions, concepts are meaningless — thus the famous statement, "Thoughts without content are empty, intuitions (perceptions) without concepts are blind."<ref>Immanuel Kant, Critique of Pure Reason [1781], trans. Norman Kemp Smith (N.Y.: St. Martins, 1965), A 51/B 75.</ref> |
|||
Kant also claims that an external environment is necessary for the establishment of the self. Although Kant would want to argue that there is no empirical way of observing the self, we can see the logical necessity of the self when we observe that we can have different perceptions of the external environment over time. By uniting these general representations into one global representation, we can see how a transcendental self emerges. "I am therefore conscious of the identical self in regard to the manifold of the representations that are given to me in an intuition because I call them all together my representations."<ref>Kant, Immanuel. ''Critique of Pure Reason''. Ed. [[Paul Guyer]] and [[Allen W. Wood]]. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 1998. p. 248.</ref> |
|||
=== |
===Kant's theory of judgment=== |
||
{{See also|Category (Kant)}} |
{{See also|Category (Kant)}} |
||
[[File:Immanuelkant.JPG|thumb|Kant statue in [[Belo Horizonte]], Brazil]] |
[[File:Immanuelkant.JPG|thumb|Kant statue in the School of Philosophy and Human Sciences (FAFICH) in the Federal University of Minas Gerais (UFMG), [[Belo Horizonte]], Brazil]] |
||
Following the "Transcendental Analytic" is the "Transcendental Logic". Whereas the former was concerned with the contributions of the sensibility, the latter is concerned, first, with the contributions of the understanding ("Transcendental Analytic") and, second, with the faculty of ''reason'' as the source of both metaphysical errors and genuine regulatory principles ("Transcendental Dialectic"). The "Transcendental Analytic" is further divided into two sections. The first, "Analytic of Concepts", is concerned with establishing the universality and necessity of the ''pure'' concepts of the understanding (i.e., the categories). This section contains Kant's famous "transcendental deduction". The second, "Analytic of Principles", is concerned with the application of those pure concepts in ''empirical'' judgments. This second section is longer than the first and is further divided into many sub-sections.{{sfn|Guyer|Wood|1998|pp=4–13}} |
|||
Kant deemed it obvious that we have some objective knowledge of the world, such as, say, Newtonian physics. But this knowledge relies on [[Analytic-synthetic distinction|synthetic]], ''a priori'' laws of nature, like causality and substance. How this is possible? Kant's solution was that the [[Subject (philosophy)#The subject in German idealism|subject]] must supply laws that make experience of objects possible, and that these laws are synthetic, ''a priori'' laws of nature that apply to all objects before we experience them. To deduce all these laws, Kant examined experience in general, dissecting in it what is supplied by the mind from what is supplied by the given intuitions. This is commonly called a transcendental deduction.<ref name="Prolegomena">Immanuel Kant, ''Prolegomena to perhaps Any Future Metaphysics'', pages 35 to 43.</ref> |
|||
====Transcendental deduction of the categories of the understanding==== |
|||
To begin with, Kant's distinction between the ''[[Empirical evidence|a posteriori]]'' being [[Contingency (philosophy)|contingent]] and particular knowledge, and the ''a priori'' being universal and necessary knowledge, must be kept in mind. If we merely connect two intuitions together in a perceiving subject, the knowledge is always subjective because it is derived ''a posteriori,'' when what is desired is for the knowledge to be objective, that is, for the two intuitions to refer to the object and hold good of it for anyone at any time, not just the perceiving subject in its current condition. What else is equivalent to objective knowledge besides the ''a priori,'' (universal and necessary knowledge)? Before knowledge can be objective, it must be incorporated under an ''a priori'' category of ''understanding''.<ref name = "Prolegomena"/><ref>[http://www.webdeleuze.com/php/texte.php?cle=66&groupe=Kant&langue=2 Deleuze on Kant] {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20071114091656/http://www.webdeleuze.com/php/texte.php?cle=66&groupe=Kant&langue=2 |date=14 November 2007 }}, from where the definitions of ''a priori'' and ''a posteriori'' were obtained.</ref> |
|||
The "Analytic of Concepts" argues for the universal and necessary validity of the pure concepts of the understanding, or the categories, for instance, the concepts of substance and causation. These twelve basic categories define what it is to be a ''thing in general''{{mdash}}that is, they articulate the necessary conditions according to which something is a possible object of experience. These, in conjunction with the ''a priori'' forms of intuition, are the basis of all synthetic ''a priori'' cognition. According to [[Paul Guyer|Guyer]] and [[Allen W. Wood|Wood]], "Kant's idea is that just as there are certain essential features of all judgments, so there must be certain corresponding ways in which we form the concepts of objects so that judgments may be about objects."{{sfn|Guyer|Wood|1998|p=8}} |
|||
Kant provides two central lines of argumentation in support of his claims about the categories. The first, known as the "metaphysical deduction", proceeds analytically from a table of the Aristotelian logical functions of judgment. As Kant was aware, this assumes precisely what the skeptic rejects, namely, the existence of synthetic ''a priori'' cognition. For this reason, Kant also supplies a synthetic argument that does not depend upon the assumption in dispute.{{sfn|Guyer|2014|pp=89–90}} |
|||
For example, if a subject says, "The sun shines on the stone; the stone grows warm," all he perceives are phenomena. His judgment is contingent and holds no necessity. But if he says, "The sunshine causes the stone to warm," he subsumes the perception under the category of causality, which is not found in the perception, and necessarily synthesizes the concept sunshine with the concept heat, producing a necessarily universally true judgment.<ref name = "Prolegomena"/> |
|||
This argument, provided under the heading "Transcendental Deduction of the Pure Concepts of the Understanding", is widely considered to be both the most important and the most difficult of Kant's arguments in the ''Critique''. Kant himself said that it is the one that cost him the most labor.<ref>Kant, ''CPuR'' Axi</ref> Frustrated by its confused reception in the first edition of his book, he rewrote it entirely for the second edition.{{sfn|Jankowiak|2023|loc= §2(e)}}{{sfn|Rohlf|2020|loc = §4}} |
|||
To explain the categories in more detail, they are the preconditions of the construction of objects in the mind. Indeed, to even think of the sun and stone presupposes the category of subsistence, that is, substance. For the categories synthesize the random data of the sensory manifold into intelligible objects. This means that the categories are also the most abstract things one can say of any object whatsoever, and hence one can have an ''a priori'' cognition of the totality of all objects of experience if one can list all of them. To do so, Kant formulates another transcendental deduction.<ref name = "Prolegomena"/> |
|||
The "Transcendental Deduction" gives Kant's argument that these pure concepts apply universally and necessarily to the objects that are given in experience. According to Guyer and Wood, "He centers his argument on the premise that our experience can be ascribed to a single identical subject, via what he calls the 'transcendental unity of apperception,' only if the elements of experience given in intuition are synthetically combined so as to present us with objects that are thought through the categories."{{sfn|Guyer|Wood|1998|p=9}} |
|||
Judgments are, for Kant, the preconditions of any thought. Man thinks via judgments, so all possible judgments must be listed and the perceptions connected within them put aside, so as to make it possible to examine the moments when ''the understanding'' is engaged in constructing judgments. For the categories are equivalent to these moments, in that they are concepts of intuitions in general, so far as they are determined by these moments universally and necessarily. Thus by listing all the moments, one can deduce from them all of the categories.<ref name = "Prolegomena"/> |
|||
Kant's principle of apperception is that "The I think must be able to accompany all my representations; for otherwise something would be represented in me that could not be thought at all, which is as much as to say that the representation would either be impossible or else at least would be nothing for me."<ref>Kant, ''CPuR'' B131-32</ref> The ''necessary'' possibility of the self-ascription of the representations of self-consciousness, identical to itself through time, is an ''a priori'' conceptual truth that cannot be based on experience.{{sfn|Rohlf|2020|loc = §4.1}} This is only a bare sketch of one of the arguments that Kant presents. |
|||
One may now ask: How many possible judgments are there? Kant believed that all the possible propositions within Aristotle's [[syllogism|syllogistic]] logic are equivalent to all possible judgments, and that all the logical operators within the propositions are equivalent to the moments of the understanding within judgments. Thus he listed Aristotle's system in four groups of three: quantity (universal, particular, singular), quality (affirmative, negative, infinite), relation (categorical, hypothetical, disjunctive) and modality (problematic, assertoric, apodeictic). The parallelism with Kant's categories is obvious: quantity (unity, plurality, totality), quality (reality, negation, limitation), relation (substance, cause, community) and modality (possibility, existence, necessity).<ref name = "Prolegomena"/> |
|||
====Principles of pure understanding==== |
|||
The fundamental building blocks of experience, i.e. objective knowledge, are now in place. First there is the sensibility, which supplies the mind with intuitions, and then there is the understanding, which produces judgments of these intuitions and can subsume them under categories. These categories lift the intuitions up out of the subject's current state of consciousness and place them within consciousness in general, producing universally necessary knowledge. For the categories are innate in any rational being, so any intuition thought within a category in one mind is necessarily subsumed and understood identically in any mind. In other words, we filter what we see and hear.<ref name = "Prolegomena"/> |
|||
Kant's deduction of the categories in the "Analytic of Concepts", if successful, demonstrates its claims about the categories only in an abstract way. The task of the "Analytic of Principles" is to show both ''that'' they must universally apply to objects given in actual experience (i.e., manifolds of intuition) and ''how'' it is they do so.{{sfn|Guyer|Wood|1998|pp=9–10}} In the first book<!--????--> of this section<!--????--> on the "[[Schema (Kant)|schematism]]", Kant connects each of the purely logical categories of the understanding to the temporality of intuition to show that, although non-empirical, they do have purchase upon the objects of experience. The second book continues this line of argument in four chapters, each associated with one of the category groupings. In some cases, it adds a connection to the spatial dimension of intuition to the categories it analyzes.{{sfn|Guyer|Wood|1998|pp=10–11}} The fourth chapter of this section, "The Analogies of Experience", marks a shift from "mathematical" to "dynamical" principles, that is, to those that deal with relations among objects. Some commentators consider this the most significant section of the ''Critique''.{{sfn|Guyer|Wood|1998|p=11}} The analogies are three in number: |
|||
# ''Principle of persistence of substance'': Kant is here concerned with the general conditions of determining time-relations among the objects of experience. He argues that the unity of time implies that "all change must consist in the alteration of states in an underlying substance, whose existence and quantity must be unchangeable or conserved."<ref>see Kant, ''CPuR'' A182–26/B224–36</ref> |
|||
===Transcendental schema doctrine=== |
|||
# ''Principle of temporal succession according to the law of causality'': Here Kant argues that "we can make determinate judgments about the objective succession of events, as contrasted to merely subjective successions of representations, only if every objective alteration follows a necessary rule of succession, or a causal law." This is Kant's most direct rejoinder to [[Humeanism#Causality and necessity|Hume's skepticism about causality]].<ref>see Kant, ''CPuR'' A186–211/B232–56</ref> |
|||
{{See also|Schema (Kant)}} |
|||
# ''Principle of simultaneity according to the law of reciprocity or community'': The final analogy argues that "determinate judgments that objects (or states of substance) in different regions of space exists simultaneously are possible only if such objects stand in mutual causal relation of community or reciprocal interaction." This is Kant's rejoinder to [[Leibniz]]'s thesis in the ''[[Monadology]]''.<ref>see Kant, ''CPuR'' A211-15/B256-62</ref>{{sfn|Guyer|Wood|1998|pp=11–12}} |
|||
The fourth section of this chapter, which is not an analogy, deals with the empirical use of the modal categories. That was the end of the chapter in the A edition of the ''Critique''. The B edition includes one more short section, "The Refutation of Idealism". In this section, by analysis of the concept of self-consciousness, Kant argues that his transcendental idealism is a "critical" or "formal" idealism that does not deny the existence of reality apart from our subjective representations.{{sfn|Guyer|Wood|1998|p=12}} The final chapter of "The Analytic of Principles" distinguishes ''phenomena'', of which we can have genuine knowledge, from ''noumena'', a term which refers to objects of pure thought that we cannot know, but to which we may still refer "in a negative sense".{{sfn|Guyer|Wood|1998|pp=12–13}} An Appendix to the section further develops Kant's criticism of Leibnizian-Wolffian rationalism by arguing that its "dogmatic" metaphysics confuses the "mere features of concepts through which we think things ... [with] features of the objects themselves". Against this, Kant reasserts his own insistence upon the necessity of a sensible component in all genuine knowledge.{{sfn|Guyer|Wood|1998|p=13}} |
|||
Kant ran into a problem with his theory that the mind plays a part in producing objective knowledge. Intuitions and categories are entirely disparate, so how can they interact? Kant's solution is the (transcendental) schema: a priori principles by which the transcendental imagination connects concepts with intuitions through time. All the principles are temporally bound, for if a concept is purely a priori, as the categories are, then they must apply for all times. Hence there are principles such as ''substance is that which endures through time'', and ''the cause must always be prior to the effect''.<ref name=autogenerated1>Immanuel Kant, ''Prolegomena to Any Future Metaphysics'', pages 35 to 43.</ref><ref name=Hackett>Immanuel Kant, ''Critique of Judgment'', the Introduction to the Hackett edition.</ref> |
|||
=== |
===Critique of metaphysics=== |
||
The second of the two Divisions of "The Transcendental Logic", "The Transcendental Dialectic", contains the "negative" portion of Kant's ''Critique'', which builds upon the "positive" arguments of the preceding "Transcendental Analytic" to expose the limits of metaphysical speculation. In particular, it is concerned to demonstrate as spurious the efforts of reason to arrive at knowledge independent of sensibility. This endeavor, Kant argues, is doomed to failure, which he claims to demonstrate by showing that reason, unbounded by sense, is always capable of generating opposing or otherwise incompatible conclusions. Like "the light dove, in free flight cutting through the air, the resistance of which it feels", reason "could get the idea that it could do even better in airless space".<ref>Kant, ''CPuR'' A5/B8</ref> Against this, Kant claims that, absent epistemic friction, there can be no knowledge. Nevertheless, Kant's critique is not entirely destructive. He presents the speculative excesses of traditional metaphysics as inherent in our very capacity of reason. Moreover, he argues that its products are not without some (carefully qualified) ''regulative'' value.<ref>{{cite book |last=Guyer |first=Paul |title=Kant and the Claims of Knowledge |year=1987 |publisher=Cambridge University Press |isbn=978-0521317245 |pages=52–55}}</ref> |
|||
[[File:Immanuel Kant.jpg|thumb|Immanuel Kant]] |
|||
Kant developed his moral philosophy in three works: ''[[Groundwork of the Metaphysic of Morals]]'' (1785), ''[[Critique of Practical Reason]]'' (1788), and ''[[Metaphysics of Morals]]'' (1797). |
|||
====On the concepts of pure reason==== |
|||
In ''Groundwork'', Kant' tries to convert our everyday, obvious, rational<ref>The distinction between rational and philosophical knowledge is given in the Preface to the ''Groundwork'', 1785.</ref> knowledge of morality into philosophical knowledge. The latter two works used "practical reason", which is based only on things about which reason can tell us, and not deriving any principles from experience, to reach conclusions which can be applied to the world of experience (in the second part of ''The Metaphysic of Morals''). |
|||
Kant calls the basic concepts of metaphysics "ideas". They are different from the concepts of understanding in that they are not limited by the critical stricture limiting knowledge to the conditions of possible experience and its objects. "Transcendental illusion" is Kant's term for the tendency of reason to produce such ideas.{{sfn|Jankowiak|2023|loc= §2(g)}} Although reason has a "logical use" of simply drawing inferences from principles, in "The Transcendental Dialectic", Kant is concerned with its purportedly "real use" to arrive at conclusions by way of unchecked regressive syllogistic ratiocination.{{sfn|Guyer|Wood|1998|p=15}} The three categories of ''relation'', pursued without regard to the limits of possible experience, yield the three central ideas of traditional metaphysics: |
|||
# ''The soul'': the concept of substance as the ultimate subject; |
|||
Kant is known for his theory that there is a single [[moral obligation]], which he called the "[[Categorical Imperative]]", and is derived from the concept of [[duty]]. Kant defines the demands of moral law as "categorical imperatives". Categorical imperatives are principles that are intrinsically valid; they are good in and of themselves; they must be obeyed in all situations and circumstances, if our behavior is to observe the moral law. The Categorical Imperative provides a test against which moral statements can be assessed. Kant also stated that the moral means and ends can be applied to the categorical imperative, that rational beings can pursue certain "ends" using the appropriate "means". Ends based on physical needs or wants create [[hypothetical imperative]]s. The categorical imperative can only be based on something that is an "end in itself", that is, an end that is not a means to some other need, desire, or purpose.<ref name="Beck 421">Kant, ''Foundations'', p. 421.</ref> Kant believed that the moral law is a principle of [[reason]] itself, and is not based on contingent facts about the world, such as what would make us happy, but to act on the moral law which has no other motive than "worthiness of being happy".<ref name = "CPR A806 B834">''Critique of Pure Reason'', A806/B834.</ref> Accordingly, he believed that moral obligation applies only to rational agents.<ref name="Beck 408">Kant, ''Foundations'', p. 408.</ref> |
|||
# ''The world in its entirety'': the concept of causation as a completed series; and |
|||
# ''God'': the concept of community as the common ground of all possibilities.{{sfn|Guyer|Wood|1998|p=15}} |
|||
Although Kant denies that these ideas can be objects of genuine cognition, he argues that they are the result of reason's inherent drive to unify cognition into a systematic whole.{{sfn|Jankowiak|2023|loc= §2(g)}} Leibnizian-Wolffian metaphysics was divided into four parts: ontology, psychology, cosmology, and theology. Kant replaces the first with the positive results of the first part of the ''Critique''. He proposes to replace the following three with his later doctrines of anthropology, the metaphysical foundations of natural science, and the critical postulation of human freedom and morality.{{sfn|Guyer|Wood|1998|p=14}} |
|||
Unlike a hypothetical imperative, a categorical imperative is an unconditional obligation; it has the force of an obligation regardless of our will or desires<ref name="Beck 420-1">Kant, ''Foundations'', pp. 420–1.</ref> In ''Groundwork of the Metaphysic of Morals'' (1785) Kant enumerated three formulations of the categorical imperative that he believed to be roughly equivalent.<ref name="Beck 436">Kant, ''Foundations'', p. 436.</ref> In the same book, Kant stated: |
|||
====Dialectical inferences of pure reason==== |
|||
:Act only according to that [[maxim (philosophy)|maxim]] whereby you can, at the same time, will that it should become a universal law.<ref name="Ellington">{{cite book |last=Kant |first=Immanuel |translator-first=James W. |translator-last=Ellington |orig-year=1785 |title=Grounding for the Metaphysics of Morals |edition=3rd |publisher=Hackett |year=1993 |pages=30 |isbn=0-87220-166-X |ref=harv}}. It is standard to also reference the ''Akademie Ausgabe'' of Kant's works. The ''Groundwork'' occurs in the fourth volume.The above citation is taken from 4:421.</ref> |
|||
In the second of the two Books of "The Transcendental Dialectic", Kant undertakes to demonstrate the contradictory nature of unbounded reason. He does this by developing contradictions in each of the three metaphysical disciplines that he contends are in fact pseudosciences. This section of the ''Critique'' is long and Kant's arguments are extremely detailed. In this context, it not possible to do much more than enumerate the topics of discussion. The first chapter addresses what Kant terms the ''paralogisms''{{mdash}}i.e., false inferences{{mdash}}that pure reason makes in the metaphysical discipline of rational psychology. He argues that one cannot take the mere thought of "I" in the proposition "I think" as the proper cognition of "I" as an object. In this way, he claims to debunk various metaphysical theses about the substantiality, unity, and self-identity of the soul.{{sfn|Jankowiak|2023|loc=§2(g.i)}} The second chapter, which is the longest, takes up the topic Kant calls the ''[[Antinomy|antinomies]]'' of pure reason{{mdash}}that is, the contradictions of reason with itself{{mdash}}in the metaphysical discipline of rational cosmology. Originally, Kant had thought that all transcendental illusion could be analyzed in antinomic terms.{{sfn|Guyer|Wood|1998|p=16}} He presents four cases in which he claims reason is able to prove opposing theses with equal plausibility: |
|||
# That "reason seems to be able to prove that the universe is both finite and infinite in space and time"; |
|||
According to Kant, one cannot make exceptions for oneself. The philosophical maxim on which one acts should always be considered to be a universal law without exception. One cannot allow oneself to do a particular action unless one thinks it appropriate that the reason for the action should become a universal law. For example, one should not steal, however dire the circumstances{{mdash}}because, by permitting oneself to steal, one makes stealing a universally acceptable act. This is the first formulation of the categorical imperative, often known as the universalizability principle. |
|||
# that "reason seems to be able to prove that matter both is and is not infinitely divisible into ever smaller parts"; |
|||
# that "reason seems to be able to prove that free will cannot be a causally efficacious part of the world (because all of nature is deterministic) and yet that it must be such a cause"; and, |
|||
# that "reason seems to be able to prove that there is and there is not a necessary being (which some would identify with God)".{{sfn|Jankowiak|2023|loc= §2(g.ii)}}{{sfn|Guyer|Wood|1998|pp=16–17}} |
|||
Kant further argues in each case that his doctrine of transcendental idealism is able to resolve the antinomy.{{sfn|Jankowiak|2023|loc= §2(g.ii)}} The third chapter examines fallacious arguments about God in rational theology under the heading of the "Ideal of Pure Reason". (Whereas an ''idea'' is a pure concept generated by reason, an ''ideal'' is the concept of an idea as an ''individual thing''.{{sfn|Guyer|Wood|1998|p=17}}) Here Kant addresses and claims to refute three traditional arguments for the existence of God: the [[ontological argument]], the [[cosmological argument]], and the [[argument from design|physio-theological argument]] (i.e., the argument from design).{{sfn|Jankowiak|2023|loc=§2(g.iii)}} The results of the transcendental dialectic so far appear to be entirely negative. In an Appendix to this section, Kant rejects such a conclusion. The ideas of pure reason, he argues, have an important ''regulatory'' function in directing and organizing our theoretical and practical inquiry. Kant's later works elaborate upon this function at length and in detail.{{sfn|Guyer|Wood|1998|p=18}} |
|||
Kant believed that, if an action is not done with the motive of duty, then it is without moral value. He thought that every action should have pure intention behind it; otherwise, it is meaningless. The final result is not the most important aspect of an action; rather, how the person feels while carrying out the action is the time when value is attached to the result. |
|||
===Moral thought=== |
|||
In ''Groundwork of the Metaphysic of Morals'', Kant also posited the "counter-[[utilitarian]] idea that there is a difference between preferences and values, and that considerations of individual rights temper calculations of aggregate utility", a concept that is an axiom in economics:<ref>Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (2003) ''Ecosystems and Well-being: A Framework for Assessment''. Washington DC: Island Press, p. 142.</ref> |
|||
{{Main|Kantian ethics}} |
|||
Kant developed his ethics, or moral philosophy, in three works: ''[[Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals]]'' (1785), ''[[Critique of Practical Reason]]'' (1788), and ''[[Metaphysics of Morals]]'' (1797). |
|||
With regard to [[morality]], Kant argued that the source of the [[Goodness and value theory|good]] lies not in anything outside the [[human]] subject, either in [[nature]] or given by [[God]], but rather is only the good will itself. A good will is one that acts from duty in accordance with the universal moral law that the autonomous human being freely gives itself. This law obliges one to treat humanity{{mdash}}understood as rational agency, and represented through oneself as well as others{{mdash}}as an [[end in itself]] rather than (merely) as [[means (philosophy)|means]] to other ends the individual might hold. Kant is known for his theory that all [[moral obligation]] is grounded in what he calls the "[[categorical imperative]]", which is derived from the concept of [[duty]]. He argues that the moral law is a principle of [[reason]] itself, not based on contingent facts about the world, such as what would make us happy; to act on the moral law has no other motive than "worthiness to be happy".<ref>Kant, ''CPuR'' A806/B834</ref> |
|||
====Idea of freedom==== |
|||
<blockquote>Everything has either a ''price'' or a ''dignity''. Whatever has a price can be replaced by something else as its equivalent; on the other hand, whatever is above all price, and therefore admits of no equivalent, has a dignity. But that which constitutes the condition under which alone something can be an end in itself does not have mere relative worth, i.e., price, but an intrinsic worth, i.e., a dignity. (p. 53, italics in original).</blockquote> |
|||
In the ''Critique of Pure Reason'', Kant distinguishes between the transcendental idea of freedom, which as a psychological concept is "mainly empirical" and refers to "whether a faculty of beginning a series of successive things or states from itself is to be assumed",<ref name="Kant, CPuR A448/B467">Kant, ''CPuR'' A448/B467</ref> and the practical concept of freedom as the independence of our will from the "coercion" or "necessitation through sensuous impulses". Kant finds it a source of difficulty that the practical idea of freedom is founded on the transcendental idea of freedom,<ref>Kant, ''CPuR'' A533–34/B561–62</ref> but for the sake of practical interests uses the practical meaning, taking "no account of ... its transcendental meaning", which he feels was properly "disposed of" in the Third Antinomy, and as an element in the question of the freedom of the will is for philosophy "a real stumbling block" that has embarrassed speculative reason.<ref name="Kant, CPuR A448/B467"/> |
|||
Kant calls ''practical'' "everything that is possible through freedom"; he calls the pure practical laws that are never given through sensuous conditions, but are held analogously with the universal law of causality, moral laws. Reason can give us only the "pragmatic laws of free action through the senses", but pure practical laws given by reason ''a priori'' dictate "what is to be done".<ref name="Kant, CPuR A448/B467"/><ref>Kant, ''CPuR'' A800–02/B 828–30</ref> Kant's categories of freedom function primarily as conditions for the possibility for actions (i) to be free, (ii) to be understood as free, and (iii) to be morally evaluated. For Kant, although actions as theoretical objects are constituted by means of the theoretical categories, actions as practical objects (objects of practical use of reason, and which can be good or bad) are constituted by means of the categories of freedom. Only in this way can actions, as phenomena, be a consequence of freedom, and be understood and evaluated as such.<ref>[[Susanne Bobzien]], 'Die Kategorien der Freiheit bei Kant', in ''Kant: Analysen, Probleme, Kritik'' Vol. 1, 1988, 193–220.</ref> |
|||
A phrase quoted by Kant, which is used to summarize the counter-utilitarian nature of his moral philosophy, is ''[[Fiat justitia, pereat mundus]]'', ("Let justice be done, though the world perish"), which he translates loosely as "Let justice reign even if all the rascals in the world should perish from it". This appears in his 1795 "[[Perpetual Peace: A Philosophical Sketch|Perpetual Peace]]" ("''[[:de:Zum ewigen Frieden|Zum ewigen Frieden. Ein philosophischer Entwurf]]''"), Appendix 1.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.constitution.org/kant/append1.htm|title=Perpetual Peace: A Philosophical Sketch: Appendix 1|publisher=Constitution.org|date=|accessdate=24 July 2009}}</ref><ref>{{cite book|url=https://books.google.com/?id=LykHAAAAQAAJ&pg=PA61&dq=pereat+mundus+inauthor:Kant|title=Project for a Perpetual Peace, p. 61|publisher=Books.google.com|date=|accessdate=24 July 2009|year=1796}}</ref><ref>{{cite book|url=https://books.google.com/?id=QskIAAAAQAAJ&pg=PA456&dq=pereat+mundus+inauthor:Kant|title=Immanuel Kant's Werke, revidirte Gesammtausg, p. 456|publisher=Books.google.com|date=|accessdate=24 July 2009|year=1838}}</ref> |
|||
==== |
====Categorical imperative==== |
||
Kant makes a distinction between categorical and [[hypothetical imperative]]s. A ''hypothetical'' imperative is one that we must obey to satisfy contingent desires. A ''categorical'' imperative binds us regardless of our desires: for example, everyone has a duty to respect others as individual ends in themselves, regardless of circumstances, even though it is sometimes in our narrowly selfish interest to not do so. These imperatives are morally binding because of the categorical form of their maxims, rather than contingent facts about an agent.<ref>Driver 2007, p. 83.</ref> Unlike hypothetical imperatives, which bind us insofar as we are part of a group or society which we owe duties to, we cannot opt out of the categorical imperative, because we cannot opt out of being [[rational agent]]s. We owe a duty to rationality by virtue of being rational agents; therefore, rational moral principles apply to all rational agents at all times.{{sfn|Johnson|2008}} Stated in other terms, with all forms of instrumental rationality excluded from morality, "the moral law itself, Kant holds, can only be the form of lawfulness itself, because nothing else is left once all content has been rejected".{{sfn|Schneewind|2010|p=261}} |
|||
[[File:Immanuel Kant (painted portrait).jpg|thumb|In his ''Metaphysics,'' Immanuel Kant introduced the [[categorical imperative]]: "Act only according to that maxim whereby you can, at the same time, will that it should become a universal law."]] |
|||
The first formulation (Formula of Universal Law) of the moral imperative "requires that the maxims be chosen as though they should hold as universal [[natural law|laws of nature]]" .<ref name="Beck 436" /> This formulation in principle has as its supreme law the creed "Always act according to that maxim whose universality as a law you can at the same time will" and is the "only condition under which a will can never come into conflict with itself [....]"<ref name="Beck 437">Kant, Foundations, p. 437.</ref> |
|||
Kant provides three formulations for the categorical imperative. He claims that these are necessarily equivalent, as all being expressions of the pure universality of the moral law as such;<ref>Kant, ''G''. 4:420–421, 436.</ref> many scholars are not convinced.<ref>Wood, Allen. (2017) ''Formulas of the Moral Law''. Cambridge University Press, pp. 74–78</ref> The formulas are as follows: |
|||
One interpretation of the first formulation is called the "universalizability test".<ref>"Kant and the German Enlightenment" in "History of Ethics". ''Encyclopedia of Philosophy'', Vol. 3, pp. 95–96. MacMillan, 1973.</ref> An agent's maxim, according to Kant, is his "subjective principle of human actions": that is, what the agent believes is his reason to act.<ref name="Beck 400 429">Kant, ''Foundations'', pp. 400, 429.</ref> The universalisability test has five steps: |
|||
* ''Formula of Universal Law'': |
|||
**"Act only in accordance with that maxim through which you at the same time can will that it become a universal law";<ref name="Kant, G 4:421">Kant, ''G'' 4:421</ref> alternatively, |
|||
# Find the agent's maxim (i.e., an action paired with its motivation). Take, for example, the declaration "I will lie for personal benefit". Lying is the action; the motivation is to fulfill some sort of desire. Together, they form the maxim. |
|||
***''Formula of the Law of Nature'': "So act, as if the maxim of your action were to become through your will a universal law of nature."<ref name="Kant, G 4:421"/> |
|||
# Imagine a possible world in which everyone in a similar position to the real-world agent followed that maxim. |
|||
* ''Formula of Humanity as End in Itself'': |
|||
# Decide if contradictions or irrationalities would arise in the possible world as a result of following the maxim. |
|||
**"So act that you use humanity, as much in your own person as in the person of every other, always at the same time as an end and never merely as a means".<ref>Kant, ''G'' 4:429</ref> |
|||
# If a contradiction or irrationality would arise, acting on that maxim is not allowed in the real world. |
|||
* ''Formula of Autonomy'': |
|||
# If there is no contradiction, then acting on that maxim is permissible, and is sometimes required. |
|||
**"the idea of the will of every rational being as a will giving universal law",<ref>Kant, ''G'' 4:431; cf. 4:432</ref> or "Not to choose otherwise than so that the maxims of one's choice are at the same time comprehended with it in the same volition as universal law";<ref>Kant, ''G'' 4:440; cf. 4:432, 434, 438</ref> alternatively, |
|||
***''Formula of the Realm of Ends'': "Act in accordance with maxims of a universally legislative member for a merely possible realm of ends."<ref>Kant, ''G'' 4:439; cf. 4:433, 437–439</ref><ref>Wood, Allen. (2017) ''Formulas of the Moral Law''. Cambridge University Press, p.6</ref> |
|||
(For a modern parallel, see [[John Rawls]]' hypothetical situation, the [[original position]].) |
|||
====Second formulation==== |
|||
The second formulation (or Formula of the End in Itself) holds that "the rational being, as by its nature an end and thus as an end in itself, must serve in every maxim as the condition restricting all merely relative and arbitrary ends".<ref name="Beck 436" /> The principle dictates that you "[a]ct with reference to every rational being (whether yourself or another) so that it is an end in itself in your maxim", meaning that the rational being is "the basis of all maxims of action" and "must be treated never as a mere means but as the supreme limiting condition in the use of all means, i.e., as an end at the same time".<ref name="Beck 437-8">Kant, ''Foundations'', pp. 437–8.</ref> |
|||
==== Third formulation ==== |
|||
The third formulation (i.e. Formula of Autonomy) is a synthesis of the first two and is the basis for the "complete determination of all maxims". It states "that all maxims which stem from autonomous legislation ought to harmonize with a possible realm of ends as with a realm of nature".<ref name="Beck 436"/> |
|||
In principle, "So act as if your maxims should serve at the same time as the universal law (of all rational beings)", meaning that we should so act that we may think of ourselves as "a member in the universal realm of ends", [[legislating]] universal laws through our maxims (that is, a universal [[code of conduct]]), in a "possible realm of ends".<ref name="Beck 438-9">Kant, ''Foundations'', pp. 438–9. See also [[Kingdom of Ends]]</ref> No one may elevate themselves above the universal law, therefore it is one's duty to follow the maxim(s). |
|||
====''Religion Within the Limits of Reason''==== |
|||
Commentators, starting in the 20th century, have tended to see Kant as having a strained relationship with religion, though this was not the prevalent view in the 19th century. [[Karl Leonhard Reinhold]], whose letters first made Kant famous, wrote "I believe that I may infer without reservation that the interest of religion, and of Christianity in particular, accords completely with the result of the Critique of Reason."<ref>Karl Leonhard Reinhold, Letters on the Kantian Philosophy (1786), 3rd Letter</ref>. Johann Schultz, who wrote one of the first Kant commentaries, wrote "And does not this system itself cohere most splendidly with the Christian religion? Do not the divinity and beneficence of the latter become all the more evident?"<ref>Johann Schultz, Exposition of Kant's Critique of Pure Reason (1784), 141.</ref> This view continued throughout the 19th century, as noted by [[Fredrick Nietzsche]], who said "Kant's success is merely a theologian's success."<ref>"The Protestant pastor is the grandfather of German philosophy...German philosophy is at bottom-a cunning theology...Why the rejoicing heard through the German academic world--three-quarters composed of the sons of pastors and teachers-at the appearance of Kant? Why the Germans' conviction, which still find echo even today, that with Kant things were taking a turn of the better? Kant's success is merely a theologian's success". Nietzsche, The Antichrist, 10</ref> The reason for these views was Kant's moral theology, and the widespread belief that his philosophy was the great antithesis to [[Spinozism]], which had been convulsing the European academy for much of the 18th century. Spinozism was widely seen as the cause of the [[Pantheism controversy]], and as a form of sophisticated pantheism or even atheism. Since Kant's philosophy disregarded the possibility of arguing for God through pure reason alone, it also disregarded the possibility of arguing against God through pure reason alone. This, coupled with his moral philosophy (his argument that the existence of morality is a rational reason why God and an afterlife do and must exist), was the reason he was seen as the great defender of Christianity at least through the end of the 19th century when the controversies caused by Spinozism had been largely forgotten. |
|||
Kant articulates his strongest criticisms of the organization and practices of religious organizations to those that encourage what he sees as a religion of counterfeit service to God.<ref name="Immanuel Kant 1793">Immanuel Kant. ''Religion within the Limits of Reason Alone'' (1793), Book IV, Part 1, Section 1, "The Christian religion as a natural religion."</ref> Among the major targets of his criticism are external ritual, superstition and a hierarchical church order. He sees these as efforts to make oneself pleasing to God in ways other than conscientious adherence to the principle of moral rightness in choosing and acting upon one's maxims. Kant's criticisms on these matters, along with his rejection of certain theoretical proofs grounded in pure reason (particularly the [[ontological argument]]) for the existence of God and his philosophical commentary on some Christian doctrines, have resulted in interpretations that see Kant as hostile to religion in general and Christianity in particular (e.g., Walsh 1967). Nevertheless, other interpreters consider that Kant was trying to mark off defensible from indefensible Christian belief.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/kant-religion/|title=Kant's Philosophy of Religion (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)|publisher=Plato.stanford.edu|date=|accessdate=24 July 2009}}</ref> Kant sees in [[Jesus Christ]] the affirmation of a "pure moral disposition of the heart" that "can make man well-pleasing to God".<ref name="Immanuel Kant 1793"/> Regarding Kant’s conception of religion, some critics have argued that he was sympathetic to deism. <ref>For example Peter Byrne, who wrote about Kant’s relationship with deism. Byrne, Peter (2007), ''Kant on God'', London: Ashgate, page 159.</ref> Other critics have argued that Kant’s moral conception moves from deism to theism (as moral theism), for example Allen W. Wood<ref>Wood, Allen W. (1970), ''Kant's moral religion'', London and Ithaca: Cornell University Press, page 16.</ref> and Merold Westphal.<ref>Westphal, Merold (2010),''The Emerge of Modern Philosophy of Religion'', in Taliaferro, Charles, Draper, Paul and Quinn, Philip (editors), ''A Companion to Philosophy of Religion'', Oxford: Blackwell, page 135.</ref> As for Kant’s book ''Religion within the Boundaries of bare Reason'', it was emphasized that Kant reduced religiosity to rationality, religion to morality and Christianity to ethics.<ref>Iţu, Mircia (2004), ''Dumnezeu şi religia în concepţia lui Immanuel Kant din Religia în limitele raţiunii'', in Boboc, Alexandru and Mariş, N. I. (editors), ''Studii de istoria filosofiei universale'', volume 12, Bucharest: Romanian Academy.</ref> |
|||
====Idea of freedom==== |
|||
In the ''Critique of Pure Reason'',<ref>The Norman Kemp Smith translation has been used for this section, with citation noting the pagination of the first and second editions.</ref> Kant distinguishes between the transcendental idea of freedom, which as a psychological concept is "mainly empirical" and refers to "the question whether we must admit a power of spontaneously beginning a series of successive things or states" as a real ground of necessity in regard to causality,<ref name="CPR A448 B476">Kant, ''Critique of Pure Reason'', A448/B476.</ref> and the practical concept of freedom as the independence of our will from the "coercion" or "necessitation through sensuous impulses". Kant finds it a source of difficulty that the practical idea of freedom is founded on the transcendental idea of freedom,<ref name = "CPR A534 B562">Kant, ''Critique of Pure Reason'', A534/B562.</ref> but for the sake of practical interests uses the practical meaning, taking "no account of... its transcendental meaning," which he feels was properly "disposed of" in the Third Antinomy, and as an element in the question of the freedom of the will is for philosophy "a real stumbling-block" that has "embarrassed speculative reason".<ref name="CPR A448 B476" /> |
|||
Kant defines ''maxim'' as a "subjective principle of volition", which is distinguished from an "objective principle or 'practical law.{{'"}} While "the latter is valid for every rational being and is a 'principle according to which they ought to act[,]' a maxim 'contains the practical rule which reason determines in accordance with the conditions of the subject (often their ignorance or inclinations) and is thus the principle according to which the subject does act.{{'"}}<ref>Caygill, Howard. (1995) ''A Kant Dictionary''. Blackwell Publishing, p. 289, citing ''GMM''.</ref> |
|||
Kant calls practical "everything that is possible through freedom", and the pure practical laws that are never given through sensuous conditions but are held analogously with the universal law of causality are moral laws. Reason can give us only the "pragmatic laws of free action through the senses", but pure practical laws given by reason ''a priori''<ref>the same distinction of transcendental and practical meaning can be applied to the idea of God, with the ''proviso'' that the practical concept of freedom can be experienced (''Critique of Pure Reason'', A801-804/B829-832).</ref> dictate "''what ought to be done''".<ref name = "CPR A800-802 B828-830">Kant, ''Critique of Pure Reason'', A800–2/B828–30.</ref><ref>The concept of freedom is also handled in the third section of the ''Foundations of the Metaphysics of Morals''. In the ''Critique of Practical Reason'' see § VII and § VIII.</ref> |
|||
Maxims fail to qualify as practical laws if they produce a contradiction in conception or a contradiction in the will when universalized. A contradiction in conception happens when, if a maxim were to be universalized, it ceases to make sense, because the "maxim would necessarily destroy itself as soon as it was made a universal law".<ref>Kant, ''G'' 4:403.</ref> For example, if the maxim 'It is permissible to break promises' was universalized, no one would trust any promises made, so the idea of a promise would become meaningless; the maxim would be [[Self-refuting idea|self-contradictory]] because, when it is universalized, promises cease to be meaningful. The maxim is not moral because it is logically impossible to universalize{{mdash}}that is, we could not conceive of a world where this maxim was universalized.<ref>Driver 2007, p. 88.</ref> A maxim can also be immoral if it creates a contradiction in the will when universalized. This does not mean a logical contradiction, but that universalizing the maxim leads to a state of affairs that no ''rational'' being would desire. |
|||
====Categories of freedom==== |
|||
In the ''Critique of Practical Reason'', at the end of the second Main Part of the ''Analytics'',<ref>5:65–67</ref> Kant introduces the categories of freedom, in analogy with the categories of understanding their practical counterparts. Kant's categories of freedom apparently function primarily as conditions for the possibility for actions (i) to be free, (ii) to be understood as free and (iii) to be morally evaluated. For Kant, although actions as theoretical objects are constituted by means of the theoretical categories, actions as practical objects (objects of practical use of reason, and which can be good or bad) are constituted by means of the categories of freedom. Only in this way can actions, as phenomena, be a consequence of freedom, and be understood and evaluated as such.<ref>[[Susanne Bobzien]], 'Die Kategorien der Freiheit bei Kant', in ''Kant: Analysen, Probleme, Kritik'' Vol. 1, 1988, 193–220.</ref> |
|||
===="The Doctrine of Virtue"==== |
|||
===Aesthetic philosophy=== |
|||
As Kant explains in the 1785 ''[[Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals]]'' and as its title directly indicates, that text is "nothing more than the search for and establishment of the ''supreme principle of morality''".<ref>Kant, ''GMM'' 4:392.</ref> His promised ''Metaphysics of Morals'' was much delayed and did not appear until its two parts, "The Doctrine of Right" and "The Doctrine of Virtue", were published separately in 1797 and 1798.<ref>Gregor, Mary J. (1996) "Translator's note on the text of The metaphysics of morals". In ''Practical Philosophy''. The Cambridge Edition of the Works of Immanuel Kant, p. 355.</ref> The first deals with political philosophy, the second with ethics. "The Doctrine of Virtue" provides "a very different account of ordinary moral reasoning" than the one suggested by the ''Groundwork''.{{sfn|Wood|2006|p=68}} It is concerned with ''duties of virtue'' or "ends that are at the same time duties".<ref>Kant, ''MM''. 6:382–391.</ref> It is here, in the domain of ethics, that the greatest innovation by ''The Metaphysics of Morals'' is to be found. According to Kant's account, "ordinary moral reasoning is fundamentally teleological{{mdash}}it is reasoning about what ends we are constrained by morality to pursue, and the priorities among these ends we are required to observe".{{sfn|Wood|2006|p=69}} |
|||
Kant discusses the subjective nature of aesthetic qualities and experiences in ''[[Observations on the Feeling of the Beautiful and Sublime]]'' (1764). Kant's contribution to [[aesthetics|aesthetic theory]] is developed in the ''[[Critique of Judgment]]'' (1790) where he investigates the possibility and logical status of "judgments of taste." In the "Critique of Aesthetic Judgment," the first major division of the ''Critique of Judgment'', Kant used the term "aesthetic" in a manner that, according to Kant scholar W.H. Walsh, differs from its modern sense.<ref>Critique of Judgment in "Kant, Immanuel" ''Encyclopedia of Philosophy''. Vol 4. Macmillan, 1973.</ref> In the ''Critique of Pure Reason'', to note essential differences between judgments of taste, moral judgments, and scientific judgments, Kant abandoned the term "aesthetic" as "designating the critique of taste," noting that judgments of taste could never be "directed" by" laws ''a priori''".<ref name = "CPR A22 B36">Kant, Critique of Pure Reason, A22/B36.</ref> After [[Alexander Gottlieb Baumgarten|A. G. Baumgarten]], who wrote ''Aesthetica'' (1750–58),<ref>Beardsley, Monroe. "History of Aesthetics". ''Encyclopedia of Philosophy''. Vol. 1, section on "Toward a unified aesthetics", p. 25, Macmillan 1973. Baumgarten coined the term "aesthetics" and expanded, clarified, and unified Wolffian aesthetic theory, but had left the ''Aesthetica'' unfinished (See also: Tonelli, Giorgio. "Alexander Gottlieb Baumgarten". ''Encyclopedia of Philosophy''. Vol. 1, Macmillan 1973). In Bernard's translation of the ''Critique of Judgment'' he indicates in the notes that Kant's reference in § 15 in regard to the identification of perfection and beauty is probably a reference to Baumgarten.</ref> Kant was one of the first philosophers to develop and integrate aesthetic theory into a unified and comprehensive philosophical system, utilizing ideas that played an integral role throughout his philosophy.<ref>German Idealism in "History of Aesthetics" ''Encyclopedia of Philosophy''. Vol 1. Macmillan, 1973.</ref> |
|||
<blockquote>There are two sorts of ends that it is our duty to have: our own perfection and the happiness of others (''MS'' 6:385). "Perfection" includes both our natural perfection (the development of our talents, skills, and capacities of understanding) and moral perfection (our virtuous disposition) (''MS'' 6:387). A person's "happiness" is the greatest rational whole of the ends the person set for the sake of her<!--Kant, Wood????--> own satisfaction (''MS'' 6:387–388).{{sfn|Wood|2006|p=70}}</blockquote> |
|||
In the chapter "Analytic of the Beautiful" in the ''Critique of Judgment'', Kant states that beauty is not a property of an artwork or natural phenomenon, but is instead consciousness of the pleasure that attends the 'free play' of the imagination and the understanding. Even though it appears that we are using reason to decide what is beautiful, the judgment is not a cognitive judgment,<ref>Kant's general discussions of the distinction between "cognition" and "conscious of" are also given in the ''Critique of Pure Reason'' (notably A320/B376), and section V and the conclusion of section VIII of his Introduction in ''Logic''.</ref> "and is consequently not logical, but aesthetical" (§ 1). A pure judgement of taste is subjective since it refers to the emotional response of the subject and is based upon nothing but esteem for an object itself: it is a disinterested pleasure, and we feel that pure judgements of taste (i.e. judgements of beauty), lay claim to universal validity (§§20–22). It is important to note that this universal validity is not derived from a determinate concept of beauty but from ''common sense'' (§40). Kant also believed that a judgement of taste shares characteristics engaged in a moral judgement: both are disinterested, and we hold them to be universal. In the chapter "Analytic of the Sublime" Kant identifies the sublime as an aesthetic quality that, like beauty, is subjective, but unlike beauty refers to an indeterminate relationship between the faculties of the imagination and of reason, and shares the character of moral judgments in the use of reason. The feeling of the sublime, divided into two distinct modes (the mathematical and the dynamical sublime), describes two subjective moments that concern the relationship of the faculty of the imagination to reason. Some commentators<ref>{{cite web|last=Clewis |first=Robert |year= 2009 |title=The Kantian Sublime and the Revelation of Freedom |location= Cambridge |publisher=Cambridge University Press |url=http://www.cambridge.org/us/knowledge/isbn/item2326741/?site_locale=en_US}}</ref> argue that Kant's critical philosophy contains a third kind of the sublime, the moral sublime, which is the aesthetic response to the moral law or a representation, and a development of the "noble" sublime in Kant's theory of 1764. The mathematical sublime results from the failure of the imagination to comprehend natural objects that appear boundless and formless, or appear "absolutely great" (§ 23–25). This imaginative failure is then recuperated through the pleasure taken in reason's assertion of the concept of infinity. In this move the faculty of reason proves itself superior to our fallible sensible self (§§ 25–26). In the dynamical sublime there is the sense of annihilation of the sensible self as the imagination tries to comprehend a vast might. This power of nature threatens us but through the resistance of reason to such sensible annihilation, the subject feels a pleasure and a sense of the human moral vocation. This appreciation of moral feeling through exposure to the [[sublime (philosophy)|sublime]] helps to develop moral character. |
|||
Kant's elaboration of this teleological doctrine offers up a moral theory very different from the one typically attributed to him on the basis of his foundational works alone. |
|||
Kant developed a distinction between an object of art as a material value subject to the conventions of society and the transcendental condition of the judgment of taste as a "refined" value in the propositions of his ''Idea of A Universal History'' (1784). In the Fourth and Fifth Theses of that work he identified all art as the "fruits of unsociableness" due to men's "antagonism in society"<ref>Kant, Immanuel. ''Idea for a Universal History''. Trans. Lewis White Beck (20, 22).</ref> and, in the Seventh Thesis, asserted that while such material property is indicative of a civilized state, only the ideal of morality and the universalization of refined value through the improvement of the mind "belongs to culture".<ref>Kant, Immanuel. ''Idea for a Universal History''. Trans. Lewis White Beck (26).</ref> |
|||
===Political philosophy=== |
===Political philosophy=== |
||
{{Main|Political philosophy of Immanuel Kant}} |
{{Main|Political philosophy of Immanuel Kant}} |
||
{{Liberalism sidebar}} |
{{Liberalism sidebar}} |
||
{{republicanism sidebar}} |
|||
In "Perpetual Peace: A Philosophical Sketch",<ref>Kant, Immanuel. ''[http://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/kant/kant1.htm Perpetual Peace: A Philosophical Sketch]'' (1795)</ref> Kant listed several conditions that he thought necessary for ending wars and creating a lasting peace. They included a world of [[constitutional republic]]s.<ref>Kant, Immanuel. ''Perpetual Peace.'' Trans. Lewis White Beck (377).</ref> His [[classical republicanism|classical republican]] theory was extended in the ''Science of Right'', the first part of the [[Metaphysics of Morals]] (1797).<ref>Manfred Riedel ''Between Tradition and Revolution: The Hegelian Transformation of Political Philosophy'', Cambridge 1984</ref> Kant believed that [[universal history]] leads to the ultimate world of republican states at peace, but his theory was not pragmatic. The process was described in "Perpetual Peace" as natural rather than rational: |
|||
In ''Towards Perpetual Peace: A Philosophical Project'', Kant listed several conditions that he thought necessary for ending wars and creating a lasting peace. They included a world of constitutional republics.<ref>Kant, ''PP'' 8:349–353</ref> His [[classical republican]] theory was extended in the ''Doctrine of Right'', the first part of the ''[[Metaphysics of Morals]]'' (1797).<ref>Manfred Riedel, ''Between Tradition and Revolution: The Hegelian Transformation of Political Philosophy'', Cambridge 1984</ref> Kant believed that [[Universal history (genre)|universal history]] leads to the ultimate world of republican states at peace, but his theory was not pragmatic. The process was described in ''Perpetual Peace'' as natural rather than rational: |
|||
{{quote| |
|||
{{blockquote|What affords this ''guarantee'' (surety) is nothing less than the great artist ''nature'' (''natura daedala rerum'') from whose mechanical course purposiveness shines forth visibly, letting concord arise by means of the discord between human beings even against their will; and for this reason nature, regarded as necessitation by a cause the laws of whose operation are unknown to us, is called ''fate'', but if we consider its purposiveness in the course of the world as the profound wisdom of a higher cause directed to the objective final end of the human race and predetermining this course of the world, it is called ''providence''.<ref>Kant, ''PP'' 8:360–362</ref>}} |
|||
Kant's political thought can be summarized as republican government and international organization |
Kant's political thought can be summarized as republican government and international organization: "In more characteristically Kantian terms, it is doctrine of the state based upon the law (''[[Rechtsstaat]]'') and of eternal peace. Indeed, in each of these formulations, both terms express the same idea: that of legal constitution or of 'peace through law.{{'"}}<ref>Hassner, Pierre. "Immanuel Kant", in ''History of Political Philosophy'', edited by Leo Strauss and Joseph Cropsey, The University of Chicago Press, 1987, pp. 581–582</ref> "Kant's political philosophy, being essentially a legal doctrine, rejects by definition the opposition between moral education and the play of passions as alternate foundations for social life. The state is defined as the union of men under law. The state rightly so called is constituted by laws which are necessary a priori because they flow from the very concept of law. A regime can be judged by no other criteria nor be assigned any other functions, than those proper to the lawful order as such."<ref>Hassner, Pierre. "Immanuel Kant", in ''History of Political Philosophy'', edited by Leo Strauss and Joseph Cropsey, The University of Chicago Press, 1987, p. 603</ref> |
||
Kant opposed "democracy", which at his time meant [[direct democracy]], believing that majority rule posed a threat to individual liberty. He stated that "''democracy'' in the strict sense of the word is necessarily a ''despotism'' because it establishes an executive power in which all decide for and, if need be, against one (who thus does not agree), so that all, who are nevertheless not all, decide; and this is a contradiction of the general will with itself and with freedom."<ref>Kant, ''PP'' 8:352</ref> |
|||
As with most writers at the time, Kant distinguished three forms of government{{mdash}}namely, democracy, aristocracy, and monarchy{{mdash}}with [[mixed government]] as the most ideal form of it.<ref>Kant, ''PP'' 8:352</ref> He believed in [[republic]]an ideals and forms of governance, and [[rule of law]] brought on by them.<ref>Kant, ''PP'' 8:349-8:353</ref> Although Kant published this as a "popular piece", [[Mary J. Gregor]] points out that two years later, in ''The Metaphysics of Morals'', Kant claims to demonstrate ''systematically'' that "establishing universal and lasting peace constitutes not merely a part of the doctrine of right, but rather the entire final end of the doctrine of right within the limits of mere reason".<ref>Kant, ''MM'' 6:355</ref><ref>Gregor, Mary J. "Introduction", in ''Practical Philosophy''. Cambridge University Press, p. 313</ref> |
|||
==Anthropology== |
|||
[[File:German 5 DM 1974 D Silver Coin Immanuel Kant.jpg|right|thumb|5 DM 1974 D silver coin commemorating the 250th birthday of Immanuel Kant in [[Königsberg]]]] |
|||
''The Doctrine of Right'', published in 1797, contains Kant's most mature and systematic contribution to political philosophy. It addresses duties according to law, which are "concerned only with protecting the external freedom of individuals" and indifferent to incentives. Although there is a moral duty "to limit ourselves to actions that are right, that duty is not part of [right] itself".{{sfn|Wood|2006|p=68}} Its basic political idea is that "each person's entitlement to be his or her own master is only consistent with the entitlements of others if public legal institutions are in place".<ref>Ripstein, Arthur. (2009) ''Force and Freedom: Kant's Legal and Political Philosophy''. Harvard University Press, p. 9.</ref> He formulates the universal principle of right as: |
|||
Kant lectured on anthropology for over 25 years. His ''Anthropology from a Pragmatic Point of View'' was published in 1798. (This was the subject of [[Michel Foucault]]'s secondary dissertation for his [[State doctorate]], ''[[Introduction to Kant's Anthropology]]''.) Kant's Lectures on Anthropology were published for the first time in 1997 in German.<ref>Thomas Sturm, ''Kant und die Wissenschaften vom Menschen'' (Paderborn: Mentis Verlag, 2009).</ref> ''Introduction to Kant's Anthropology'' was translated into English and published by the Cambridge Texts in the History of Philosophy series in 2006.<ref>''Anthropology from a Pragmatic Point of View'', ed. Robert B. Louden, introduction by Manfred Kuehn, Cambridge University Press, 2006</ref> |
|||
{{Blockquote|text=Any action is ''right'' if it can coexist with everyone's freedom in accordance with a universal law, or if on its maxim the freedom of choice of each can coexist with everyone's freedom in accordance with a universal law. (''MS'' 6:230).{{sfn|Wood|2006|p=68}}}} |
|||
===Religious writings=== |
|||
Kant was among the first people of his time to introduce anthropology as an intellectual area of study long before the field gained popularity. As a result, his texts are considered to have advanced the field. Kant's point of view also influenced the works of philosophers after him such as Martin Heidegger, Paul Ricoeur, and Jean Greisch. |
|||
{{Main|Religion within the Bounds of Bare Reason}} |
|||
Starting in the 20th century, commentators tended to see Kant as having a strained relationship with religion, although in the nineteenth century this had not been the prevalent view. [[Karl Leonhard Reinhold]], whose letters helped make Kant famous, wrote: "I believe that I may infer without reservation that the interest of religion, and of Christianity in particular, accords completely with the result of the Critique of Reason."<ref>Karl Leonhard Reinhold, ''Letters on the Kantian Philosophy'' (1786), 3rd Letter</ref> According to [[Johann Schultz]], who wrote one of the first commentaries on Kant: "And does not this system itself cohere most splendidly with the Christian religion? Do not the divinity and beneficence of the latter become all the more evident?"<ref>Johann Schultz, ''Exposition of Kant's Critique of Pure Reason'' (1784), 141.</ref> The reason for these views was Kant's moral theology and the widespread belief that his philosophy was the great antithesis to [[Spinozism]], which was widely seen as a form of sophisticated pantheism or even atheism. As Kant's philosophy disregarded the possibility of arguing for God through pure reason alone, for the same reasons it also disregarded the possibility of arguing against God through pure reason alone. |
|||
Kant directs his strongest criticisms of the organization and practices of religious organizations at those that encourage what he sees as a religion of counterfeit service to God.<ref>Kant, ''RBMR'' Part IV, First part, First section [6:157–163]</ref> Among the major targets of his criticism are external ritual, superstition, and a hierarchical church order. He sees these as efforts to make oneself pleasing to God in ways other than conscientious adherence to the principle of moral rightness in choosing and acting upon one's maxims. Kant's criticisms on these matters, along with his rejection of certain theoretical proofs for the existence of God that were grounded in pure reason (particularly the [[ontological argument]]) and his philosophical commentary on some Christian doctrines, have resulted in interpretations that see Kant as hostile to religion in general and to Christianity in particular.<ref>E.g., Walsh, W. H., 1967, "Kant, Immanuel: Philosophy of Religion", ''The Encyclopedia of Philosophy'', Volume Four, Paul Edwards (ed.), New York: Macmillan Publishing Co. Inc. & The Free Press, 322.</ref> Other interpreters, nevertheless, consider that Kant was trying to mark off defensible from indefensible Christian belief.<ref>{{cite encyclopedia|last1=Pasternack|first1=Lawrence|last2=Rossi|first2=Philip|editor-last=Zalta|editor-first=Edward N.|url=http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/kant-religion/|title=Kant's Philosophy of Religion|encyclopedia=Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy|publisher=Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University|edition=Fall 2014|access-date=18 October 2019|archive-date=9 July 2010|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100709212423/http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/kant-religion/|url-status=live}}</ref> |
|||
Kant viewed anthropology in two broad categories. One category was the physiological approach which he referred to as "what nature makes of the human being". The other category was the pragmatic approach which explored the things a human "can and should make of himself".<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Gregor|first1=Brian|title=Anthropology from a Pragmatic Point of View. By Immanuel Kant. Translated and edited by Robert B. Louden.|volume=Heythrop}}</ref> |
|||
Regarding Kant's conception of religion, some critics have argued that he was sympathetic to deism.<ref>For example Peter Byrne, who wrote about Kant's relationship with deism. Byrne, Peter (2007), ''Kant on God'', London: Ashgate, p. 159.</ref> Other critics have argued that Kant's moral conception moves from deism to theism (as moral theism), for example Allen W. Wood,<ref>Wood, Allen W. (1970), ''Kant's moral religion'', London and Ithaca: Cornell University Press, p. 16.</ref> as well as Merold Westphal.<ref>Westphal, Merold (2010), ''The Emergence of Modern Philosophy of Religion'', in Taliaferro, Charles, Draper, Paul and Quinn, Philip (editors), ''A Companion to Philosophy of Religion'', Oxford: Blackwell, p. 135.</ref> As for Kant's book ''[[Religion within the Bounds of Bare Reason|Religion within the Bounds of Mere Reason]]'', it was emphasized that Kant reduced religiosity to rationality, religion to morality, and Christianity to ethics;<ref>Iţu, Mircia (2004), ''Dumnezeu şi religia în concepţia lui Immanuel Kant din Religia în limitele raţiunii'', in Boboc, Alexandru and Mariş, N.I. (editors), ''Studii de istoria filosofiei universale'', volume 12, Bucharest: Romanian Academy.</ref> however, many interpreters, including Wood,<ref>Wood, Allen W. (2020), ''Kant and Religion'', Cambridge University Press, p.2.</ref> alongside Lawrence Pasternack,<ref>See e.g., Lawrence Pasternack, ''Routledge Philosophy Guidebook to Kant on Religion within the Boundaries of Mere Reason'' (New York, Routledge, 2014), pp. 239–240.</ref> now agree with [[Stephen Palmquist]]'s claim that a better way of reading Kant's ''Religion'' is to see him as raising morality to the status of religion.<ref>Palmquist, Stephen (1992), "Does Kant Reduce Religion to Morality?", ''Kant-Studien'' 83.2, pp. 129–148.</ref> |
|||
=== Views on homosexuality === |
|||
<blockquote>"A second ''crimen carnis contra naturam'' is intercourse between ''seux hornogenii'', in which the object of sexual impulse is a human being but there is homogeneity instead of heterogeneity of sex, as when a woman satisfies her desire on a woman or a man on a man. This practice too is contrary to the ends of humanity: for the end of humanity in respect of sexuality is to preserve the species without debasing the person: but in this instance the species is not being preserved."<ref>''Lectures on Ethics'', translated by L. Infield (New York: Harper & Row, 1'163), p. 170, quoted by Ruse, op. cit., p. 186.</ref></blockquote> |
|||
== |
=== Aesthetics === |
||
{{See also | Kant's teleology}} |
|||
[[File:Immanuel Kant.jpg|thumb|Engraving of Kant by Friedrich Rosmäsler, 1822, from a painting by Todd Schorr]] |
|||
Kant discusses the subjective nature of aesthetic qualities and experiences in ''[[Observations on the Feeling of the Beautiful and Sublime]]'' (1764). Kant's contribution to [[aesthetics|aesthetic theory]] is developed in the ''[[Critique of Judgment|Critique of the Power of Judgment]]'' (1790), where he investigates the possibility and logical status of "judgments of taste". In the "Critique of Aesthetic Judgment", the first major division of the ''Critique of the Power of Judgment'', Kant used the term "aesthetic" in a manner that resembles its modern sense.<ref>Critique of Judgment in "Kant, Immanuel", ''[https://ia601704.us.archive.org/23/items/encyclopedia-of-philosophy_202010/Volume%205.pdf Encyclopedia of Philosophy]'', volume 5, Macmillan, 2006, accessed on 16 November 2024</ref> In the ''Critique of Pure Reason'', to note essential differences between judgments of taste, moral judgments, and scientific judgments, Kant abandoned the term "aesthetic" as "designating the critique of taste", noting that judgments of taste could never be "directed" by "laws ''a priori''".<ref>Kant, ''CPuR'' A22/B36</ref> After [[Alexander Gottlieb Baumgarten|A. G. Baumgarten]], who wrote ''Aesthetica'' (1750–58),{{efn|Beardsley, Monroe. "History of Aesthetics". ''Encyclopedia of Philosophy''. Vol. 1, section on "Toward a unified aesthetics", p. 25, Macmillan 1973. Baumgarten coined the term "aesthetics" and expanded, clarified, and unified Wolffian aesthetic theory, but had left the ''Aesthetica'' unfinished (See also: Tonelli, Giorgio. "Alexander Gottlieb Baumgarten". ''Encyclopedia of Philosophy''. Vol. 1, Macmillan 1973). In Bernard's translation of the ''Critique of Judgment'' he indicates in the notes that Kant's reference in § 15 in regard to the identification of perfection and beauty is probably a reference to Baumgarten.}} Kant was one of the first philosophers to develop and integrate aesthetic theory into a unified and comprehensive philosophical system, utilizing ideas that played an integral role throughout his philosophy.<ref>German Idealism in "History of Aesthetics" ''Encyclopedia of Philosophy''. Vol 1. Macmillan, 1973.</ref> In the chapter "Analytic of the Beautiful" in the ''Critique of the Power of Judgment'', Kant states that beauty is not a property of an artwork or natural phenomenon, but is instead consciousness of the pleasure that attends the 'free play' of the imagination and the understanding. Even though it appears that we are using reason to decide what is beautiful, the judgment is not a cognitive judgment,{{efn|Kant's general discussions of the distinction between "cognition" and "conscious of" are also given in the ''Critique of Pure Reason'' (notably A320/B376), and section V and the conclusion of section VIII of his Introduction in ''Logic''.}} "and is consequently not logical, but aesthetical".<ref>Kant, ''CPJ'' §1</ref> |
|||
Kant's influence on Western thought has been profound.<ref>Prof. Oliver A. Johnson claims that, "With the possible exception of Plato's Republic, (Critique of Pure Reason) is the most important philosophical book ever written." Article on Kant within the collection "Great thinkers of the Western World", Ian P. McGreal, Ed., HarperCollins, 1992.</ref> Over and above his influence on specific thinkers, Kant changed the framework within which philosophical inquiry has been carried out. He accomplished a [[paradigm shift]]; very little philosophy is now carried out in the style of pre-Kantian philosophy. This shift consists in several closely related innovations that have become foundational in philosophy itself and in the social sciences and humanities generally: |
|||
* Kant's "Copernican revolution", that placed the role of the human subject or knower at the center of inquiry into our knowledge, such that it is impossible to philosophize about things as they are independently of us or of how they are for us;<ref>See Stephen Palmquist, "The Architectonic Form of Kant's Copernican Logic", ''Metaphilosophy'' 17:4 (October 1986), pp. 266–288; revised and reprinted as Chapter III of [http://www.hkbu.edu.hk/~ppp/ksp1 Kant's System of Perspectives]: An architectonic interpretation of the Critical philosophy (Lanham: University Press of America, 1993).</ref> |
|||
* His invention of critical philosophy, that is of the notion of being able to discover and systematically explore possible inherent limits to our ability to know through philosophical reasoning; |
|||
* His creation of the concept of "conditions of possibility", as in his notion of "the conditions of possible experience"{{spaced ndash}}that is that things, knowledge, and forms of consciousness rest on prior conditions that make them possible, so that, to understand or to know them, we must first understand these conditions; |
|||
* His theory that objective experience is actively constituted or constructed by the functioning of the human mind; |
|||
* His notion of moral autonomy as central to humanity; |
|||
* His assertion of the principle that human beings should be treated as ends rather than as means. |
|||
A pure judgement of taste is subjective since it refers to the emotional response of the subject and is based upon nothing but esteem for an object itself: it is a disinterested pleasure, and we feel that pure judgements of taste (i.e., judgements of beauty), lay claim to universal validity.<ref>Kant, ''CPJ'' §§ 20–22</ref> This universal validity is not derived from a determinate concept of beauty but from ''common sense''.<ref>Kant, ''CPJ'' §40</ref> Kant also believed that a judgment of taste shares characteristics with a moral judgment: both are disinterested, and we hold them to be universal.<ref>{{cite book |last=Guyer |first=Paul |title=Kant and the Claims of Taste |year=1997 |publisher=Harvard University Press |isbn=978-0674500358 |pages=15–20}}</ref> In the chapter "Analytic of the Sublime," Kant identifies the [[Sublime (philosophy)|sublime]] as an aesthetic quality that, like beauty, is subjective, but unlike beauty, it refers to an indeterminate relationship between the faculties of the imagination and reason. It also shares the character of moral judgments in its engagement with reason.<ref>{{cite book |last=Clewis |first=Robert R. |title=The Kantian Sublime and the Revelation of Freedom |year=2009 |publisher=Cambridge University Press |isbn=978-0521760867 |pages=48–52}}</ref> The feeling of the sublime, divided into two distinct modes (the mathematical and the dynamical sublime),<ref>Kant, ''CPJ'' §24</ref> describes two subjective moments that concern the relationship of the faculty of the imagination to reason. Some commentators argue that Kant's critical philosophy contains a third kind of the sublime, the moral sublime, which is the aesthetic response to the moral law or a representation, and a development of the "noble" sublime in Kant's theory of 1764.<ref>{{cite web |last=Clewis |first=Robert |year=2009 |title=The Kantian Sublime and the Revelation of Freedom |location=Cambridge |publisher=Cambridge University Press |url=http://www.cambridge.org/us/knowledge/isbn/item2326741/?site_locale=en_US |access-date=8 December 2011 |archive-date=20 October 2012 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20121020224616/http://www.cambridge.org/us/knowledge/isbn/item2326741/?site_locale=en_US |url-status=live }}</ref> |
|||
Kant's ideas have been incorporated into a variety of schools of thought. These include [[German Idealism]], [[Marxism]], [[positivism]], [[phenomenology (philosophy)|phenomenology]], [[existentialism]], [[critical theory]], [[linguistic philosophy]], [[structuralism]], [[post-structuralism]], and [[deconstructionism]].{{citation needed|date=October 2015}} |
|||
The mathematical sublime results from the failure of the imagination to comprehend natural objects that appear boundless and formless, or appear "absolutely great".<ref>Kant, ''CPJ'' §§23–25</ref> This imaginative failure is then recuperated through the pleasure taken in reason's assertion of the concept of infinity. In this move the faculty of reason proves itself superior to our fallible sensible self.<ref>Kant, ''CPJ'' §§25–26</ref> In the dynamical sublime, there is the sense of annihilation of the sensible self as the imagination tries to comprehend a vast might. This power of nature threatens us but through the resistance of reason to such sensible annihilation, the subject feels a pleasure and a sense of the human moral vocation. This appreciation of moral feeling through exposure to the [[sublime (philosophy)|sublime]] helps to develop moral character. Kant developed a theory of [[Humour|humor]],<ref>Kant, ''CPJ'' §54</ref> which has been interpreted as an "incongruity" theory. He illustrated his theory of humor by telling three narrative jokes in the ''Critique of Judgment''. He thought that the physiological impact of humor is akin to that of music.<ref>{{cite journal|last=Jakobidze-Gitman|first=Alexander|title=Kant's Situated Approach to Musicking and Joking|journal=Journal of Interdisciplinary Music Studies|year=2020|volume=10|pages=17–33|doi=10.25364/24.10:2020.2}}</ref> |
|||
===Historical influence=== |
|||
{{refimprove section|date=July 2016}} |
|||
Kant developed a distinction between an object of art as a material value subject to the conventions of society and the transcendental condition of the judgment of taste as a "refined" value in his ''Idea for a Universal History with a Cosmopolitan Aim'' (1784). In the Fourth and Fifth Theses of that work he identified all art as the "fruits of unsociableness" due to men's "antagonism in society"<ref>Kant, ''UH'' 8:20–22</ref> and, in the Seventh Thesis, asserted that while such material property is indicative of a civilized state, only the ideal of morality and the universalization of refined value through the improvement of the mind "belongs to culture".<ref>Kant, ''UH'' 8:24–26.</ref> |
|||
During his own life, there was much critical attention paid to his thought. He had an influence on [[Karl Leonhard Reinhold|Reinhold]], [[Johann Gottlieb Fichte|Fichte]], [[Friedrich Wilhelm Joseph von Schelling|Schelling]], [[Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel|Hegel]], and [[Novalis]] during the 1780s and 1790s. The school of thinking known as [[German Idealism]] developed from his writings. The German Idealists Fichte and Schelling, for example, tried to bring traditional "metaphysically" laden notions like "the Absolute", "God", and "Being" into the scope of Kant's [[critical thought]].<ref>There is much debate in the recent scholarship about the extent to which Fichte and Schelling actually overstep the boundaries of Kant's critical philosophy, thus entering the realm of dogmatic or pre-Critical philosophy. Beiser's ''German Idealism'' discusses some of these issues. Beiser, Frederick C. ''German Idealism: The Struggle against Subjectivism, 1781–1801.'' Cambridge, Massachusetts: [[Harvard University Press]], 2002.</ref> In so doing, the German Idealists tried to reverse Kant's view that we cannot know what we cannot observe. |
|||
===Anthropology=== |
|||
[[File:Kant Kaliningrad.jpg|thumb|left|Statue of Immanuel Kant in [[Kaliningrad]] ([[Königsberg]]), Russia. Replica by {{Interlanguage link multi|Harald Haacke|de}} of the original by [[Christian Daniel Rauch]] lost in 1945.]] |
|||
Kant lectured on [[History of anthropology|anthropology]], the study of human nature, for twenty-three years.<ref>{{cite book |last1=Wilson |first1=Holly |title=Kant's Pragmatic Anthropology |url=https://archive.org/details/kantspragmatican00wils |url-access=limited |date=2006 |publisher=State University of New York Press |location=Albany |isbn=978-0-7914-6849-4 |page=[https://archive.org/details/kantspragmatican00wils/page/n21 7]}}</ref> His ''[[Anthropology from a Pragmatic Point of View]]'' was published in 1798. Transcripts of Kant's lectures on anthropology were published for the first time in 1997 in German.<ref>Thomas Sturm, ''Kant und die Wissenschaften vom Menschen'' (Paderborn: Mentis Verlag, 2009).</ref> Kant was among the first people of his time to introduce anthropology as an intellectual area of study, long before the field gained popularity, and his texts are considered to have advanced the field. His point of view was to influence the works of later philosophers such as [[Martin Heidegger]] and [[Paul Ricoeur]].<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Piercey |first1=Robert |last2=Philosophy Documentation Center |date=2011 |title=Kant and the Problem of Hermeneutics: Heidegger and Ricoeur on the Transcendental Schematism |url=http://www.pdcnet.org/oom/service?url_ver=Z39.88-2004&rft_val_fmt=&rft.imuse_id=idstudies_2011_0041_0003_0187_0202&svc_id=info:www.pdcnet.org/collection |journal=Idealistic Studies |volume=41 |issue=3 |pages=187–202 |doi=10.5840/idstudies201141315 |issn=0046-8541}}</ref> |
|||
Kant was the first to suggest using a dimensionality approach to human diversity. He analyzed the nature of the [[Hippocrates]]-[[Galen]] [[four temperaments]] and plotted in two dimensions "what belongs to a human being's faculty of desire": |
|||
Hegel was one of Kant's first major critics. In response to what he saw as Kant's abstract and formal account, Hegel brought about an ethic focused on the "ethical life" of the community.<ref>Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel, ''Natural Law: The Scientific Ways of Treating Natural Law, Its Place in Moral Philosophy, and Its Relation to the Positive Sciences.'' trans. T. M. Knox. Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1975. Hegel's mature view and his concept of "ethical life" is elaborated in his ''Philosophy of Right.'' Hegel, ''Philosophy of Right.'' trans. T. M. Knox. Oxford University Press, 1967.</ref> But Hegel's notion of "ethical life" is meant to subsume, rather than replace, [[Kantian ethics]]. And Hegel can be seen as trying to defend Kant's idea of freedom as going beyond finite "desires", by means of reason. Thus, in contrast to later critics like Nietzsche or Russell, Hegel shares some of Kant's most basic concerns.<ref>Robert Pippin's ''Hegel's Idealism'' (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989) emphasizes the continuity of Hegel's concerns with Kant's. Robert Wallace, ''Hegel's Philosophy of Reality, Freedom, and God'' (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005) explains how Hegel's ''Science of Logic'' defends Kant's idea of freedom as going beyond finite "inclinations", contra skeptics such as David Hume.</ref> |
|||
"his natural aptitude or natural predisposition" and "his temperament or sensibility".<ref>Kant ''APPV'' 7:285</ref> Cholerics were described as emotional and energetic, phlegmatics as balanced and weak, sanguines as balanced and energetic, and melancholics as emotional and weak. These two dimensions reappeared in all subsequent models of temperament and personality traits. Kant viewed anthropology in two broad categories: (1) the physiological approach, which he referred to as "what nature makes of the human being"; and (2) the pragmatic approach, which explores the things that a human "can and should make of himself".<ref>Kant ''APPV'' 7:119</ref> |
|||
====Racism==== |
|||
Kant's thinking on religion was used in Britain to challenge the decline in religious faith in the nineteenth century. British Catholic writers, notably [[G. K. Chesterton]] and [[Hilaire Belloc]], followed this approach. [[Ronald Englefield]] debated this movement, and Kant's use of language. See Englefield's article,<ref>Englefield, Ronald, ''Kant as Defender of the Faith in Nineteenth-century England", ''Question'', 12, 16–27, (Pemberton, London)</ref> reprinted in Englefield.<ref>Englefield, Ronald, Critique of Pure Verbiage, Essays on Abuses of Language in Literary, Religious, and Philosophical Writings, edited by G. A. Wells and D. R. Oppenheimer, Open Court, 1990.</ref> Criticisms of Kant were common in the realist views of the new positivism at that time. |
|||
[[File:Kant drawing.png|thumb|100px|''Kant Mixing Mustard'', drawn by {{interlanguage link|Carl Friedrich Hagemann|de}}, 1801]] |
|||
Kant's theory of race and his prejudicial beliefs are among the most contentious areas of recent Kant scholarship.<ref name=":0">{{Cite book |title=Kant and the Concept of Race |publisher=State University of New York Press |year=2013 |isbn=978-1438443614 |editor-last=Mikkelsen |editor-first=Jon M. |location=Albany, New York |pages=12–30 |language=English}}</ref><ref name=":1">{{Cite journal |last=Zorn |first=Daniel-Pascal |title=Kant{{mdash}}a Racist? |url=https://public-history-weekly.degruyter.com/?p=17156 |journal=Public History Weekly |year=2020 |volume=2020 |issue=8 |doi=10.1515/phw-2020-17156 |s2cid=225247836 |issn=2197-6376}}</ref>{{sfn|Kleingeld|2007|pp=573–592}}<!-- <ref>{{Cite journal |last=Kleingeld |first=Pauline |date=October 2007 |title=Kant's Second Thoughts on Race |url=https://philarchive.org/rec/KLEKST |journal=Philosophical Quarterly |volume=57 |issue=229 |pages=573–592 |doi=10.1111/j.1467-9213.2007.498.x}}</ref>--> While few, if any, dispute the overt racism and chauvinism present in his work, a more contested question is the degree to which it degrades or invalidates his other contributions. His most severe critics assert that Kant intentionally manipulated science to support chattel slavery and discrimination.<ref>{{Cite book |last=Eze |first=Emmanuel |chapter=The Color of Reason: the Idea of 'Race' in Kant's Anthropology |date=1997 |url=https://philpapers.org/rec/EZETCO |title=Postcolonial African Philosophy: A Critical Reader |pages=103–140 |editor-last=Eze |editor-first=Emmanuel Chukwudi |publisher=Blackwell |access-date=20 April 2023}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal |last=Serequeberhan |first=T. |date=1996 |title=Eurocentrism in Philosophy: the Case of Immanuel Kant |journal=The Philosophical Forum |s2cid=170547963 |language=en}}</ref><ref name=":0" /> Others acknowledge that he lived in an era of immature science, with many erroneous beliefs, some racist, all appearing decades before evolution, molecular genetics, and other sciences that today are taken for granted.<ref name=":0" /><ref name=":1" /><ref>{{Cite web |title=The Philosophy Junkie: Immanuel Kant's Racism and Sexism with Professors Lucy Allais and Helga Varden on Apple Podcasts |url=https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/immanuel-kants-racism-and-sexism-with-professors/id1512137924?i=1000496715962 |access-date=20 April 2023 |website=Apple Podcasts |language=en-US}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal |last=Geismann |first=Georg |date=1 January 2022 |title=Why Kant Was Not a 'Racist' |url=https://elibrary.duncker-humblot.com/article/69870/why-kant-was-not-a-racist |journal=Jahrbuch für Recht und Ethik/Annual Review of Law and Ethics |volume=30 |issue=1 |pages=263–357 |doi=10.3790/jre.30.1.263 |s2cid=255676303 |issn=0944-4610}}</ref> Kant was one of the most notable Enlightenment thinkers to defend [[racism]]. Philosopher [[Charles W. Mills]] is unequivocal: "Kant is also seen as one of the central figures in the birth of modern 'scientific' racism. Whereas other contributors to early racial thought like Carolus Linnaeus and Johann Friedrich Blumenbach had offered only 'empirical' (scare-quotes necessary!) observation, Kant produced a full-blown ''theory'' of race."{{sfn|Mills|2017|pp=91–112|p=95}} |
|||
[[Arthur Schopenhauer]] was strongly influenced by Kant's [[transcendental idealism]]. He, like [[G. E. Schulze]], [[Friedrich Heinrich Jacobi|Jacobi]], and Fichte before him, was critical of Kant's theory of the thing in itself. Things in themselves, they argued, are neither the cause of what we observe nor are they completely beyond our access. Ever since the first ''Critique of Pure Reason'' philosophers have been critical of Kant's theory of the thing in itself. Many have argued, if such a thing exists beyond experience then one cannot posit that it affects us causally, since that would entail stretching the category 'causality' beyond the realm of experience. For a review of this problem and the relevant literature see ''The Thing in Itself and the Problem of Affection'' in the revised edition of Henry Allison's ''Kant's Transcendental Idealism''. For Schopenhauer things in themselves do not exist outside the non-rational will. The world, as Schopenhauer would have it, is the striving and largely unconscious will. Michael Kelly, in the preface to his 1910 book ''Kant's Ethics and Schopenhauer's Criticism'', stated: "Of Kant it may be said that what is good and true in his philosophy would have been buried with him, were it not for Schopenhauer...." |
|||
Using the [[four temperaments]] of ancient Greece, Kant proposed a hierarchy of racial categories including white Europeans, black Africans, and red Native Americans.<ref name=":2">{{Cite book |last=Kant |first=Immanuel |url=https://www.worldcat.org/oclc/34663347 |chapter=On the Different Races of Man |title=Race and the Enlightenment: a reader |publisher=Blackwell |year=1997 |isbn=0-631-20136-X |editor-last=Eze |editor-first=Emmanuel Chukwudi |location=Cambridge, Mass. |pages=38–49 |oclc=34663347 |orig-date=1775, 1777}}</ref> Although he was a proponent of [[scientific racism]] for much of his career, Kant's views on race changed significantly in the last decade of his life, and he ultimately rejected racial hierarchies and European [[colonialism]] in ''[[Perpetual Peace: A Philosophical Sketch]]'' (1795).{{sfn|Kleingeld|2007|pp=573–592}}{{sfn|Mills|2017|pp=91–112}}<ref name=":2" />{{efn|Kant wrote that "[Whites] contain all the impulses of nature in affects and passions, all talents, all dispositions to culture and civilization and can as readily obey as govern. They are the only ones who always advance to perfection." He describes South Asians as "educated to the highest degree but only in the arts and not in the sciences". He goes on that Hindustanis can never reach the level of abstract concepts and that a "great hindustani man" is one who has "gone far in the art of deception and has much money". He states that the Hindus always stay the way they are and can never advance. About black Africans, Kant wrote that "they can be educated but only as servants, that is they allow themselves to be trained". To Kant, "the Negro can be disciplined and cultivated, but is never genuinely civilized. He falls of his own accord into savagery." Native Americans, Kant opined, "cannot be educated". He calls them unmotivated, lacking affect, passion and love, and describes them as too weak for labor, unfit for any culture, and too [[Four temperaments|phlegmatic]] for diligence. He said that Native Americans are "far below the Negro, who undoubtedly holds the lowest of all remaining levels by which we designate the different races". Kant stated that "Americans and Blacks cannot govern themselves. They thus serve only for slaves."{{sfn|Mills|2017|pp=169–193}}{{sfn|Bowersox|2016}}}} Kant was an opponent of [[miscegenation]], believing that whites would be "degraded" and that "fusing of races" is undesirable, for "not every race adopts the morals and customs of the Europeans". He states that "instead of assimilation, which was intended by the melting together of the various races, nature has here made a law of just the opposite".<ref>Kant ''APPV'' 7:320</ref> Kant was also an anti-Semite, believing that Jews were incapable of transcending material forces, which a moral order required. In this way, Jews are presented as the opposite of autonomous, rational Christians, and therefore incapable of being incorporated into an ethical Christian society. In his "Anthropology", Kant called the Jews "a nation of cheaters" and portrayed them as "a group that has followed not the path of transcendental freedom but that of enslavement to the material world".{{sfn|Shrage|2019}} |
|||
With the success and wide influence of Hegel's writings, Kant's influence began to wane, though there was in Germany a movement that hailed a return to Kant in the 1860s, beginning with the publication of ''Kant und die Epigonen'' in 1865 by [[Otto Liebmann]]. His motto was "Back to Kant", and a re-examination of his ideas began (See [[Neo-Kantianism]]). During the turn of the 20th century there was an important revival of Kant's theoretical philosophy, known as the [[Marburg School]], represented in the work of [[Hermann Cohen]], [[Paul Natorp]], [[Ernst Cassirer]],<ref>Beck, Lewis White. "Neo-Kantianism". In ''Encyclopedia of Philosophy''. Vol. 5–6. Macmillan, 1973. Article on Neo-Kantianism by a translator and scholar of Kant.</ref> and anti-Neo-Kantian [[Nicolai Hartmann]].<ref>Cerf, Walter. "Nicolai Hartmann". In ''Encyclopedia of Philosophy''. Vol. 3–4. Macmillan, 1973. Nicolai was a realist who later rejected the idealism of Neo-Kantianism, his anti-Neo-Kantian views emerging with the publication of the second volume of ''Hegel'' (1929).</ref> |
|||
Mills wrote that Kant has been "sanitized for public consumption", his racist works conveniently ignored.{{sfn|Mills|2017|pp=95–97}} [[Robert Bernasconi]] stated that Kant "supplied the first scientific definition of race". [[Emmanuel Chukwudi Eze]] is credited with bringing Kant's contributions to racism to light in the 1990s among Western philosophers, who he believed often glossed over this part of his life and works.{{sfn|Bouie|2018}} Pauline Kleingeld argues that, while Kant "did defend a racial hierarchy until at least the end of the 1780s", his views on race changed significantly in works published in the last decade of his life. In particular, she argues that Kant rejected past views related to racial hierarchies and the diminished rights or moral status of non-whites in ''[[Perpetual Peace: A Philosophical Sketch|Perpetual Peace]]'' (1795). This work also saw him providing extended arguments against European [[colonialism]], which he claimed was morally unjust and incompatible with the equal rights held by indigenous populations. Kleingeld argues that this shift in Kant's views later in life has often been forgotten or ignored in the literature on Kant's racist anthropology, and that the shift suggests a belated recognition of the fact that racial hierarchy was incompatible with a universalized moral framework.{{sfn|Kleingeld|2007|pp=573–592}} |
|||
Kant's notion of "Critique" has been quite influential. The Early German Romantics, especially [[Karl Wilhelm Friedrich Schlegel|Friedrich Schlegel]] in his "Athenaeum Fragments", used Kant's self-reflexive conception of criticism in their Romantic theory of poetry.<ref>Schlegel, Friedrich. "Athenaeum Fragments", in ''Philosophical Fragments''. Trans. Peter Firchow. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press, 1991. See especially fragments Nos. 1, 43, 44.</ref> Also in [[Aesthetics]], [[Clement Greenberg]], in his classic essay "Modernist Painting", uses Kantian criticism, what Greenberg refers to as "immanent criticism", to justify the aims of [[Abstract Art|Abstract painting]], a movement Greenberg saw as aware of the key limitiaton—flatness—that makes up the medium of painting.<ref>Greenberg, Clement. "Modernist Painting", in ''The Philosophy of Art'', ed. Alex Neill and Aaron Ridley, McGraw-Hill, 1995.</ref> French philosopher [[Michel Foucault]] was also greatly influenced by Kant's notion of "Critique" and wrote several pieces on Kant for a re-thinking of the Enlightenment as a form of "critical thought". He went so far as to classify his own philosophy as a "critical history of modernity, rooted in Kant".<ref>See "Essential Works of Foucault: 1954–1984 vol.2: Aesthetics, Method, and Epistemology." Ed. by James Faubion, Trans. Robert Hurley et al. New York City, New York: The New Press, 1998 (2010 reprint). See "Foucault, Michel, 1926 –" entry by Maurice Florence.</ref> |
|||
While Kant's racist rhetoric is indicative of the state of scholarship and science during the 18th century, German philosopher [[Daniel-Pascal Zorn]] explains the risk of taking period quotations out of context. Many of Kant's most outrageous quotations are from a series of articles from 1777–1788, a public exchange among Kant, Herder, natural scientist [[Georg Forster]], and other scholars prominent in that period.<ref>{{Cite book |url=https://www.worldcat.org/oclc/861693001 |title=Kant and the Concept of Race: late eighteenth-century writings |date=2013 |others=Jon M. Mikkelsen |isbn=978-1-4619-4312-9 |editor-last=Mikkelsen |editor-first=Jon M. |location=Albany |oclc=861693001 |publisher=State University of New York Press}}</ref>{{sfn|Kuehn|2001|pp=298–301, 343–345}}<ref>cf. Kant, ''DCHR'' 8:91-106</ref> Kant asserts that all races of humankind are of the same species, challenging the position of Forster and others that the races were distinct species. While his commentary is clearly biased at times, certain extreme statements were patterned specifically to paraphrase or counter Forster and other authors.<ref name=":0" /><ref name=":1" /> By considering the full arc of Kant's scholarship, Zorn notes the progression in both his philosophical and his anthropological works, "with which he argues, against the ''zeitgeist'', for the unity of humanity".<ref name=":1" /> |
|||
Kant believed that mathematical truths were forms of [[synthetic a priori]] knowledge, which means they are necessary and universal, yet known through intuition.<ref>For a discussion and qualified defense of this position, see Stephen Palmquist, "A Priori Knowledge in Perspective: (I) Mathematics, Method and Pure Intuition", ''The Review of Metaphysics'' 41:1 (September 1987), pp. 3–22.</ref> Kant's often brief remarks about [[mathematics]] influenced the mathematical school known as [[intuitionism]], a movement in [[philosophy of mathematics]] opposed to [[David Hilbert|Hilbert's]] [[formalism (mathematics)|formalism]], and [[Frege]] and [[Bertrand Russell]]'s [[logicism]].<ref>[[Stephan Körner|Körner, Stephan]], ''The Philosophy of Mathematics'', Dover, 1986. For an analysis of Kant's writings on mathematics see, Friedman, Michael, ''Kant and the Exact Sciences'', Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 1992.</ref> |
|||
==Influence and legacy== |
|||
[[File:300Jahrfeier.jpg|thumb|Poster celebrating the 300 years of the [[University of Königsberg]], 1844. Among others, Kant and [[Johann Friedrich Herbart]] are honored.]] |
|||
[[File:DBP - 250 Jahre Immanuel Kant - 90 Pfennig - 1974.jpg|thumb|West German postage stamp, 1974, commemorating the 250th anniversary of Kant's birth]] |
|||
Kant's influence on Western thought has been profound.{{efn|Oliver A. Johnson claims, "With the possible exception of Plato's ''Republic'', (''Critique of Pure Reason'') is the most important philosophical book ever written." Article on Kant within the collection ''Great thinkers of the Western World'', Ian P. McGreal, Ed., HarperCollins, 1992.}} Although the basic tenets of Kant's [[transcendental idealism]] (i.e., that space and time are ''a priori'' forms of human perception rather than real properties and the claim that formal logic and transcendental logic coincide) have been claimed to be falsified by modern science and logic,<ref>{{Cite book|last=Strawson|first=Peter|title=Bounds of Sense: Essay on Kant's "Critique of Pure Reason"|id={{ASIN|0415040302|country=uk}}}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|title=Einstein on Kant|url=https://www.pitt.edu/~jdnorton/teaching/HPS_0410/chapters/significance_GR_geometry/Einstein_on_Kant.html#:~:text=Einstein%20wrote:,withstand%20the%20test%20of%20time.&text=However,%20if%20one%20does%20not,and%20norms%20of%20Kant%27s%20system.|access-date=2 September 2020|publisher=University of Pittsburgh|archive-date=9 August 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200809030743/https://www.pitt.edu/~jdnorton/teaching/HPS_0410/chapters/significance_GR_geometry/Einstein_on_Kant.html#:~:text=Einstein%20wrote:,withstand%20the%20test%20of%20time.&text=However,%20if%20one%20does%20not,and%20norms%20of%20Kant%27s%20system.|url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal|last=Perrick|first=Michael|date=1985|title=Kant and Kripke on Necessary Empirical Truths|journal=Mind|volume=94|issue=376|pages=596–598|doi=10.1093/mind/XCIV.376.596|jstor=2254731|issn=0026-4423}}</ref> and no longer set the intellectual agenda of contemporary philosophers, Kant is credited with having innovated the way philosophical inquiry has been carried on at least up to the early nineteenth century.<!--not very long! early twentieth?--> This shift consisted of several closely related innovations that, although highly contentious in themselves, have become important in subsequent philosophy and in the social sciences broadly construed: |
|||
With his "[[Perpetual Peace: A Philosophical Sketch]]", Kant is considered to have foreshadowed many of the ideas that have come to form the [[democratic peace theory]], one of the main controversies in [[political science]].<ref>Ray, James Lee. [http://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/ray.htm ''Does Democracy Cause Peace?''] {{webarchive |url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080217032515/http://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/ray.htm |date=17 February 2008 }} Annual Review of Political Science 1998. 1:27–46.</ref> |
|||
* The human subject seen as the center of inquiry into human knowledge, such that it is impossible to philosophize about things as they exist independently of human perception or of how they are "for us";<ref>Stephen Palmquist, "The Architectonic Form of Kant's Copernican Logic", ''Metaphilosophy'' 17:4 (October 1986), pp. 266–288; revised and reprinted as Chapter III of [http://www.hkbu.edu.hk/~ppp/ksp1 Kant's System of Perspectives] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120414204136/http://www.hkbu.edu.hk/~ppp/ksp1 |date=14 April 2012 }}: An architectonic interpretation of the Critical philosophy (Lanham: University Press of America, 1993).</ref> |
|||
* the notion that is possible to discover and systematically explore the inherent limits of the human ability to know entirely ''a priori''; |
|||
* the notion of the "categorical imperative", an assertion that people are naturally endowed with the ability and obligation toward right reason and acting. Perhaps his most famous quote is drawn from the ''Critique of Practical Reason'': "Two things fill my mind with ever new and increasing admiration and reverence ... : ''the starry heavens above me and the moral law within me''";<ref>Kant, ''CPracR'' 5:161</ref> |
|||
* the concept of "conditions of possibility", as in his notion of "the conditions of possible experience"; that is, that things, knowledge, and forms of consciousness rest on prior conditions that make them possible, so that, to understand or to know them, several conditions must be understood: |
|||
:* the claim that objective experience is actively constituted or constructed by the functioning of the human mind; |
|||
:* the concept of moral autonomy as central to humanity; and |
|||
:* the assertion of the principle that human beings should be treated as ends rather than as mere means. |
|||
Kant's ideas have been incorporated into a variety of schools of thought. These include [[German idealism]],<ref>{{cite book |last=Beiser |first=Frederick C. |author-link=Frederick C. Beiser |title=German Idealism: The Struggle Against Subjectivism, 1781–1801 |publisher=[[Harvard University Press]] |date=2002 |isbn=978-0674007703 |pages=Part I}}</ref> [[Marxism]],<ref>{{cite book |last=McLellan |first=David |title=Marxism after Marx |publisher=Palgrave Macmillan |date=1998 |isbn=978-0333738399 |pages=22–25}}</ref> [[positivism]],<ref>{{cite book |last=Kolakowski |first=Leszek |title=Positivist Philosophy: From Hume to the Vienna Circle |publisher=Penguin Books |date=1972 |isbn=0140212248 |pages=67–69}}</ref> [[phenomenology (philosophy)|phenomenology]],<ref>{{cite book |last=Carman |first=Taylor |title=Merleau-Ponty |publisher=Routledge |date=2008 |isbn=978-0415360616 |pages=34–36}}</ref> [[existentialism]],<ref>{{cite book |last=Kaufmann |first=Walter |title=Existentialism: From Dostoevsky to Sartre |publisher=Meridian Books |date=1989 |isbn=978-0452009301 |pages=9–12}}</ref> [[critical theory]],<ref>{{cite book |last=Habermas |first=Jürgen |title=The Philosophical Discourse of Modernity: Twelve Lectures |publisher=MIT Press |date=1987 |isbn=978-0745608303 |pages=109–113}}</ref> [[linguistic philosophy]],<ref>{{cite book |last=Dummett |first=Michael |title=Origins of Analytical Philosophy |publisher=Harvard University Press |date=1996 |isbn=978-0674644731 |pages=45–47}}</ref> [[structuralism]],<ref>{{cite book |last=Piaget |first=Jean |title=Structuralism |publisher=Routledge |date=2001 |isbn=978-0415262491 |pages=10–12}}</ref> [[post-structuralism]],<ref>{{cite book |last=Norris |first=Christopher |title=Deconstruction: Theory and Practice |publisher=Routledge |date=2003 |isbn=978-0415061742 |pages=40–42}}</ref> and [[deconstruction]].<ref>{{cite book |last=Culler |first=Jonathan |title=On Deconstruction: Theory and Criticism after Structuralism |publisher=Cornell University Press |date=2007 |isbn=978-0801479182 |pages=53–56}}</ref> |
|||
Prominent recent Kantians include the British philosophers [[P. F. Strawson]]<ref>Strawson, P. F., ''The Bounds of Sense: An Essay on Kant's Critique of Pure Reason.'' Routledge: 2004. When first published in 1966, this book forced many Anglo-American philosophers to reconsider Kant's ''Critique of Pure Reason''.</ref> and [[Quassim Cassam]]<ref>Cassam, Q., "The Possibility of Knowledge" Oxford: 2009</ref> and the American philosophers [[Wilfrid Sellars]]<ref>Sellars, Wilfrid, ''Science and Metaphysics: Variations on Kantian Themes.'' Ridgeview Publishing Company, 1967</ref> and [[Christine Korsgaard]].<ref>Korsgaard, Christine. ''Creating the Kingdom of Ends.'' Cambridge; New York, NY, US: Cambridge University Press, 1996. {{ISBN|0-521-49644-6}}, {{ISBN|0-521-49962-3}} (pbk.) ''Not a commentary, but a defense of a broadly Kantian approach to ethics''</ref> Due to the influence of Strawson and Sellars, among others, there has been a renewed interest in Kant's view of the mind. Central to many debates in [[philosophy of psychology]] and [[cognitive science]] is Kant's conception of the unity of consciousness.<ref>[[Andrew Brook|Brook, Andrew]]. ''Kant and the Mind''. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1994. See also, Meerbote, R. "Kant's [[Functionalism (philosophy of mind)|Functionalism]]". In: J. C. Smith, ed. ''Historical Foundations of Cognitive Science''. Dordrecht, Holland: Reidel, 1991. Brook has an article on Kant's View of the Mind in the [http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/kant-mind/ Stanford Encyclopedia]</ref> |
|||
===Historical influence=== |
|||
[[Jürgen Habermas]] and [[John Rawls]] are two significant political and moral philosophers whose work is strongly influenced by Kant's moral philosophy.<ref>See Habermas, J. ''Moral Consciousness and Communicative Action.'' Trans. Christian Lenhardt and Shierry Weber Nicholsen. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press, 1996. For Rawls see, Rawls, John. ''Theory of Justice'' Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 1971. Rawls has a well-known essay on Kant's concept of good. See, Rawls, "Themes in Kant's Moral Philosophy" in ''Kant's Transcendental Deductions''. Ed. Eckart Förster. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1989.</ref> They argued against relativism,<ref>Habermas, J. (1994): The Unity of Reason in the Diversity of Its Voices. In: Habermas, J. (Eds.): Postmetaphysical Thinking. Political Essays, Cambridge, Massachusetts: 115–148.</ref> supporting the Kantian view that universality is essential to any viable moral philosophy. Jean-Francois Lyotard, however, emphasized the indeterminacy in the nature of thought and language and has engaged in debates with Habermas based on the effects this indeterminacy has on philosophical and political debates.<ref>Rorty, R. (2984) Habermas and Lyotard on postmodernity. Praxis International (32-44)</ref> |
|||
[[File:Kant Kaliningrad.jpg|thumb|upright=.8|Statue of Kant in [[Kaliningrad]], Russia. Replica by {{Interlanguage link|Harald Haacke|de}} of the original by [[Christian Daniel Rauch]] was lost in 1945.]] |
|||
Kant's influence also has extended to the social, behavioral, and physical sciences, as in the sociology of [[Max Weber]], the psychology of [[Jean Piaget]], and the linguistics of [[Noam Chomsky]]. Kant's work on mathematics and synthetic a priori knowledge is also cited by theoretical physicist [[Albert Einstein]] as an early influence on his intellectual development.<ref>Issacson, Walter. "Einstein: His Life and Universe." p. 20.</ref> Because of the thoroughness of the Kantian paradigm shift, his influence extends to thinkers who neither specifically refer to his work nor use his terminology. |
|||
During his own life, much critical attention was paid to Kant's thought. He influenced [[Karl Leonhard Reinhold|Reinhold]], [[Johann Gottlieb Fichte|Fichte]], [[Friedrich Wilhelm Joseph von Schelling|Schelling]], [[Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel|Hegel]], and [[Novalis]] during the 1780s and 1790s. [[Samuel Taylor Coleridge]] was greatly influenced by Kant and helped to spread awareness of him, and of German Idealism generally, in the UK and the US. In his ''[[Biographia Literaria]]'' (1817), he credits Kant's ideas in coming to believe that the mind is not a passive, but an active agent in the apprehension of reality. Hegel was one of Kant's first major critics. In Hegel's view the entire project of setting a "transcendental subject" (i.e., human consciousness) apart from the living individual as well as from nature, history, and society was fundamentally flawed,<ref>{{Cite book|last=Hegel|first=Georg Wilhelm Friedrich|title=Encyclopedia of the Philosophical Sciences in Basic Outline|year=1827|location=Heidelberg|pages=14–15}}</ref> although parts of that very project could be put to good use in a new direction. Similar concerns motivated Hegel's criticisms of Kant's concept of moral autonomy, to which Hegel opposed an ethic focused on the "ethical life" of the community.{{efn|Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel, ''Natural Law: The Scientific Ways of Treating Natural Law, Its Place in Moral Philosophy, and Its Relation to the Positive Sciences''. trans. T. M. Knox. Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1975. Hegel's mature view and his concept of "ethical life" is elaborated in his ''Philosophy of Right''. Hegel, ''Philosophy of Right''. trans. T. M. Knox. Oxford University Press, 1967.}} In a sense, Hegel's notion of "ethical life" is meant to subsume, rather than replace, [[Kantian ethics]]. And Hegel can be seen as trying to defend Kant's idea of freedom as going beyond finite "desires", by means of reason. Thus, in contrast to later critics like Nietzsche or Russell, Hegel shares some of Kant's concerns.{{efn|Robert Pippin's ''Hegel's Idealism'' (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989) emphasizes the continuity of Hegel's concerns with Kant's. Robert Wallace, ''Hegel's Philosophy of Reality, Freedom, and God'' (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005) explains how Hegel's ''Science of Logic'' defends Kant's idea of freedom as going beyond finite "inclinations", contra skeptics such as David Hume.}} |
|||
==Personal legacy== |
|||
Kant's thinking on religion was used in Britain by philosophers such as [[Thomas Carlyle]]<ref>{{Cite web |last=Cody |first=David |date= |title=Carlyle: Sources and Influence |url=https://victorianweb.org/authors/carlyle/sources.html |access-date=28 July 2023 |website=The Victorian Web}}</ref> to challenge the nineteenth-century decline in religious faith. British Catholic writers, notably [[G. K. Chesterton]] and [[Hilaire Belloc]], followed this approach.<ref>{{cite book |last=Morse |first=David |title=The Age of Virtue: British Culture from the Restoration to Romanticism |year=2000 |publisher=Macmillan |isbn=978-0333913918 |pages=198–200}}</ref> Criticisms of Kant were common in the realist views of the new [[positivism]] at that time. [[Arthur Schopenhauer]] was strongly influenced by Kant's [[transcendental idealism]]. Like [[Gottlob Ernst Schulze|G. E. Schulze]], [[Friedrich Heinrich Jacobi|Jacobi]], and Fichte before him, Schopenhauer was critical of Kant's theory of the thing-in-itself. Things-in-themselves, they argued, are neither the cause of what we observe, nor are they completely beyond our access. Ever since the ''Critique of Pure Reason'', philosophers have been critical of Kant's theory of the thing-in-itself. Many have argued that, if such a thing exists beyond experience, then one cannot posit that it affects us causally, since that would entail stretching the category "causality" beyond the realm of experience.{{efn|For a review of this problem and the relevant literature see ''The Thing in Itself and the Problem of Affection'' in the revised edition of Henry Allison's ''Kant's Transcendental Idealism''.}} |
|||
Kant always cut a curious figure in his lifetime for his modest, rigorously scheduled habits, which have been referred to as clocklike. But [[Heinrich Heine]] noted the magnitude of "his destructive, world-crushing thoughts" and considered him a sort of philosophical "executioner", comparing him to [[Maximilien Robespierre|Robespierre]] with the observation that both men "represented in the highest the type of provincial bourgeois. Nature had destined them to weigh coffee and sugar, but Fate determined that they should weigh other things and placed on the scales of the one a king, on the scales of the other a god."<ref>{{cite web |url=http://philosophy.uchicago.edu/resources/files/On%20Kant.pdf |title=Heine on Immanuel Kant |access-date=10 July 2015}}</ref> |
|||
[[File:DR 1926 391 Immanuel Kant.jpg|thumb|upright|[[Weimar Republic]] stamp honoring Kant, 1926]] |
|||
When his body was transfered to a new burial spot, his skull was measured during the exhumation and found to be larger than the average German male's with a "high and broad" forehead.<ref>''Examined Lives, From Socrates to Nietzsche'', James Miller p.284</ref> His forehead has been an object of interest ever since it became well-known through his portraits: “In Döbler’s portrait and in Kiefer’s faithful if expressionistic reproduction of it — as well as in many of the other late eighteenth- and early nineteenth-century portraits of Kant — the forehead is remarkably large and decidedly retreating. Was Kant’s forehead shaped this way in these images because he was a philosopher, or, to follow the implications of Lavater’s system, was he a philosopher because of the intellectual acuity manifested by his forehead? Kant and Johann Kaspar Lavater were correspondents on theological matters, and Lavater refers to Kant in his work "Physiognomic Fragments, for the Education of Human Knowledge and Love of People" (Leipzig & Winterthur, 1775-1778).<ref>''Immanuel Kant and the Bo(a)rders of Art History'' Mark Cheetham, in The Subjects of Art History: Historical Objects in Contemporary Perspectives, p. 16</ref> |
|||
With the success and wide influence of Hegel's writings, Kant's own influence began to wane, but a re-examination of his ideas began in Germany in 1865 with the publication of ''Kant und die Epigonen'' by [[Otto Liebmann]], whose motto was "Back to Kant". There proceeded an important revival of Kant's theoretical philosophy, known as [[Neo-Kantianism]]. Kant's notion of "critique" has been more broadly influential. The early German Romantics, especially [[Friedrich Schlegel]] in his "Athenaeum Fragments", used Kant's reflexive conception of criticism in their Romantic theory of poetry.<ref>Schlegel, Friedrich. "Athenaeum Fragments", in ''Philosophical Fragments''. Trans. Peter Firchow. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press, 1991. See especially fragments Nos. 1, 43, 44.</ref> Also in [[aesthetics]], [[Clement Greenberg]], in his classic essay "Modernist Painting", uses Kantian criticism, what Greenberg refers to as "immanent criticism", to justify the aims of [[Abstract art|abstract painting]], a movement Greenberg saw as aware of the key limitation—flatness—that makes up the medium of painting.<ref>Greenberg, Clement. "Modernist Painting", in ''The Philosophy of Art'', ed. Alex Neill and Aaron Ridley, McGraw-Hill, 1995.</ref> French philosopher [[Michel Foucault]] was also greatly influenced by Kant's notion of "critique" and wrote several pieces on Kant for a re-thinking of the Enlightenment as a form of "critical thought". He went so far as to classify his own philosophy as a "critical history of modernity, rooted in Kant".<ref>See "Essential Works of Foucault: 1954–1984 vol. 2: Aesthetics, Method, and Epistemology". Ed. by James Faubion, Trans. Robert Hurley et al. New York City: The New Press, 1998 (2010 reprint). See "Foucault, Michel, 1926 –" entry by Maurice Florence.</ref> |
|||
Kant believed that mathematical truths were forms of [[Synthetic a priori|synthetic ''a priori'']] knowledge, which means they are necessary and universal, yet known through the ''a priori'' intuition of space and time, as transcendental preconditions of experience.<ref>For a discussion and qualified defense of this position, see Stephen Palmquist, "A Priori Knowledge in Perspective: (I) Mathematics, Method and Pure Intuition", ''The Review of Metaphysics'' 41:1 (September 1987), pp. 3–22.</ref> Kant's often brief remarks about [[mathematics]] influenced the mathematical school known as [[intuitionism]], a movement in [[philosophy of mathematics]] opposed to [[David Hilbert|Hilbert]]'s [[Formalism (mathematics)|formalism]], and [[Gottlob Frege|Frege]] and [[Bertrand Russell]]'s [[logicism]].{{efn|[[Stephan Körner|Körner, Stephan]], ''The Philosophy of Mathematics'', Dover, 1986. For an analysis of Kant's writings on mathematics see, Friedman, Michael, ''Kant and the Exact Sciences'', Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 1992.}} |
|||
==Tomb and statue== |
|||
[[File:Kant kaliningrad2.png|upright|thumb|Kant's tomb in [[Kaliningrad]], Russia]] |
|||
===Influence on modern thinkers=== |
|||
Kant's [[mausoleum]] adjoins the northeast corner of [[Königsberg Cathedral]] in what is now known as [[Kaliningrad]], Russia. The mausoleum was constructed by the architect [[Friedrich Lahrs]] and was finished in 1924 in time for the bicentenary of Kant's birth. Originally, Kant was buried inside the cathedral, but in 1880 his remains were moved to a [[neo-Gothic]] chapel adjoining the northeast corner of the cathedral. Over the years, the chapel became dilapidated and was demolished to make way for the mausoleum, which was built on the same location. |
|||
[[File:DBP - 250 Jahre Immanuel Kant - 90 Pfennig - 1974.jpg|thumb|upright|[[West German]] postage stamp, 1974, commemorating the 250th anniversary of Kant's birth]] |
|||
With his ''Perpetual Peace'', Kant is considered to have foreshadowed many of the ideas that have come to form the [[democratic peace theory]], one of the main controversies in [[political science]].<ref>{{cite journal|last=Ray|first=James Lee |url=http://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/ray.htm |title=Does Democracy Cause Peace?|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080217032515/http://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/ray.htm |archive-date=17 February 2008|journal=Annual Review of Political Science|year=1998|volume=1|pages=27–46|doi=10.1146/annurev.polisci.1.1.27|doi-access=free}}</ref> More concretely, constructivist theorist Alexander Wendt proposed that the anarchy of the international system could evolve from the "brutish" Hobbesian anarchy understood by realist theorists, through Lockean anarchy, and ultimately a Kantian anarchy in which states would see their self-interests as inextricably linked to the well being of other states, thus transforming international politics into a far more peaceful form.<ref>{{Cite book |last=Wendt |first=Alexander |title=Social Theory of International Politics |publisher=Cambridge University Press |year=1999 |pages=chapter 6}}</ref> |
|||
Prominent recent Kantians include the British philosophers [[P. F. Strawson]],{{efn|Strawson, P. F., ''The Bounds of Sense: An Essay on Kant's Critique of Pure Reason''. Routledge: 2004. When first published in 1966, this book forced many Anglo-American philosophers to reconsider Kant's ''Critique of Pure Reason''.}} [[Onora O'Neill]],<ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/14/books/onora-oneill-wins-holberg-prize.html|title=Onora O'Neill Wins Holberg Prize for Academic Research|last=Aridi|first=Sara|date=14 March 2017|work=The New York Times|access-date=9 January 2019|archive-date=9 January 2019|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190109111404/https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/14/books/onora-oneill-wins-holberg-prize.html|url-status=live}}</ref> and [[Quassim Cassam]],<ref>Cassam, Q. ''The Possibility of Knowledge'' Oxford: 2009</ref> and the American philosophers [[Wilfrid Sellars]]<ref>Sellars, Wilfrid, ''Science and Metaphysics: Variations on Kantian Themes''. Ridgeview Publishing Company, 1967</ref> and [[Christine Korsgaard]].{{efn|Korsgaard, Christine. ''Creating the Kingdom of Ends''. Cambridge; New York: Cambridge University Press, 1996.{{ISBN|978-0-521-49644-5}} ''Not a commentary, but a defense of a broadly Kantian approach to ethics''.}} Due to the influence of Strawson and Sellars, among others, there has been a renewed interest in Kant's view of the mind. Central to many debates in [[philosophy of psychology]] and [[cognitive science]] is Kant's conception of the unity of consciousness.{{efn|[[Andrew Brook|Brook, Andrew]]. ''Kant and the Mind''. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1994. See also, Meerbote, R. "Kant's [[Functionalism (philosophy of mind)|Functionalism]]". In: J. C. Smith, ed. ''Historical Foundations of Cognitive Science''. Dordrecht, Holland: Reidel, 1991. Brook has an article on Kant's View of the Mind in the [http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/kant-mind/ Stanford Encyclopedia] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100709014732/http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/kant-mind/ |date=9 July 2010 }}}} |
|||
The tomb and its mausoleum are among the few artifacts of German times preserved by the [[Soviets]] after they conquered and annexed the city.<ref>{{Cite news|url=http://www.spiegel.de/international/zeitgeist/architectural-competition-held-to-rebuild-koenigsberg-city-center-a-980260.html|title=Resurrecting Königsberg: Russian City Looks to German Roots|last=Beyer|first=Susanne|date=2014-07-25|work=Spiegel Online|access-date=2018-02-03}}</ref> Today, many newlyweds bring flowers to the mausoleum. |
|||
[[Jürgen Habermas]] and [[John Rawls]] are two significant political and moral philosophers whose work is strongly influenced by Kant's moral philosophy.{{efn|See Habermas, J. ''Moral Consciousness and Communicative Action''. Trans. Christian Lenhardt and Shierry Weber Nicholsen. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press, 1996. For Rawls see, Rawls, John. ''Theory of Justice'' Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 1971. Rawls has a well-known essay on Kant's concept of good. See, Rawls, "Themes in Kant's Moral Philosophy" in ''Kant's Transcendental Deductions''. Ed. Eckart Förster. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1989.}} They have argued against relativism,<ref>Habermas, J. (1994): The Unity of Reason in the Diversity of Its Voices. In: Habermas, J. (Ed.): ''Postmetaphysical Thinking. Political Essays'', Cambridge, Massachusetts: 115–148.</ref> supporting the Kantian view that universality is essential to any viable moral philosophy. [[Mou Zongsan]]'s study of Kant has been cited as a highly crucial part in the development of Mou's personal philosophy, namely [[New Confucianism]]. Widely regarded as the most influential Kant scholar in China, Mou's rigorous critique of Kant's philosophy{{mdash}}having translated all three of Kant's [[Critique of Pure Reason|critiques]]{{mdash}}served as an ardent attempt to reconcile Chinese and Western philosophy whilst increasing pressure to [[Westernize]] in China.<ref>{{cite book |last1=Palmquist |first1=Stephen |title=Cultivating Personhood: Kant and Asian Philosophy |url=https://archive.org/details/cultivatingperso00palm |url-access=limited |year= 2010 |publisher=De Gruyter, Inc. |location=Hong Kong |isbn=978-3-11-022624-9|page=[https://archive.org/details/cultivatingperso00palm/page/n43 25] |edition=}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last1=Wing-Cheuk |first1=Chan |title=Mou Zongsan's Transformation of Kant's Philosophy |journal=Journal of Chinese Philosophy |date=21 February 2006 |volume=33 |issue=1 |page=1 |doi=10.1111/j.1540-6253.2006.00340.x }}</ref> |
|||
Artifacts previously owned by Kant, known as ''Kantiana'', were included in the [[Königsberg City Museum]]. However, the museum was destroyed during [[World War II]]. |
|||
[[File:Kant-Münze DDR.jpg|thumb|upright|[[East German]] commemorative coin honoring Kant, 1974]] |
|||
A replica of the statue of Kant that stood in German times in front of the main [[University of Königsberg]] building was donated by a German entity in the early 1990s and placed in the same grounds. |
|||
Because of the thoroughness of Kant's paradigm shift, his influence extends well beyond this to thinkers who neither specifically refer to his work nor use his terminology. Kant's influence extended to the social, behavioral, and physical sciences{{mdash}}as in the sociology of [[Max Weber]], the psychology of [[Jean Piaget]], and [[Carl Gustav Jung]].<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Balanovskiy |first1=Valentin |title=Whether jung was a kantian? |journal=Con-Textos Kantianos |year=2016 |issue=4 |pages=118–126 |doi=10.5281/zenodo.2550828 |url=https://www.researchgate.net/publication/323218719 |access-date=29 May 2020 |archive-date=20 December 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201220055819/https://www.researchgate.net/publication/323218719_Whether_jung_was_a_kantian |url-status=live }}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last1=Balanovskiy |first1=Valentin |title=Kant and Jung on the prospects of Scientific Psychology |journal=Estudos Kantianos |year=2017 |volume=5 |issue=1 |pages=357–390 |doi=10.36311/2318-0501.2017.v5n1.26.p375 |url=https://www.researchgate.net/publication/323540339 |doi-access=free |access-date=29 May 2020 |archive-date=20 December 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201220055820/https://www.researchgate.net/publication/323540339_Kant_and_Jung_on_the_prospects_of_Scientific_Psychology |url-status=live }}</ref> Kant's work on mathematics and synthetic ''a priori'' knowledge is also cited by theoretical physicist [[Albert Einstein]] as an early influence on his intellectual development, although it was one which he later criticized and rejected.<ref>Isaacson, Walter. "Einstein: His Life and Universe". p. 20.</ref> In the 2020s, there was a renewed interest in Kant's theory of mind from the point of view of [[formal logic]] and [[computer science]].<ref>Theodora Achourioti & Michiel van Lambalgen, 'A Formalization of Kant's Transcendental Logic', ''The Review of Symbolic Logic'', 4 (2011), 254–289.</ref> |
|||
After the expulsion of [[Königsberg]]'s German population at the end of [[World War II]], the University of Königsberg where Kant taught was replaced by the Russian-language Kaliningrad State University, which appropriated the campus and surviving buildings. In 2005, the university was renamed [[Immanuel Kant State University of Russia]]. The name change was announced at a ceremony attended by President [[Vladimir Putin]] of Russia and Chancellor [[Gerhard Schröder]] of Germany, and the university formed a Kant Society, dedicated to the study of [[Kantianism]]. |
|||
{{-}} |
|||
==Bibliography== |
==Bibliography== |
||
Unless otherwise noted, all citations are to ''The Cambridge Edition of the Works of Immanuel Kant in English Translation'', 16 vols., ed. Guyer, Paul, and Wood, Allen W. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992. Citations in the article are to individual works per abbreviations in ''List of Major'' works below. |
|||
* ''Theoretical Philosophy, 1755-1770''. Ed. and trans. David Walford with Ralf Meerbote. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992. |
|||
* ''Lectures on Logic''. Ed. and trans. J. Michael Young. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992. |
|||
* ''Opus postumum''. Ed. Eckart Förster, trans. Eckart Förster and Michael Rosen. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993 |
|||
* ''Practical Philosophy''. Ed. and trans. Mary J. Gregor. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996. |
|||
* ''Religion and Rational Theology''. Ed. and trans.Allen W. Wood and George di Giovanni. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996 |
|||
* ''Lectures on Metaphysics''. Ed. and trans. Karl Ameriks and Steve Naragon. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997. |
|||
* ''Lectures on Ethics''. Ed. Peter Heath and J.B. Schneewind, trans. Peter Heath. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997. |
|||
* ''Critique of Pure Reason''. Ed. and trans. Paul Guyer and Allen W. Wood. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998. |
|||
* ''Correspondence''. Ed. and trans. Arnulf Zweig. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999. |
|||
* ''Critique of the Power of Judgment''. Ed. Paul Guyer, trans. Paul Guyer and Eric Matthews. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000. |
|||
* ''Theoretical Philosophy after 1781''. Ed. Henry Allison and Peter Heath, trans. Gary Hatfield, Michael Friedman, Henry Allison, and Peter Heath. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002. |
|||
* ''Notes and Fragments''. Ed. Paul Guyer, trans. Curtis Bowman, Paul Guyer, and Frederick Rauscher. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005. |
|||
* ''Anthropology, History, and Education'', Ed. Günter Zöller and Robert B. Louden. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007. |
|||
* ''Lectures on Anthropology'', Ed. Allen W. Wood and Robert B. Louden Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2012. |
|||
* ''Natural Science'', Ed. Eric Watkins. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2012. |
|||
===List of major works=== |
===List of major works=== |
||
Abbreviations used in body of article are boldface in brackets. Unless otherwise noted, pagination is to the critical ''Akademie'' edition, which can be found in the margins of the Cambridge translations. |
|||
* (1749) ''[[Thoughts on the True Estimation of Living Forces]]'' (''Gedanken von der wahren Schätzung der lebendigen Kräfte'') |
|||
* 1749: ''[[Thoughts on the True Estimation of Living Forces]]'' (''Gedanken von der wahren Schätzung der lebendigen Kräfte'') |
|||
* (March 1755) ''[[Universal Natural History and Theory of Heaven]]'' (''Allgemeine Naturgeschichte und Theorie des Himmels'') |
|||
* 1755: ''[[Universal Natural History and Theory of the Heavens]]'' ['''UNH'''] ({{lang|de|Allgemeine Naturgeschichte und Theorie des Himmels}}) |
|||
* (Apr. 1755) ''Brief Outline of Certain Meditations on Fire'' (''Meditationum quarundam de igne succinta delineatio'' ([[master's thesis]] under [[Johann Gottfried Teske]]))<ref>The thesis was submitted on 17 April 1755. "The public examination was held four weeks later on 13 May, and the degree was formally awarded on 12 June" (Eric Watkins, ''Kant: Natural Science'', Cambridge University Press, 2012, p. 309).</ref><ref>Eric Watkins (ed.), ''Kant and the Sciences'', Oxford University Press, 2001, p. 27.</ref><ref>Martin Schonfeld, ''The Philosophy of the Young Kant: The Precritical Project'', Oxford University Press, 2000, p. 74.</ref><ref>Available [https://korpora.zim.uni-duisburg-essen.de/kant/aa01/369.html online at Bonner Kant-Korpus].</ref> |
|||
* |
* 1755: ''Brief Outline of Certain Meditations on Fire'' (''Meditationum quarundam de igne succinta delineatio'' ([[master's thesis]] under [[Johann Gottfried Teske]]))<ref>The thesis was submitted on 17 April 1755. "The public examination was held four weeks later on 13 May, and the degree was formally awarded on 12 June" (Eric Watkins, ''Kant: Natural Science'', Cambridge University Press, 2012, p. 309).</ref><ref>Eric Watkins (ed.), ''Kant and the Sciences'', Oxford University Press, 2001, p. 27.</ref><ref>Martin Schonfeld, ''The Philosophy of the Young Kant: The Precritical Project'', Oxford University Press, 2000, p. 74.</ref><ref>Available [https://korpora.zim.uni-duisburg-essen.de/kant/aa01/369.html online at Bonner Kant-Korpus] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160306131152/https://korpora.zim.uni-duisburg-essen.de/kant/aa01/369.html |date=6 March 2016 }}.</ref> |
||
* 1755: ''A New Elucidation of the First Principles of Metaphysical Cognition'' (''Principiorum primorum cognitionis metaphysicae nova dilucidatio'' ([[doctoral thesis]]))<ref>The thesis was publicly disputed on 27 September 1755 (Kuehn 2001, p. 100).</ref>{{efn|available [https://korpora.zim.uni-duisburg-essen.de/kant/aa01/385.html online at Bonner Kant-Korpus] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160306131856/https://korpora.zim.uni-duisburg-essen.de/kant/aa01/385.html |date=6 March 2016 }}.}} |
|||
* (1756) ''The Use in Natural Philosophy of Metaphysics Combined with Geometry, Part I: Physical Monadology'' (''Metaphysicae cum geometrica iunctae usus in philosophin naturali, cuius specimen I. continet monadologiam physicam'', abbreviated as ''Monadologia Physica'' (thesis as a prerequisite of associate professorship))<ref>Kant's application for the position was unsuccessful. He defended it on 10 April 1756 (Kuehn 2001, p. 102).</ref> |
|||
* 1756: ''The Use in Natural Philosophy of Metaphysics Combined with Geometry, Part I: Physical Monadology'' ['''PM'''] (''Metaphysicae cum geometrica iunctae usus in philosophia naturali, cuius specimen I. continet monadologiam physicam'', abbreviated as ''Monadologia Physica'' (thesis as a prerequisite of associate professorship))<ref>Kant's application for the position was unsuccessful. He defended it on 10 April 1756 (Kuehn 2001, p. 102).</ref> |
|||
* (1762) ''[[The False Subtlety of the Four Syllogistic Figures]]'' (''Die falsche Spitzfindigkeit der vier syllogistischen Figuren'') |
|||
* 1762: ''[[The False Subtlety of the Four Syllogistic Figures]]'' (''Die falsche Spitzfindigkeit der vier syllogistischen Figuren'') |
|||
* (1763) ''[[The Only Possible Argument in Support of a Demonstration of the Existence of God]]'' (''Der einzig mögliche Beweisgrund zu einer Demonstration des Daseins Gottes'') |
|||
* 1763: ''[[The Only Possible Argument in Support of a Demonstration of the Existence of God]]'' (''Der einzig mögliche Beweisgrund zu einer Demonstration des Daseins Gottes'') |
|||
* (1763) ''Attempt to Introduce the Concept of Negative Magnitudes into Philosophy'' (''Versuch den Begriff der negativen Größen in die Weltweisheit einzuführen'') |
|||
* 1763: ''Attempt to Introduce the Concept of Negative Magnitudes into Philosophy'' ['''NQ'''] (''Versuch den Begriff der negativen Größen in die Weltweisheit einzuführen'') |
|||
* (1764) ''[[Observations on the Feeling of the Beautiful and Sublime]]'' (''Beobachtungen über das Gefühl des Schönen und Erhabenen'') |
|||
* |
* 1764: ''[[Observations on the Feeling of the Beautiful and Sublime]]'' ['''OFBS'''] (''Beobachtungen über das Gefühl des Schönen und Erhabenen'') |
||
* |
* 1764: ''Essay on the Illness of the Head'' (''Über die Krankheit des Kopfes'') |
||
* 1764: ''Inquiry Concerning the Distinctness of the Principles of Natural Theology and Morality'' (the ''Prize Essay'') ['''PNTM'''] (''Untersuchungen über die Deutlichkeit der Grundsätze der natürlichen Theologie und der Moral'') |
|||
* |
* 1766: ''Dreams of a Spirit-Seer'' ['''DSS'''] (''Träume eines Geistersehers'')<ref>Available [https://archive.org/details/dreamsofspiritse00kant online at Archive.org].</ref> |
||
* 1768: ''On the Ultimate Ground of the Differentiation of Regions in Space'' [1768] (''Von dem ersten Grunde des Unterschiedes der Gegenden im Raume'')<ref>Immanuel Kant, [https://philpapers.org/rec/KANCTU "Concerning the ultimate ground of the differentiation of directions in space"] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180716082315/https://philpapers.org/rec/KANCTU |date=16 July 2018 }}.</ref> |
|||
* (1770) ''Dissertation on the Form and Principles of the Sensible and the Intelligible World'' (''De mundi sensibilis atque intelligibilis forma et principiis'' (doctoral thesis))<ref>The thesis was publicly disputed on 21 August 1770 (Kuehn 2001, p. 189).</ref><ref>Available [https://books.google.com/books?id=dNRKAQAAMAAJ&pg=PA123&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q&f=false online at Google Books].</ref><ref>English translation available [[:s:Kant's Inaugural Dissertation of 1770|online at Wikisource]].</ref><ref name="RGT"/> |
|||
* 1770: ''Dissertation on the Form and Principles of the Sensible and the Intelligible World'' ['''ID'''] (''De mundi sensibilis atque intelligibilis forma et principiis'' [doctoral thesis])<ref>The thesis was publicly disputed on 21 August 1770 (Kuehn 2001, p. 189).</ref><ref>Available [https://books.google.com/books?id=dNRKAQAAMAAJ&pg=PA123 online at Google Books] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200803105335/https://books.google.com/books?id=dNRKAQAAMAAJ&pg=PA123 |date=3 August 2020 }}.</ref><ref>English translation available [[:s:Kant's Inaugural Dissertation of 1770|online at Wikisource]].</ref> |
|||
* (1775) ''On the Different Races of Man'' (''Über die verschiedenen Rassen der Menschen'') |
|||
* 1775: ''On the Different Races of Man'' (''Über die verschiedenen Rassen der Menschen'') |
|||
* (1781) First edition of the ''[[Critique of Pure Reason]]''<ref>{{cite web|author=Immanuel Kant|url=http://etext.library.adelaide.edu.au/k/kant/immanuel/k16p/|title=The Critique of Pure Reason|publisher=Etext.library.adelaide.edu.au|date=|accessdate=24 July 2009|deadurl=yes|archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20081202072513/http://etext.library.adelaide.edu.au/k/kant/immanuel/k16p/|archivedate=2 December 2008|df=dmy-all}}</ref> (''Kritik der reinen Vernunft'')<ref>{{cite web|author=Immanuel Kant|url=http://gutenberg.spiegel.de/kant/krva/krva.htm|title=Projekt Gutenberg-DE – Spiegel Online – Nachrichten – Kultur|publisher=Gutenberg.spiegel.de|date=20 July 2009|accessdate=24 July 2009}}</ref> |
|||
* 1781: First edition of the ''[[Critique of Pure Reason]]'' ['''CPuR A''']<ref>{{cite web|author=Immanuel Kant|url=http://etext.library.adelaide.edu.au/k/kant/immanuel/k16p/|title=The Critique of Pure Reason|publisher=Etext.library.adelaide.edu.au|access-date=24 July 2009|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20081202072513/http://etext.library.adelaide.edu.au/k/kant/immanuel/k16p/|archive-date=2 December 2008}}</ref> (''Kritik der reinen Vernunft'')<ref>{{cite web|author=Immanuel Kant|url=http://gutenberg.spiegel.de/kant/krva/krva.htm|title=Immanuel Kant: Kritik der reinen Vernunft – 1. Auflage – Kapitel 1|publisher=Projekt Gutenberg-DE|access-date=24 July 2009|language=de|archive-date=9 June 2007|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070609150201/http://gutenberg.spiegel.de/kant/krva/krva.htm|url-status=live}}</ref> |
|||
* (1783) ''[[Prolegomena to any Future Metaphysics]]'' (''Prolegomena zu einer jeden künftigen Metaphysik'') |
|||
* 1783: ''[[Prolegomena to Any Future Metaphysics]]'' ['''PFM'''] (''Prolegomena zu einer jeden künftigen Metaphysik'') |
|||
* (1784) "[[What Is Enlightenment?|An Answer to the Question: What Is Enlightenment?]]" ("''Beantwortung der Frage: Was ist Aufklärung?''")<ref>{{cite web|author=Frank-Christian Lilienweihs|url=http://www.prometheusonline.de/heureka/philosophie/klassiker/kant/aufklaerung.htm|title=Immanuel Kant: Beantwortung der Frage: Was ist Aufklaerung?|publisher=Prometheusonline.de|date=10 June 1999|accessdate=24 July 2009}}</ref> |
|||
* 1784: "[[What Is Enlightenment?|An Answer to the Question: What Is Enlightenment?]]" ['''WE?'''] ("''Beantwortung der Frage: Was ist Aufklärung?''")<ref>{{cite web|author=Frank-Christian Lilienweihs|url=http://www.prometheusonline.de/heureka/philosophie/klassiker/kant/aufklaerung.htm|title=Immanuel Kant: Beantwortung der Frage: Was ist Aufklaerung?|publisher=Prometheusonline.de|date=10 June 1999|access-date=24 July 2009|archive-date=1 August 2009|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090801001752/http://www.prometheusonline.de/heureka/philosophie/klassiker/kant/aufklaerung.htm|url-status=live}}</ref> |
|||
* (1784) "[[Idea for a Universal History with a Cosmopolitan Purpose]]" ("''Idee zu einer allgemeinen Geschichte in weltbürgerlicher Absicht''") |
|||
* 1784: "[[Idea for a Universal History with a Cosmopolitan Purpose]]" ['''UH'''] ("''Idee zu einer allgemeinen Geschichte in weltbürgerlicher Absicht''") |
|||
* (1785) ''[[Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals]]'' (''Grundlegung zur Metaphysik der Sitten'') |
|||
* 1785: "Determination of the Concept of a Human Race" ['''DCHR'''] (''Bestimmung des Begriffs einer Menschenrace'') |
|||
* (1786) ''[[Metaphysical Foundations of Natural Science]]'' (''Metaphysische Anfangsgründe der Naturwissenschaft'') |
|||
* 1785: ''[[Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals]]'' ['''G'''] (''Grundlegung zur Metaphysik der Sitten'') |
|||
* (1786) "[https://archive.org/details/KantOrientFerrerMarch2014 What does it mean to orient oneself in thinking?]" ("''Was heißt: sich im Denken orientieren?''") |
|||
* 1786: ''[[Metaphysical Foundations of Natural Science]]'' ['''MFNS'''] (''Metaphysische Anfangsgründe der Naturwissenschaft'') |
|||
* (1786) ''Conjectural Beginning of Human History'' |
|||
* 1786: "[https://archive.org/details/KantOrientFerrerMarch2014 What does it mean to orient oneself in thinking?]" ['''OT''']("''Was heißt: sich im Denken orientieren?''") |
|||
* (1787) Second edition of the ''[[Critique of Pure Reason]]''<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.hkbu.edu.hk/~ppp/cpr/toc.html|title=Critique of Pure Reason|publisher=Hkbu.edu.hk|date=31 October 2003|accessdate=24 July 2009}}</ref> (''Kritik der reinen Vernunft'')<ref>{{cite web|url=http://gutenberg.spiegel.de/kant/krvb/krvb.htm|title=Projekt Gutenberg-DE – Spiegel Online – Nachrichten – Kultur|publisher=Gutenberg.spiegel.de|date=20 July 2009|accessdate=24 July 2009}}</ref> |
|||
* 1786: ''Conjectural Beginning of Human History'' ['''CB'''] (''Mutmaßlicher Anfang der Menschengeschichte'') |
|||
* (1788) ''[[Critique of Practical Reason]]'' (''Kritik der praktischen Vernunft'')<ref>{{cite web|author=Immanuel Kant|url=http://gutenberg.spiegel.de/kant/kritikpr/kritikpr.htm|title=Projekt Gutenberg-DE – Spiegel Online – Nachrichten – Kultur|publisher=Gutenberg.spiegel.de|date=20 July 2009|accessdate=24 July 2009}}</ref> |
|||
* 1787: Second edition of the ''[[Critique of Pure Reason]]'' ['''CPuR B''']<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.hkbu.edu.hk/~ppp/cpr/toc.html|title=Critique of Pure Reason|publisher=Hkbu.edu.hk|date=31 October 2003|access-date=24 July 2009|archive-date=27 April 2009|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090427130629/http://www.hkbu.edu.hk/~ppp/cpr/toc.html|url-status=live}}</ref> (''Kritik der reinen Vernunft'')<ref>{{cite web|url=http://gutenberg.spiegel.de/kant/krvb/krvb.htm|title=Immanuel Kant: Kritik der reinen Vernunft – 2. Auflage – Kapitel 1|publisher=Projekt Gutenberg-DE|date=20 July 2009|access-date=24 July 2009|language=de|archive-date=26 December 2005|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20051226212924/http://gutenberg.spiegel.de/kant/krvb/krvb.htm|url-status=live}}</ref> |
|||
* (1790) ''[[Critique of Judgment]]'' (''Kritik der Urteilskraft'')<ref>[[s:The Critique of Judgment]]</ref> |
|||
* |
* 1788: ''[[Critique of Practical Reason]]'' ['''CPracR'''] (''Kritik der praktischen Vernunft'')<ref>{{cite web|author=Immanuel Kant|url=http://gutenberg.spiegel.de/kant/kritikpr/kritikpr.htm|title=Immanuel Kant: Kritik der praktischen Vernunft – Kapitel 1|publisher=Projekt Gutenberg-DE|access-date=24 July 2009|language=de|archive-date=9 June 2007|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070609150443/http://gutenberg.spiegel.de/kant/kritikpr/kritikpr.htm|url-status=live}}</ref> |
||
* 1790: ''[[Critique of Judgment]]'' ['''CPJ'''] (''Kritik der Urteilskraft'')<ref>[[s:The Critique of Judgment]]</ref> |
|||
* (1793) ''On the Old Saw: That may be right in theory, but it won't work in practice'' ''(Über den Gemeinspruch: Das mag in der Theorie richtig sein, taugt aber nicht für die Praxis)'' |
|||
* 1793: ''[[Religion within the Bounds of Bare Reason]]'' ['''RBMR'''] (''Die Religion innerhalb der Grenzen der bloßen Vernunft'')<ref name="KReligion"/><ref>{{cite web|author=Immanuel Kant|url=http://www.marxists.org/reference/subject/ethics/kant/religion/religion-within-reason.htm|title=Religion within the Limits of Reason Alone by Immanuel Kant 1793|publisher=Marxists.org|access-date=24 July 2009|archive-date=1 June 2009|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090601192705/http://www.marxists.org/reference/subject/ethics/kant/religion/religion-within-reason.htm|url-status=live}}</ref> |
|||
* (1795) "[[Perpetual Peace: A Philosophical Sketch|Perpetual Peace]]"<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/kant/kant1.htm|title=Immanuel Kant, "Perpetual Peace"|publisher=Mtholyoke.edu|date=|accessdate=24 July 2009}}</ref> ("''Zum ewigen Frieden''")<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.uni-kassel.de/fb5/frieden/themen/Theorie/kant.html|title=Immanuel Kant: Zum ewigen Frieden, 12.02.2004 (Friedensratschlag)|publisher=Uni-kassel.de|date=|accessdate=24 July 2009}}</ref> |
|||
* 1793: ''On the Old Saw: That May be Right in Theory But It Won't Work in Practice'' ['''TP'''] ''(Über den Gemeinspruch: Das mag in der Theorie richtig sein, taugt aber nicht für die Praxis)'' |
|||
* (1797) ''[[Metaphysics of Morals]]'' (''Metaphysik der Sitten''). First part is The Doctrine of Right, which has often been published separately as The Science of Right. |
|||
* 1795: ''[[Perpetual Peace: A Philosophical Sketch]]''<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/kant/kant1.htm|title=Immanuel Kant, "Perpetual Peace"|publisher=Mountr Holyoke |access-date=24 July 2009|archive-date=6 April 2019|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190406161945/https://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/kant/kant1.htm|url-status=live}}</ref> ['''PP'''] ("''Zum ewigen Frieden''")<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.uni-kassel.de/fb5/frieden/themen/Theorie/kant.html|title=Immanuel Kant: Zum ewigen Frieden, 12.02.2004 (Friedensratschlag)|publisher=Uni-kassel.de|access-date=24 July 2009|archive-date=23 September 2009|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090923155158/http://www.uni-kassel.de/fb5/frieden/themen/Theorie/kant.html|url-status=live}}</ref> |
|||
* (1798) ''Anthropology from a Pragmatic Point of View'' (''Anthropologie in pragmatischer Hinsicht'') |
|||
* 1797: ''[[Metaphysics of Morals]]'' ['''MM'''] (''Metaphysik der Sitten''). First part is The Doctrine of Right, which has often been published separately as The Science of Right. |
|||
* (1798) ''The Contest of Faculties''<ref>{{cite web|url=http://chnm.gmu.edu/revolution/d/564/|title=Kant, The Contest of Faculties|publisher=Chnm.gmu.edu|date=|accessdate=24 July 2009}}</ref> (''Der Streit der Fakultäten'')<ref>{{cite web|author=Immanuel Kant|url=http://gutenberg.spiegel.de/kant/streit/streit.htm|title=Projekt Gutenberg-DE – Spiegel Online – Nachrichten – Kultur|publisher=Gutenberg.spiegel.de|date=20 July 2009|accessdate=24 July 2009}}</ref> |
|||
* 1798: ''[[Anthropology from a Pragmatic Point of View]]'' ['''APPV'''] (''Anthropologie in pragmatischer Hinsicht'') |
|||
* (1800) ''Logic'' (''Logik'') |
|||
* 1798: ''Conflict of Faculties'' ['''CF''']<ref>{{cite web|url=http://chnm.gmu.edu/revolution/d/564/|title=Kant, The Contest of Faculties|year=1798|publisher=Chnm.gmu.edu|access-date=24 July 2009|archive-date=4 August 2011|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110804222523/http://chnm.gmu.edu/revolution/d/564/|url-status=live}}</ref> (''Der Streit der Fakultäten'')<ref>{{cite web|author=Immanuel Kant|url=http://gutenberg.spiegel.de/kant/streit/streit.htm|title=Immanuel Kant: Der Streit der Facultäten – Kapitel 1|publisher=Projekt Gutenberg-DE|access-date=24 July 2009|language=de|archive-date=9 June 2007|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070609150025/http://gutenberg.spiegel.de/kant/streit/streit.htm|url-status=live}}</ref> |
|||
* (1803) ''On Pedagogy'' (''Über Pädagogik'')<ref>Available [http://www.deutschestextarchiv.de/book/show/kant_paedagogik_1803 online at DeutschesTextArchiv.de].</ref> |
|||
* |
* 1800: ''Logic'' (''Logik'') |
||
* 1803: ''On Pedagogy'' (''Über Pädagogik'')<ref>Available [http://www.deutschestextarchiv.de/book/show/kant_paedagogik_1803 online at DeutschesTextArchiv.de] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160310102744/http://www.deutschestextarchiv.de/book/show/kant_paedagogik_1803 |date=10 March 2016 }}.</ref> |
|||
* (1817) ''Lectures on Philosophical Theology'' (''Immanuel Kants Vorlesungen über die philosophische Religionslehre'' edited by K. H. L. Pölitz) [The English edition of A. W. Wood & G. M. Clark (Cornell, 1978) is based on Pölitz' second edition, 1830, of these lectures.]<ref>As noted by [[Allen W. Wood]] in his Introduction, p. 12. Wood further speculates that the lectures themselves were delivered in the Winter of 1783–84.</ref> |
|||
* 1804: ''Opus Postumum'' ['''OP'''] |
|||
* 1817: ''Lectures on Philosophical Theology'' (''Immanuel Kants Vorlesungen über die philosophische Religionslehre'' edited by K.H.L. Pölitz) [The English edition of A.W. Wood & G.M. Clark (Cornell, 1978) is based on Pölitz' second edition, 1830, of these lectures.]{{efn|As noted by [[Allen W. Wood]] in his Introduction, p. 12. Wood further speculates that the lectures themselves were delivered in the Winter of 1783–84.}} |
|||
===Collected works in German=== |
===Collected works in German=== |
||
Line 395: | Line 414: | ||
* II. Kant's correspondence (vols. 10–13), |
* II. Kant's correspondence (vols. 10–13), |
||
* III. Kant's literary remains, or ''[[Nachlass]]'' (vols. 14–23), and |
* III. Kant's literary remains, or ''[[Nachlass]]'' (vols. 14–23), and |
||
* IV. Student notes from |
* IV. Student notes from Kant's lectures (vols. 24–29). |
||
An electronic version is also available: [https://web.archive.org/web/20190619210921/https://korpora.zim.uni-duisburg-essen.de/Kant/ ''Elektronische Edition der Gesammelten Werke Immanuel Kants''] (vols. 1–23). |
|||
==See also== |
|||
{{Portal|Philosophy}} |
|||
==Notes== |
|||
{{Columns-list|colwidth=30em| |
|||
{{notelist}} |
|||
* ''[[Aenesidemus (book)|Aenesidemus]]'' |
|||
* [[Agnosticism]] |
|||
* [[Arthur Schopenhauer's criticism of Immanuel Kant's schemata]] |
|||
* [[Johann Georg Hamann]] |
|||
* [[Kant Russian State University]] |
|||
* [[List of liberal theorists]] |
|||
* ''[[On Vision and Colors]]'' |
|||
* [[Political philosophy of Immanuel Kant]] |
|||
* [[Schopenhauer's criticism of Kant's Groundwork of the Metaphysic of Morals]] |
|||
* [[Schopenhauer's criticism of the Kantian philosophy]] |
|||
}} |
|||
==References |
==References== |
||
===Citations=== |
|||
{{reflist|20em}} |
|||
{{reflist|22em}} |
|||
===Works cited=== |
===Works cited=== |
||
{{refbegin|30em}} |
|||
* Kant, Immanuel. ''Foundations of the Metaphysics of Morals''. Trans. Lewis White Beck, Indianapolis, Bobbs-Merrill, 1969. Page numbers citing this work are Beck's marginal numbers that refer to the page numbers of the standard edition of ''Königlich-Preußische Akademie der Wissenschaften'' (Berlin, 1902–38). |
|||
* {{cite journal |last1=Bernasconi |first1=Robert |title=Defining Race Scientifically: A response to Michael Banton |journal=Ethnicities |date=2010 |volume=10 |issue=1 |pages=141–148 |doi=10.1177/14687968100100010802 |jstor=23890861 |s2cid=143925406 |issn=1468-7968}} |
|||
* Kuehn, Manfred. ''Kant: a Biography.'' Cambridge University Press, 2001. {{ISBN|0-521-49704-3}}. |
|||
* {{cite web |last1=Bouie |first1=Jamelle |title=How the Enlightenment Created Modern Race Thinking and Why We Should Confront It |url=https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2018/06/taking-the-enlightenment-seriously-requires-talking-about-race.html |website=[[Slate (magazine)|Slate]] |access-date=15 June 2020 |language=en |date=5 June 2018 |archive-date=15 June 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200615090940/https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2018/06/taking-the-enlightenment-seriously-requires-talking-about-race.html |url-status=live }} |
|||
* {{cite web |title=Kant on the different human races (1777) |last=Bowersox |first=Jeff |url=https://blackcentraleurope.com/sources/1750-1850/kant-on-the-different-human-races-1777/ |website=Black Central Europe |access-date=16 June 2020 |language=en |date=4 February 2016 |archive-date=16 June 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200616003834/https://blackcentraleurope.com/sources/1750-1850/kant-on-the-different-human-races-1777/ |url-status=live }} |
|||
==Further reading== |
|||
* {{Cite book |last=Caygill |first=Howard |year=1995 |title=A Kant Dictionary |publisher=Blackwell Publishing}} |
|||
{{Further reading cleanup|date=February 2017}} |
|||
* {{cite book |last1=Eze |first1=Emmanuel Chukwudi |title=Postcolonial African Philosophy: A Critical Reader |year=1997a |publisher=Wiley |isbn=978-0-631-20339-1 |pages=103–131 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=BwkRtAEACAAJ |access-date=15 June 2020 |language=en |archive-date=20 December 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201220055821/https://books.google.com/books?id=BwkRtAEACAAJ |url-status=live }} |
|||
Any suggestion of further reading on Kant has to take cognizance of the fact that his work has dominated philosophy like no other figure after him. Nevertheless, several guideposts can be made out. In Germany, one important contemporary interpreter of Kant and the movement of [[German Idealism]] he began is [[Dieter Henrich]], who has some work available in English. [[P. F. Strawson]]'s ''[[The Bounds of Sense]]'' (1966) played a significant role in determining the contemporary reception of Kant in England and America. More recent interpreters of note in the English-speaking world include [[Lewis White Beck]], [[Jonathan Bennett (philosopher)|Jonathan Bennett]], Henry Allison, [[Paul Guyer]], [[Christine Korsgaard]], Stephen Palmquist, [[Robert B. Pippin]], [[Roger Scruton]], [[Rudolf Makkreel]], and [[Béatrice Longuenesse]]. |
|||
* {{cite book |last1=Eze |first1=Emmanuel Chukwudi |title=Race and the Enlightenment: A Reader |year=1997b |publisher=Wiley |isbn=978-0-631-20136-6 |pages=39–48 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=0BaguAEACAAJ |access-date=15 June 2020 |language=en |archive-date=20 December 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201220055823/https://books.google.com/books?id=0BaguAEACAAJ |url-status=live }} |
|||
* {{cite book |title=Ethics: The Fundamentals |publisher=Blackwell |year=2007 |author=Driver, Julia |isbn=978-1-4051-1154-6}} |
|||
{{refbegin}} |
|||
* {{Cite book |last=di Giovanni |first=George |year=2005 |title=Freedom and Religion in Kant and His Immediate Successors |publisher=Cambridge University Press}} |
|||
* {{Cite book |last=Guyer |first=Paul |year=2014 |title=Kant |publisher=Routledge}} |
|||
===General introductions to his thought=== |
|||
* {{Cite book |last1=Guyer |first1=Paul |last2=Wood |first2=Alan W. |year=1998 |chapter=Introduction to the Critique of Pure Reason [Editors' Introduction] |title=The Critique of Pure Reason |publisher=Cambridge University Press}} |
|||
* [[C. D. Broad|Broad, C. D.]] ''Kant: An Introduction''. Cambridge University Press, 1978. {{ISBN|0521217555}}, {{ISBN|0521292654}} |
|||
* {{cite encyclopedia |last=Jankowiak |first=Tim |year=2023 |title=Immanuel Kant |publisher=The Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy |url=https://iep.utm.edu/kantview/ |access-date=4 March 2023}} |
|||
* Gardner, Sebastian. ''Kant and the Critique of Pure Reason''. [[Routledge]], 1999. {{ISBN|0-415-11909-X}} |
|||
* {{cite encyclopedia |url=http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/kant-moral/#DutResForMorLaw |title=Kant's Moral Philosophy |encyclopedia=Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy |year=2008 |access-date=11 September 2013 |last=Johnson |first=Robert}} |
|||
* Martin, Gottfried. ''Kant's Metaphysics and Theory of Science''. [[Greenwood Press]], 1955 {{ISBN|978-0-8371-7154-8}} (elucidates Kant's most fundamental concepts in their historical context) |
|||
* {{cite web |last1=Kant |first1=Immanuel |editor=Eze, Emmanuel Chukwudi|title=Kant on the Different Races of Man |year=2010|url=https://blogs.umass.edu/afroam391g-shabazz/files/2010/01/Kant-on-the-Different-Races-of-Man1.pdf |publisher=UMass Amherst |access-date=15 June 2020 |archive-date=1 August 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200801194450/https://blogs.umass.edu/afroam391g-shabazz/files/2010/01/Kant-on-the-Different-Races-of-Man1.pdf |url-status=live }} |
|||
* Palmquist, Stephen. [http://www.hkbu.edu.hk/~ppp/ksp1 ''Kant's System of Perspectives'']'': an architectonic interpretation of the Critical philosophy''. Lanham, MD: University Press of America, 1993. {{ISBN|0-8191-8927-8}} |
|||
* {{cite journal |last1=Kleingeld |first1=Pauline |title=Kant's Second Thoughts on Race |journal=The Philosophical Quarterly |date=October 2007 |volume=57 |issue=229 |pages=573–592 |doi=10.1111/j.1467-9213.2007.498.x |hdl=11370/e15b6815-5eab-42d6-a789-24a2f6ecb946 |s2cid=55185762 |url=https://pure.rug.nl/ws/files/2768306/Kants_second_thoughts_on_race.pdf |access-date=14 December 2020 |archive-date=16 February 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190216193713/https://pure.rug.nl/ws/files/2768306/Kants_second_thoughts_on_race.pdf |url-status=live }} |
|||
* [[T. K. Seung|Seung, T. K.]] 2007. ''Kant: a Guide for the Perplexed''. London: Continuum. {{ISBN|0-8264-8580-4}} |
|||
* {{Cite book |last=Kuehn |first=Manfred |year=2001 |title=Kant: a Biography |publisher=Cambridge University Press |isbn=978-0-521-49704-6}} |
|||
* Satyananda Giri. ''Kant''. Durham, CT: Strategic Publishing Group, 2010. {{ISBN|978-1-60911-686-6}} |
|||
* {{cite book |last1=Mills |first1=Charles W. |title=Black Rights/White Wrongs: The Critique of Racial Liberalism |year=2017 |publisher=Oxford University Press |isbn=978-0-19-024545-0 |pages=169–193 |doi=10.1093/acprof:oso/9780190245412.001.0001 |url=https://www.oxfordscholarship.com/view/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780190245412.001.0001/acprof-9780190245412 |access-date=15 June 2020 |archive-date=16 June 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200616003829/https://www.oxfordscholarship.com/view/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780190245412.001.0001/acprof-9780190245412 |url-status=live }} |
|||
* [[Roger Scruton|Scruton, Roger]]. ''Kant: a Very Short Introduction''. [[Oxford University Press]], 2001. {{ISBN|0-19-280199-6}} (provides a brief account of his life, and a lucid introduction to the three major critiques) |
|||
* {{cite encyclopedia |last=Rohlf |first=Michael |year=2020 |title=Immanuel Kant |publisher=The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2020 Edition) |editor=Edward N. Zalta |url=https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2020/entries/kant/}} |
|||
* Uleman, Jennifer. ''An Introduction to Kant's Moral Philosophy''. [[Cambridge University Press]], 2010. {{ISBN|978-0-521-13644-0}} |
|||
* {{Cite book |last=Schneewind |first=J. B. |year=2010 |chapter=Autonomy, Obligation, and Virtue: An Overview of Kant's Moral Philosophy |title=Essays on the History of Moral Philosophy |publisher=Oxford University Press}} |
|||
* Luchte, James. ''Kant's Critique of Pure Reason''. [[Bloomsbury Publishing]], 2007. {{ISBN|978-0826493224}} |
|||
* {{cite news |last1=Shrage |first1=Laurie |title=Should we continue to teach thinkers like Kant, Voltaire and Hume without mention of the harmful prejudices they helped legitimize? |work=The New York Times |date=18 March 2019 |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/18/opinion/philosophy-anti-semitism.html |access-date=10 November 2022}} |
|||
* Deleuze, Gilles. ''Kant's Critical Philosophy: The Doctrine of the Faculties''. The Athlone Press, 1983. {{ISBN|0-485-11249-3}} |
|||
* {{cite encyclopedia |last=Stang |first=Nicholas F. |year=2022 |title=Kant's Transcendental Idealism |publisher=The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2022 Edition) |editor=Edward N. Zalta & Uri Nodelman |url=https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2022/entries/kant-transcendental-idealism/}} |
|||
* {{Cite book |last=Wood |first=Allen |year=1999 |title=Kant's Ethical Thought |publisher=Cambridge University Press |isbn=978-0521648363}} |
|||
===Biography and historical context=== |
|||
* {{Cite book |last=Wood |first=Allen |year=2006 |chapter=Kant's Practical Philosophy |title=The Cambridge Companion to German Idealism |editor=Karl Ameriks |publisher=Cambridge University Press. |isbn=978-0801486043}} |
|||
* {{cite encyclopedia |last=Bader |first=Ralph |authorlink= |editor-first=Ronald |editor-last=Hamowy |editor-link=Ronald Hamowy |encyclopedia=The Encyclopedia of Libertarianism |title= Kant, Immanuel (1724–1804) |url= https://books.google.com/books?id=yxNgXs3TkJYC |year=2008 |publisher= [[SAGE Publications|SAGE]]; [[Cato Institute]] |location= Thousand Oaks, CA |doi= 10.4135/9781412965811.n161|isbn= 978-1-4129-6580-4 |oclc=750831024| lccn = 2008009151 |pages=269–71 |quote= |ref= }} |
|||
* {{Cite book |last=Wood |first=Allen |year=2008 |title=Kantian Ethics |publisher=Cambridge University Press. |isbn=978-0521671149}} |
|||
* Beck, Lewis White. ''Early German Philosophy: Kant and his Predecessors.'' Harvard University Press, 1969. (a survey of Kant's intellectual background) |
|||
* Beiser, Frederick C. ''The Fate of Reason: German Philosophy from Kant to Fichte.'' Harvard University Press, 1987. |
|||
* Beiser, Frederick C. ''German Idealism: the Struggle against Subjectivism, 1781–1801.'' Harvard University Press, 2002 |
|||
* Cassirer, Ernst. ''Kant's Life and Thought.'' Translation of ''Kants Leben und Lehre''. Trans., Jame S. Haden, intr. Stephan Körner. New Haven, CT: [[Yale University Press]], 1981. |
|||
* [[Houston Stewart Chamberlain|Chamberlain, Houston Stewart.]] ''Immanuel Kant{{spaced ndash}}a study and a comparison with [[Goethe]], [[Leonardo da Vinci]], Bruno, [[Plato]] and [[Descartes]]'', the authorised translation from the German by [[Lord Redesdale]], with his 'Introduction', [[The Bodley Head]], London, 1914, (2 volumes). |
|||
* Gulyga, Arsenij. ''Immanuel Kant: His Life and Thought''. Trans., Marijan Despaltović. Boston: Birkhäuser, 1987. |
|||
* Johnson, G.R. (ed.). ''Kant on Swedenborg. Dreams of a Spirit-Seer and Other Writings''. Swedenborg Foundation, 2002. (new translation and analysis, many supplementary texts) |
|||
* Lehner, Ulrich L., [http://www.brill.nl/default.aspx?partid=73&pid=26413 Kants Vorsehungskonzept auf dem Hintergrund der deutschen Schulphilosophie und -theologie] (Leiden: 2007) (Kant's concept of Providence and its background in German school philosophy and theology) |
|||
* Pinkard, Terry. ''German Philosophy, 1760–1860: the Legacy of Idealism.'' Cambridge, 2002. |
|||
* Pippin, Robert. ''Idealism as Modernism.'' Cambridge University Press, 1996. |
|||
* Sassen, Brigitte (ed.). ''Kant's Early Critics: the Empiricist Critique of the Theoretical Philosophy'', Cambridge, 2000. |
|||
* Schabert, Joseph A. [https://archive.org/stream/americancatholic47philuoft#page/120/mode/2up ''"Kant's Influence on his Successors"''], ''The American Catholic Quarterly Review'', Vol. XLVII, January 1922. |
|||
===Collections of essays=== |
|||
* Firestone, Chris L. and Palmquist, Stephen (eds.). ''Kant and the New Philosophy of Religion''. Notre Dame: Indiana University Press, 2006. {{ISBN|0-253-21800-4}} |
|||
* Förster, Eckart (ed.). ''Kant's Transcendental Deductions:. The Three 'Critiques' and the 'Opus Postumum' '' Stanford: [[Stanford University Press]], 1989. Includes an important essay by Dieter Henrich. |
|||
* Guyer, Paul (ed.). ''The Cambridge Companion to Kant'', Cambridge: [[Cambridge University Press]], 1992. {{ISBN|0-521-36587-2}}, {{ISBN|0-521-36768-9}}. Excellent collection of papers that covers most areas of Kant's thought. |
|||
* Mohanty, J. N. and Shahan, Robert W. (eds.). ''Essays on Kant's Critique of Pure Reason.'' Norman: [[University of Oklahoma Press]], 1982. {{ISBN|0-8061-1782-6}} |
|||
* Phillips, Dewi et al. (eds.). ''Kant and Kierkegaard on Religion.'' New York: Palgrave Macmillian, 2000, {{ISBN|0-312-23234-9}} Collection of essays about Kantian religion and its influence on Kierkegaardian and contemporary philosophy of religion. |
|||
* ''Proceedings of the International Kant Congresses.'' Several Congresses (numbered) edited by various publishers. |
|||
===Theoretical philosophy=== |
|||
* Allison, Henry. ''Kant's Transcendental Idealism.'' New Haven: Yale University Press, 1983, 2004. {{ISBN|0-300-03629-9}}, {{ISBN|0-300-03002-9}} (a very influential defense of Kant's idealism, recently revised). |
|||
* Ameriks, Karl. ''Kant's Theory of Mind: An Analysis of the Paralogisms of Pure Reason.'' Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1982 (one of the first detailed studies of the Dialectic in English). |
|||
* Banham, Gary. ''Kant's Transcendental Imagination''. London and New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2006. |
|||
* [[Gilles Deleuze|Deleuze, Gilles]]. ''Kant's Critical Philosophy''. Trans., Hugh Tomlinson and Barbara Habberjam. [[University of Minnesota Press]], 1984. {{ISBN|0-8166-1341-9}}, {{ISBN|0-8166-1436-9}} |
|||
* Gram, Moltke S. ''The Transcendental Turn: The Foundation of Kant's Idealism.'' Gainesville: University Presses of Florida, 1984. {{ISBN|0813007879}} |
|||
* Greenberg, Robert. ''Kant's Theory of A Priori Knowledge''. Penn State Press, 2001 {{ISBN|0-271-02083-0}} |
|||
* Guyer, Paul. ''Kant and the Claims of Knowledge''. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1987 (modern defense of the view that Kant's theoretical philosophy is a "patchwork" of ill-fitting arguments). |
|||
* [[Martin Heidegger|Heidegger, Martin]]. ''Kant and the Problem of Metaphysics''. Trans., Richard Taft. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1997. {{ISBN|0-253-21067-4}} |
|||
* Henrich, Dieter. ''The Unity of Reason: Essays on Kant's Philosophy.'' Ed. with introduction by Richard L. Velkley; trans. Jeffrey Edwards ''et al''. Harvard University Press, 1994. {{ISBN|0-674-92905-5}} |
|||
* Kemp Smith, Norman. ''A Commentary to Kant's 'Critique of Pure Reason''. London: Macmillan, 1930 (influential commentary on the first Critique, recently reprinted). |
|||
* Kitcher, Patricia. ''Kant's Transcendental Psychology.'' New York: [[Oxford University Press]], 1990. |
|||
* Longuenesse, Béatrice. ''Kant and the Capacity to Judge.'' [[Princeton University Press]], 1998. {{ISBN|0-691-04348-5}}. (argues that the notion of judgment provides the key to understanding the overall argument of the first Critique) |
|||
* Melnick, Arthur. ''Kant's Analogies of Experience.'' Chicago: [[University of Chicago Press]], 1973. (important study of Kant's Analogies, including his defense of the principle of causality) |
|||
* Paton, H. J. ''Kant's Metaphysic of Experience: a Commentary on the First Half of the Kritik der reinen Vernunft''. Two volumes. London: Macmillan, 1936. (extensive study of Kant's theoretical philosophy) |
|||
* [[Robert B. Pippin|Pippin, Robert B.]]. ''Kant's Theory of Form: An Essay on the Critique of Pure Reason.'' New Haven: Yale University Press, 1982. (influential examination of the formal character of Kant's work) |
|||
* [[Schopenhauer|Schopenhauer, Arthur]]. ''Die Welt als Wille und Vorstellung. Erster Band. Anhang. Kritik der Kantischen Philosophie''. F. A. Brockhaus, Leipzig 1859 (In English: Arthur [[Schopenhauer]], New York: Dover Press, Volume I, Appendix, "[[Criticism of the Kantian Philosophy]]", {{ISBN|0-486-21761-2}}) |
|||
* {{cite book | last = Schott | first = Robin May | title = Feminist interpretations of Immanuel Kant | publisher = Pennsylvania State University Press | location = University Park, Pennsylvania | year = 1997 | isbn = 9780271016764 }} |
|||
* [[T. K. Seung|Seung, T. K.]] ''Kant's Transcendental Logic''. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1969. |
|||
* [[P. F. Strawson|Strawson, P. F]]. ''The Bounds of Sense: An Essay on Kant's Critique of Pure Reason.'' Routledge, 1989 (the work that revitalized the interest of contemporary analytic philosophers in Kant). |
|||
* Sturm, Thomas, ''Kant und die Wissenschaften vom Menschen.'' Paderborn: Mentis Verlag, 2009. {{ISBN|3897856085}}; {{ISBN|978-3897856080}}. [http://ndpr.nd.edu/news/31397-kant-und-die-wissenschaften-vom-menschen/ review] (Treats Kant's anthropology and his views on psychology and history in relation to his philosophy of science.) |
|||
* Tonelli, Giorgio. ''Kant's Critique of Pure Reason within the Tradition of Modern Logic. A Commentary on its History.'' Hildesheim, Olms 1994 |
|||
* Werkmeister, W.H., ''Kant: The Architectonic and Development of His Philosophy'', Open Court Publishing Co., La Salle, Ill.; 1980 {{ISBN|0-87548-345-3}} (it treats, as a whole, the architectonic and development of Kant's philosophy from 1755 through the ''Opus postumum''.) |
|||
* Wolff, Robert Paul. ''Kant's Theory of Mental Activity: A Commentary on the Transcendental Analytic of the Critique of Pure Reason.'' Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 1963. (detailed and influential commentary on the first part of the Critique of Pure Reason) |
|||
* Yovel, Yirmiahu. ''Kant and the Philosophy of History''. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1980. ([https://www.jstor.org/stable/2184944 review]) |
|||
===Practical philosophy=== |
|||
* Allison, Henry. ''Kant's Theory of Freedom.'' Cambridge University Press 1990. |
|||
* Banham, Gary. ''Kant's Practical Philosophy: From Critique to Doctrine.'' Palgrave Macmillan, 2003. |
|||
* Dorschel, Andreas. ''Die idealistische Kritik des Willens: Versuch über die Theorie der praktischen Subjektivität bei Kant und Hegel.'' Hamburg: Felix Meiner, 1992 (Schriften zur Transzendentalphilosophie 10) {{ISBN|3-7873-1046-0}}. |
|||
* {{Cite journal | last = Friedman | first = Michael | author-link = Michael Friedman (philosopher) | title = Kantian themes in contemporary philosophy | journal = [[Aristotelian Society#Publications|Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, Supplementary Volumes]] | volume = 72 | issue = 1 | pages = 111–130 | publisher = [[Wiley-Blackwell|Wiley]] | doi = 10.1111/1467-8349.00038 | jstor = 4107015 | date = June 1998 | url = https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1467-8349.00038 | ref = harv | postscript = .}} |
|||
* Koorsgaard, Christine M. ''The Sources of Normativity.'' Cambridge University Press, 1996. |
|||
* Michalson, Gordon E. ''Fallen Freedom: Kant on Radical Evil and Moral Regeneration.'' Cambridge University Press, 1990. |
|||
* Michalson, Gordon E. ''Kant and the Problem of God.'' Blackwell Publishers, 1999. |
|||
* Paton, H. J. ''The Categorical Imperative: A Study in Kant's Moral Philosophy.'' [[University of Pennsylvania Press]] 1971. |
|||
* Rawls, John. ''Lectures on the History of Moral Philosophy.'' Cambridge, 2000. |
|||
* [[T. K. Seung|Seung, T.K.]] ''Kant's Platonic Revolution in Moral and Political Philosophy.'' Johns Hopkins, 1994. |
|||
* Wolff, Robert Paul. ''The Autonomy of Reason: A Commentary on Kant's Groundwork of the Metaphysic of Morals.'' New York: HarperCollins, 1974. {{ISBN|0-06-131792-6}}. |
|||
* [[Allen W. Wood|Wood, Allen]]. ''Kant's Ethical Thought.'' New York: Cambridge University Press, 1999. |
|||
===Aesthetics=== |
|||
* Allison, Henry. ''Kant's Theory of Taste: A Reading of the Critique of Aesthetic Judgment''. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2001. |
|||
* Banham, Gary. ''Kant and the Ends of Aesthetics''. London and New York: Macmillan Press, 2000. |
|||
* Clewis, Robert. ''The Kantian Sublime and the Revelation of Freedom''. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2009. |
|||
* Crawford, Donald. ''Kant's Aesthetic Theory''. Wisconsin, 1974. |
|||
* Doran, Robert. ''The Theory of the Sublime from Longinus to Kant''. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2015. |
|||
* Guyer, Paul. ''Kant and the Claims of Taste''. Cambridge, Massachusetts and London, 1979. |
|||
* Hammermeister, Kai. ''The German Aesthetic Tradition''. Cambridge University Press, 2002. |
|||
* ''Immanuel Kant'' entry in Kelly, Michael (Editor in Chief) (1998) ''[[Encyclopedia of Aesthetics]]''. New York, Oxford, [[Oxford University Press]]. |
|||
* Kaplama, Erman. ''Cosmological Aesthetics through the Kantian Sublime and Nietzschean Dionysian''. Lanham: UPA, Rowman & Littlefield, 2014. |
|||
* Makkreel, Rudolf, ''Imagination and Interpretation in Kant''. Chicago, 1990. |
|||
* McCloskey, Mary. ''Kant's Aesthetic''. SUNY, 1987. |
|||
* Schaper, Eva. ''Studies in Kant's Aesthetics''. Edinburgh, 1979. |
|||
* Zammito, John H. ''The Genesis of Kant's <u>Critique of Judgment</u>''. Chicago and London: Chicago University Press, 1992. |
|||
* Zupancic, Alenka. ''Ethics of the Real: Kant and Lacan''. Verso, 2000. |
|||
===Philosophy of religion=== |
|||
* Palmquist, Stephen. [http://www.hkbu.edu.hk/~ppp/ksp2 Kant's Critical Religion]: Volume Two of ''Kant's System of Perspectives''. Ashgate, 2000. {{ISBN|0-7546-1333-X}} |
|||
* Perez, Daniel Omar. "Religión, Política y Medicina en Kant: El Conflicto de las Proposiciones". Cinta de Moebio. ''Revista de Epistemologia de Ciencias Sociales'', v. 28, p. 91–103, 2007. [http://www.facso.uchile.cl/publicaciones/moebio/28/perez.pdf Uchile.cl] (Spanish) |
|||
===Perpetual peace and international relations=== |
|||
* Sir [[Harry Hinsley]], ''Power and the Pursuit of Peace'', Cambridge University Press, 1962. |
|||
* [[Martin Wight]], [http://ukcatalogue.oup.com/product/9780199273676.do ''Four Seminal Thinkers in International Theory: Machiavelli, Grotius, Kant and Mazzini''] ed. Gabriele Wight & Brian Porter (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005). |
|||
* {{Cite journal | last = Bennington | first = Geoffrey | author-link = Geoffrey Bennington | title = Kant’s open secret | journal = [[Theory, Culture & Society]] | volume = 28 | issue = 7–8 | pages = 26–40 | publisher = [[Sage Publications|Sage]] | doi = 10.1177/0263276411423036 | date = December 2011 | url = https://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0263276411423036 | ref = harv | postscript = .}} |
|||
===Other works=== |
|||
* Botul, Jean-Baptiste. ''La vie sexuelle d'Emmanuel Kant''. Paris, FR; Éd. Mille et une Nuits, 2008. {{ISBN|978-2842054243}} |
|||
* Caygill, Howard. ''A Kant Dictionary''. Oxford, UK; Cambridge, Massachusetts, US: Blackwell Reference, 1995. {{ISBN|0-631-17534-2}}, {{ISBN|0-631-17535-0}} |
|||
* Derrida, Jacques. ''Mochlos; or, The Conflict of the Faculties''. Columbia University, 1980. |
|||
* Kelly, Michael. ''Kant's Ethics and Schopenhauer's Criticism'', London: [[Swan Sonnenschein]] 1910. [Reprinted 2010 [[Nabu Press]], {{ISBN|978-1171707950}}] |
|||
* Mosser, Kurt. ''Necessity and Possibility; The Logical Strategy of Kant's Critique of Pure Reason''. Catholic University of America Press, 2008. {{ISBN|978-0-8132-1532-7}} |
|||
* White, Mark D. [http://www.themontrealreview.com/2009/Kantian-ethics-and-economics.php ''Kantian Ethics and Economics: Autonomy, Dignity, and Character'']. Stanford University Press, 2011. {{ISBN|978-0-8047-6894-8}}. ([http://www.themontrealreview.com/2009/Kantian-ethics-and-economics.php Reviewed in The Montreal Review]) |
|||
===Contemporary philosophy with a Kantian influence=== |
|||
* {{Cite journal | last = Assiter | first = Alison | author-link = Alison Assiter | title = Kant and Kierkegaard on freedom and evil | journal = Royal Institute of Philosophy Supplement | volume = 72 | pages = 275–296 | publisher = Cambridge Journals Online | doi = 10.1017/S1358246113000155 | date = July 2013 | url = https://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S1358246113000155 | ref = harv | postscript = .}} |
|||
* {{Cite journal | last = Bird | first = Graham | title = Kantian themes in contemporary philosophy | journal = [[Aristotelian Society#Publications|Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, Supplementary Volumes]] | volume = 72 | issue = 1 | pages = 131–152 | publisher = [[Wiley-Blackwell|Wiley]] | doi = 10.1111/1467-8349.00039 | jstor = 4107015 | date = June 1998 | url = https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1467-8349.00039 | ref = harv | postscript = .}} |
|||
* Guyer, Paul. ''Knowledge, Reason, and Taste: Kant's Response to Hume''. Princeton University Press, 2008. |
|||
* Hanna, Robert, ''Kant and the Foundations of Analytic Philosophy''. Clarendon Press, 2004. |
|||
* Hanna, Robert, ''Kant, Science, and Human Nature''. Clarendon Press, 2006. |
|||
* Herman, Barbara. ''The Practice of Moral Judgement''. Harvard University Press, 1993. |
|||
* {{cite journal | last = Hill | first = Judith M. | title = Pornography and degradation | journal = [[Hypatia: A Journal of Feminist Philosophy]] | volume = 2 | issue = 2 | pages = 39–54 | publisher = [[Wiley-Blackwell|Wiley]] | doi = 10.1111/j.1527-2001.1987.tb01064.x | jstor = 3810015 | date = June 1987 | url = https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1527-2001.1987.tb01064.x | ref = harv | postscript = .}} (A Kantian approach to the issue of pornography and degradation.) |
|||
* Korsgaard, Christine. ''Creating the Kingdom of Ends''. Cambridge; New York, NY, US: Cambridge University Press, 1996. {{ISBN|0-521-49644-6}}, {{ISBN|0-521-49962-3}} (pbk.) (not a commentary, but a defense of a broadly Kantian approach to ethics) |
|||
* [[John McDowell|McDowell, John]]. ''Mind and World.'' Harvard University Press, 1994. {{ISBN|0-674-57609-8}}. (offers a Kantian solution to a dilemma in contemporary epistemology regarding the relation between mind and world) |
|||
* {{Cite journal | last = O'Neill | first = Onora | author-link = Onora O'Neill | title = Kant on duties regarding nonrational nature | journal = [[Aristotelian Society#Publications|Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, Supplementary Volumes]] | volume = 72 | issue = 1 | pages = 211–228 | publisher = [[Wiley-Blackwell|Wiley]] | doi = 10.1111/1467-8349.00043 | jstor = 4107017 | date = June 1998 | url = https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1467-8349.00043 | ref = harv | postscript = .}} |
|||
* [[Derek Parfit|Parfit, Derek]]. ''On What Matters'' (2 vols.). New York: [[Oxford University Press]], 2011. {{ISBN|978-0-19-926592-3}} |
|||
* [[Steven Pinker|Pinker, Steven]]. ''[[The Stuff of Thought]]''. Viking Press, 2007. {{ISBN|978-0-670-06327-7}}. (Chapter 4 "Cleaving the Air" discusses Kant's anticipation of modern cognitive science) |
|||
* [[Allen W. Wood|Wood, Allen W.]]. ''Kant's Ethical Thought''. Cambridge; New York, NY, US: Cambridge University Press, 1999. {{ISBN|0-521-64836-X}}. (comprehensive, in-depth study of Kant's ethics, with emphasis on formula of humanity as most accurate formulation of the categorical imperative) |
|||
* {{Cite journal | last = Wood | first = Allen W. | author-link = Allen W. Wood | title = Kant on duties regarding nonrational nature | journal = [[Aristotelian Society#Publications|Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, Supplementary Volumes]] | volume = 72 | issue = 1 | pages = 189–210 | publisher = [[Wiley-Blackwell|Wiley]] | doi = 10.1111/1467-8349.00042 | jstor = 4107017 | date = June 1998 | url = https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1467-8349.00042 | ref = harv | postscript = .}} |
|||
{{refend}} |
{{refend}} |
||
==External links== |
==External links== |
||
{{sister project links|d=Q9312|n=no|b=no|v=no|voy=no|m=no|mw=no|wikt=Kantian|s=Author:Immanuel_Kant|species=no}} |
|||
{{external links|date=March 2018}} |
|||
* {{Gutenberg author|id=1426|name=Immanuel Kant}} |
|||
{{sisterlinks|d=Q9312|n=no|b=no|v=no|voy=no|m=no|mw=no|wikt=Kantian|s=Author:Immanuel_Kant|species=no}} |
|||
* {{ |
* {{Internet Archive author|sname=Immanuel Kant}} |
||
* {{ |
* {{Librivox author|id=1312}} |
||
* [https://www.kantpapers.org KantPapers], authors and papers database powered by PhilPapers, focused on Kant, and located at Cornell University |
|||
* {{Librivox author |id=1312}} |
|||
* At the ''[[Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy]]'': |
|||
* [http://www.kantpapers.org KantPapers], authors and papers database powered by PhilPapers, focused on Kant, and located at Cornell University |
|||
** {{hlist | [https://www.iep.utm.edu/kantview/ Immanuel Kant: An Overview] | [https://www.iep.utm.edu/kantaest/ Aesthetics] | [https://www.iep.utm.edu/k-logic/ Logic] | [https://www.iep.utm.edu/kantmeta/ Metaphysics] | |
|||
* [http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/311398/Immanuel-Kant Immanuel Kant] at the ''[[Encyclopædia Britannica]]'' |
|||
[https://www.iep.utm.edu/kantmind/ Philosophy of Mind] | [https://www.iep.utm.edu/kant-rel/ Philosophy of Religion] | [https://www.iep.utm.edu/rad-evil/ Radical Evil] | [https://www.iep.utm.edu/kant-transcendental-idealism/ Transcendental Idealism]}} |
|||
* [http://cyclopedia.lcms.org/display.asp?t1=k&word=KANT.IMMANUEL Immanuel Kant] in the Christian Cyclopedia |
|||
* At the ''[[Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy]]'': |
|||
* [http://korpora.zim.uni-duisburg-essen.de/Kant/ Works by Immanuel Kant] at [[Duisburg-Essen University]] |
|||
** {{hlist | [https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/kant/ Immanuel Kant] | [https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/kant-hume-causality/ Kant and Hume on Causality] | [https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/kant-hume-morality/ Kant and Hume on Morality] | [https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/kant-reason/ Kant's Account of Reason] | [https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/kant-aesthetics/ Kant's Aesthetics and Teleology] | [https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/kant-metaphysics/ Kant's Critique of Metaphysics] | |
|||
* [http://www.hkbu.edu.hk/~ppp/ksp1/KSPglos.html Stephen Palmquist's Glossary of Kantian Terminology] |
|||
[https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/kant-moral/ Kant's Moral Philosophy] | [https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/kant-development/ Kant's Philosophical Development] | [https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/kant-mathematics/ Kant's Philosophy of Mathematics] | [https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/kant-religion/ Kant's Philosophy of Religion] | [https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/kant-science/ Kant's Philosophy of Science] | [https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/kant-social-political/ Kant's Social and Political Philosophy] | |
|||
* [http://www.rsrevision.com/Alevel/ethics/kant/index.htm Kant's Ethical Theory] – Kantian ethics explained, applied and evaluated |
|||
[https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/kant-judgment/ Kant's Theory of Judgment] | |
|||
* [http://sites.wofford.edu/kaycd/deontology/ Notes on Utilitarianism] – A conveniently brief survey of Kant's Utilitarianism |
|||
[https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/kant-transcendental/ Kant's Transcendental Arguments] | |
|||
* ''[[Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy]]'': [http://www.iep.utm.edu/kantview/ Immanuel Kant: An Overview] |
|||
[https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/kant-mind/ Kant's View of the Mind and Consciousness of Self] | |
|||
[https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/kant-spacetime/ Kant's Views on Space and Time] | |
|||
[https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/kant-conceptualism/ Kantian Conceptualism/Nonconceptualism] | |
|||
[https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/kant-leibniz/ Leibniz's Influence on Kant] |
|||
}} |
|||
{{Navboxes |
{{Navboxes |
||
|title=Articles related to Immanuel Kant |
|title=Articles related to Immanuel Kant |
||
|list |
|list= |
||
{{Philosophy topics}} |
|||
{{Age of Enlightenment}} |
{{Age of Enlightenment}} |
||
{{metaphysics}} |
{{metaphysics}} |
||
{{epistemology}} |
{{epistemology}} |
||
{{philosophy of science}} |
|||
{{Social and political philosophy}} |
{{Social and political philosophy}} |
||
{{Political philosophy}} |
|||
{{Ethics}} |
{{Ethics}} |
||
{{philosophy of religion}} |
{{philosophy of religion}} |
||
Line 580: | Line 485: | ||
{{jurisprudence}} |
{{jurisprudence}} |
||
{{Liberalism}} |
{{Liberalism}} |
||
{{Social and political philosophy}} |
|||
}} |
}} |
||
{{Authority control}} |
{{Authority control}} |
||
Line 588: | Line 492: | ||
[[Category:1724 births]] |
[[Category:1724 births]] |
||
[[Category:1804 deaths]] |
[[Category:1804 deaths]] |
||
[[Category:18th-century anthropologists]] |
|||
[[Category:18th-century essayists]] |
|||
[[Category:18th-century German male writers]] |
|||
[[Category:18th-century German philosophers]] |
|||
[[Category:18th-century German writers]] |
[[Category:18th-century German writers]] |
||
[[Category:18th-century philosophers]] |
[[Category:18th-century philosophers]] |
||
[[Category:18th-century Prussian people]] |
[[Category:18th-century Prussian people]] |
||
[[Category: |
[[Category:19th-century German anthropologists]] |
||
[[Category:19th-century German essayists]] |
|||
[[Category:German male essayists]] |
|||
[[Category:19th-century German male writers]] |
|||
[[Category:19th-century German non-fiction writers]] |
|||
[[Category:19th-century German philosophers]] |
|||
[[Category:19th-century Prussian people]] |
|||
[[Category:19th-century social scientists]] |
|||
[[Category:Academic staff of the University of Königsberg]] |
|||
[[Category:Age of Enlightenment]] |
|||
[[Category:Enlightenment philosophers]] |
[[Category:Enlightenment philosophers]] |
||
[[Category: |
[[Category:German epistemologists]] |
||
[[Category:German idealism]] |
|||
[[Category:German agnostics]] |
[[Category:German agnostics]] |
||
[[Category:German |
[[Category:German ethicists]] |
||
[[Category:German |
[[Category:German idealists]] |
||
[[Category:German political theorists]] |
|||
[[Category:German anthropologists]] |
|||
[[Category:German logicians]] |
[[Category:German logicians]] |
||
[[Category:German Lutherans]] |
|||
[[Category:German male non-fiction writers]] |
|||
[[Category:German nationalists]] |
[[Category:German nationalists]] |
||
[[Category:German political philosophers]] |
|||
[[Category:Humor researchers]] |
|||
[[Category:Idealists]] |
[[Category:Idealists]] |
||
[[Category:Kantianism| |
[[Category:Kantianism|*]] |
||
[[Category:Kantian philosophers| |
[[Category:Kantian philosophers|*]] |
||
[[Category:Lecturers]] |
|||
[[Category:Logicians]] |
|||
[[Category:Members of the Prussian Academy of Sciences]] |
[[Category:Members of the Prussian Academy of Sciences]] |
||
[[Category: |
[[Category:Metaphilosophers]] |
||
[[Category:Natural philosophers]] |
[[Category:Natural philosophers]] |
||
[[Category:Ontologists]] |
[[Category:Ontologists]] |
||
[[Category:People |
[[Category:People of the Age of Enlightenment]] |
||
[[Category: |
[[Category:German philosophers of art]] |
||
[[Category:German philosophers of culture]] |
|||
[[Category:German philosophers of education]] |
|||
[[Category:German philosophers of history]] |
|||
[[Category:Philosophers of law]] |
[[Category:Philosophers of law]] |
||
[[Category:Philosophers of |
[[Category:Philosophers of literature]] |
||
[[Category:Philosophers of logic]] |
|||
[[Category:German philosophers of mind]] |
|||
[[Category:German philosophers of religion]] |
|||
[[Category:German philosophers of science]] |
|||
[[Category:Philosophers of sexuality]] |
[[Category:Philosophers of sexuality]] |
||
[[Category:Philosophers of social science]] |
|||
[[Category:Philosophers of war]] |
|||
[[Category:Philosophy writers]] |
|||
[[Category:Political liberals (international relations)]] |
[[Category:Political liberals (international relations)]] |
||
[[Category: |
[[Category:Rationalists]] |
||
[[Category:Theoretical historians]] |
|||
[[Category:Theorists on Western civilization]] |
|||
[[Category:University of Königsberg alumni]] |
[[Category:University of Königsberg alumni]] |
||
[[Category: |
[[Category:Writers about activism and social change]] |
||
[[Category:Writers about religion and science]] |
|||
[[Category:Natural law ethicists]] |
Latest revision as of 18:59, 16 December 2024
Part of a series on |
Immanuel Kant |
---|
Category • Philosophy portal |
Immanuel Kant[a] (born Emanuel Kant; 22 April 1724 – 12 February 1804) was a German philosopher and one of the central Enlightenment thinkers. Born in Königsberg, Kant's comprehensive and systematic works in epistemology, metaphysics, ethics, and aesthetics have made him one of the most influential and controversial figures in modern Western philosophy. He has been called the "father of modern ethics",[7] the "father of modern aesthetics",[8] and for bringing together rationalism and empiricism, the "father of modern philosophy".[9][10]
In his doctrine of transcendental idealism, Kant argued that space and time are mere "forms of intuition" that structure all experience, and that the objects of experience are mere "appearances". The nature of things as they are in themselves is unknowable to us. Nonetheless, in an attempt to counter the philosophical doctrine of skepticism, he wrote the Critique of Pure Reason (1781/1787), his best-known work. Kant drew a parallel to the Copernican Revolution in his proposal to think of the objects of experience as conforming to our spatial and temporal forms of intuition and the categories of our understanding, so that we have a priori cognition of those objects. These claims have proved especially influential in the social sciences, particularly sociology and anthropology, which regard human activities as pre-oriented by cultural norms.[11]
Kant believed that reason is the source of morality, and that aesthetics arises from a faculty of disinterested judgment. Kant's religious views were deeply connected to his moral theory. Their exact nature remains in dispute. He hoped that perpetual peace could be secured through an international federation of republican states and international cooperation. His cosmopolitan reputation is called into question by his promulgation of scientific racism for much of his career, although he altered his views on the subject in the last decade of his life.
Biography
[edit]Immanuel Kant was born on 22 April 1724 into a Prussian German family of Lutheran faith in Königsberg, East Prussia. His mother, Anna Regina Reuter (1697–1737), was born in Königsberg to a father from Nuremberg.[12] Her surname is sometimes erroneously given as Porter. Kant's father, Johann Georg Kant (1682–1746), was a German harness-maker from Memel,[13] at the time Prussia's most northeastern city (now Klaipėda, Lithuania). It is possible that the Kants got their name from the village of Kantvainiai (German: Kantwaggen – today part of Priekulė) and were of Kursenieki origin.[14][15]
Kant was baptized as Emanuel and later changed the spelling of his name to Immanuel after learning Hebrew.[13] He was the fourth of nine children (six of whom reached adulthood).[16] The Kant household stressed the pietist values of religious devotion, humility, and a literal interpretation of the Bible.[17] The young Immanuel's education was strict, punitive and disciplinary, and focused on Latin and religious instruction over mathematics and science.[18] In his later years, Kant lived a strictly ordered life. It was said that neighbors would set their clocks by his daily walks. He never married but seems to have had a rewarding social life; he was a popular teacher as well as a modestly successful author, even before starting on his major philosophical works.[19]
Young scholar
[edit]Kant showed a great aptitude for study at an early age. He first attended the Collegium Fridericianum, from which he graduated at the end of the summer of 1740. In 1740, aged 16, he enrolled at the University of Königsberg, where he would later remain for the rest of his professional life.[20] He studied the philosophy of Gottfried Leibniz and Christian Wolff under Martin Knutzen (Associate Professor of Logic and Metaphysics from 1734 until he died in 1751), a rationalist who was also familiar with developments in British philosophy and science and introduced Kant to the new mathematical physics of Isaac Newton. Knutzen dissuaded Kant from the theory of pre-established harmony, which he regarded as "the pillow for the lazy mind".[21] He also dissuaded Kant from idealism, the idea that reality is purely mental, which most philosophers in the 18th century regarded negatively. The theory of transcendental idealism that Kant later included in the Critique of Pure Reason was developed partially in opposition to traditional idealism. Kant had contacts with students, colleagues, friends and diners who frequented the local Masonic lodge.[22]
His father's stroke and subsequent death in 1746 interrupted his studies. Kant left Königsberg shortly after August 1748;[23] he would return there in August 1754.[24] He became a private tutor in the towns surrounding Königsberg, but continued his scholarly research. In 1749, he published his first philosophical work, Thoughts on the True Estimation of Living Forces (written in 1745–1747).[25]
Early work
[edit]Kant is best known for his work in the philosophy of ethics and metaphysics, but he made significant contributions to other disciplines. In 1754, while contemplating on a prize question by the Berlin Academy about the problem of Earth's rotation, he argued that the Moon's gravity would slow down Earth's spin and he also put forth the argument that gravity would eventually cause the Moon's tidal locking to coincide with the Earth's rotation.[b][27] The next year, he expanded this reasoning to the formation and evolution of the Solar System in his Universal Natural History and Theory of the Heavens.[27] In 1755, Kant received a license to lecture in the University of Königsberg and began lecturing on a variety of topics including mathematics, physics, logic, and metaphysics. In his 1756 essay on the theory of winds, Kant laid out an original insight into the Coriolis force.
In 1756, Kant also published three papers on the 1755 Lisbon earthquake.[28] Kant's theory, which involved shifts in huge caverns filled with hot gases, though inaccurate, was one of the first systematic attempts to explain earthquakes in natural rather than supernatural terms. In 1757, Kant began lecturing on geography making him one of the first lecturers to explicitly teach geography as its own subject.[29][30] Geography was one of Kant's most popular lecturing topics and, in 1802, a compilation by Friedrich Theodor Rink of Kant's lecturing notes, Physical Geography, was released. After Kant became a professor in 1770, he expanded the topics of his lectures to include lectures on natural law, ethics, and anthropology, along with other topics.[29]
In the Universal Natural History, Kant laid out the nebular hypothesis, in which he deduced that the Solar System had formed from a large cloud of gas, a nebula. Kant also correctly deduced that the Milky Way was a large disk of stars, which he theorized formed from a much larger spinning gas cloud. He further suggested that other distant "nebulae" might be other galaxies. These postulations opened new horizons for astronomy, for the first time extending it beyond the solar system to galactic and intergalactic realms.[31]
From then on, Kant turned increasingly to philosophical issues, although he continued to write on the sciences throughout his life. In the early 1760s, Kant produced a series of important works in philosophy. The False Subtlety of the Four Syllogistic Figures, a work in logic, was published in 1762. Two more works appeared the following year: Attempt to Introduce the Concept of Negative Magnitudes into Philosophy and The Only Possible Argument in Support of a Demonstration of the Existence of God. By 1764, Kant had become a notable popular author, and wrote Observations on the Feeling of the Beautiful and Sublime; he was second to Moses Mendelssohn in a Berlin Academy prize competition with his Inquiry Concerning the Distinctness of the Principles of Natural Theology and Morality (often referred to as "The Prize Essay"). In 1766 Kant wrote a critical piece on Emanuel Swedenborg's Dreams of a Spirit-Seer.
In 1770, Kant was appointed Full Professor of Logic and Metaphysics at the University of Königsberg. In defense of this appointment, Kant wrote his inaugural dissertation On the Form and Principles of the Sensible and the Intelligible World[c] This work saw the emergence of several central themes of his mature work, including the distinction between the faculties of intellectual thought and sensible receptivity. To miss this distinction would mean to commit the error of subreption, and, as he says in the last chapter of the dissertation, only in avoiding this error does metaphysics flourish.
It is often claimed that Kant was a late developer, that he only became an important philosopher in his mid-50s after rejecting his earlier views. While it is true that Kant wrote his greatest works relatively late in life, there is a tendency to underestimate the value of his earlier works. Recent Kant scholarship has devoted more attention to these "pre-critical" writings and has recognized a degree of continuity with his mature work.[32]
Publication of the Critique of Pure Reason
[edit]At age 46, Kant was an established scholar and an increasingly influential philosopher, and much was expected of him. In correspondence with his ex-student and friend Markus Herz, Kant admitted that, in the inaugural dissertation, he had failed to account for the relation between our sensible and intellectual faculties.[33] He needed to explain how we combine what is known as sensory knowledge with the other type of knowledge—that is, reasoned knowledge—these two being related but having very different processes. Kant also credited David Hume with awakening him from a "dogmatic slumber" in which he had unquestioningly accepted the tenets of both religion and natural philosophy.[34][35] Hume, in his 1739 Treatise on Human Nature, had argued that we only know the mind through a subjective, essentially illusory series of perceptions. Ideas such as causality, morality, and objects are not evident in experience, so their reality may be questioned. Kant felt that reason could remove this skepticism, and he set himself to solving these problems. Although fond of company and conversation with others, Kant isolated himself, and resisted friends' attempts to bring him out of his isolation.[d] When Kant emerged from his silence in 1781, the result was the Critique of Pure Reason, printed by Johann Friedrich Hartknoch. Kant countered Hume's empiricism by claiming that some knowledge exists inherently in the mind, independent of experience.[34] He drew a parallel to the Copernican revolution in his proposal that worldly objects can be intuited a priori, and that intuition is consequently distinct from objective reality. Perhaps the most direct contested matter was Hume's argument against any necessary connection between causal events, which Hume characterized as the "cement of the universe." In the Critique of Pure Reason, Kant argues for what he takes to be the a priori justification of such necessary connection.[37]
Although now recognized as one of the greatest works in the history of philosophy, the Critique disappointed Kant's readers upon its initial publication.[38] The book was long, over 800 pages in the original German edition, and written in a convoluted style. Kant was quite upset with its reception.[39] His former student, Johann Gottfried Herder criticized it for placing reason as an entity worthy of criticism by itself instead of considering the process of reasoning within the context of language and one's entire personality.[40] Similarly to Christian Garve and Johann Georg Heinrich Feder, he rejected Kant's position that space and time possess a form that can be analyzed. Garve and Feder also faulted the Critique for not explaining differences in perception of sensations.[41] Its density made it, as Herder said in a letter to Johann Georg Hamann, a "tough nut to crack", obscured by "all this heavy gossamer".[42] Its reception stood in stark contrast to the praise Kant had received for earlier works, such as his Prize Essay and shorter works that preceded the first Critique. Recognizing the need to clarify the original treatise, Kant wrote the Prolegomena to any Future Metaphysics in 1783 as a summary of its main views. Shortly thereafter, Kant's friend Johann Friedrich Schultz (1739–1805), a professor of mathematics, published Explanations of Professor Kant's Critique of Pure Reason (Königsberg, 1784), which was a brief but very accurate commentary on Kant's Critique of Pure Reason.[43]
Kant's reputation gradually rose through the latter portion of the 1780s, sparked by a series of important works: the 1784 essay, "Answer to the Question: What is Enlightenment?"; 1785's Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals (his first work on moral philosophy); and Metaphysical Foundations of Natural Science from 1786. Kant's fame ultimately arrived from an unexpected source. In 1786, Karl Leonhard Reinhold published a series of public letters on Kantian philosophy. In these letters, Reinhold framed Kant's philosophy as a response to the central intellectual controversy of the era: the pantheism controversy. Friedrich Jacobi had accused the recently deceased Gotthold Ephraim Lessing (a distinguished dramatist and philosophical essayist) of Spinozism. Such a charge, tantamount to an accusation of atheism, was vigorously denied by Lessing's friend Moses Mendelssohn, leading to a bitter public dispute among partisans. The controversy gradually escalated into a debate about the values of the Enlightenment and the value of reason. Reinhold maintained in his letters that Kant's Critique of Pure Reason could settle this dispute by defending the authority and bounds of reason. Reinhold's letters were widely read and made Kant the most famous philosopher of his era.[44]
Later work
[edit]Kant published a second edition of the Critique of Pure Reason in 1787, heavily revising the first parts of the book. Most of his subsequent work focused on other areas of philosophy. He continued to develop his moral philosophy, notably in 1788's Critique of Practical Reason (known as the second Critique), and 1797's Metaphysics of Morals. The 1790 Critique of the Power of Judgment (the third Critique) applied the Kantian system to aesthetics and teleology. In 1792, Kant's attempt to publish the Second of the four Pieces of Religion within the Bounds of Bare Reason,[45] in the journal Berlinische Monatsschrift, met with opposition from the King's censorship commission, which had been established that same year in the context of the French Revolution.[46] Kant then arranged to have all four pieces published as a book, routing it through the philosophy department at the University of Jena to avoid the need for theological censorship.[46] This insubordination earned him a now-famous reprimand from the King.[46] When he nevertheless published a second edition in 1794, the censor was so irate that he arranged for a royal order that required Kant never to publish or even speak publicly about religion.[46] Kant then published his response to the King's reprimand and explained himself in the preface of The Conflict of the Faculties.[46]
He also wrote a number of semi-popular essays on history, religion, politics, and other topics. These works were well received by Kant's contemporaries and confirmed his preeminent status in eighteenth-century philosophy. There were several journals devoted solely to defending and criticizing Kantian philosophy. Despite his success, philosophical trends were moving in another direction. Many of Kant's most important disciples and followers (including Reinhold, Beck, and Fichte) transformed the Kantian position. The progressive stages of revision of Kant's teachings marked the emergence of German idealism. In what was one of his final acts expounding a stance on philosophical questions, Kant opposed these developments and publicly denounced Fichte in an open letter in 1799.[47]
In 1800, a student of Kant named Gottlob Benjamin Jäsche (1762–1842) published a manual of logic for teachers called Logik, which he had prepared at Kant's request. Jäsche prepared the Logik using a copy of a textbook in logic by Georg Friedrich Meier entitled Excerpt from the Doctrine of Reason, in which Kant had written copious notes and annotations. The Logik has been considered of fundamental importance to Kant's philosophy, and the understanding of it. The great 19th-century logician Charles Sanders Peirce remarked, in an incomplete review of Thomas Kingsmill Abbott's English translation of the introduction to Logik, that "Kant's whole philosophy turns upon his logic."[48] Also, Robert Schirokauer Hartman and Wolfgang Schwarz wrote in the translators' introduction to their English translation of the Logik, "Its importance lies not only in its significance for the Critique of Pure Reason, the second part of which is a restatement of fundamental tenets of the Logic, but in its position within the whole of Kant's work."[49]
Death and burial
[edit]Kant's health, long poor, worsened. He died at Königsberg on 12 February 1804, uttering Es ist gut ("It is good") before his death.[50] His unfinished final work was published as Opus Postumum. Kant always cut a curious figure in his lifetime for his modest, rigorously scheduled habits, which have been referred to as clocklike. Heinrich Heine observed the magnitude of "his destructive, world-crushing thoughts" and considered him a sort of philosophical "executioner", comparing him to Robespierre with the observation that both men "represented in the highest the type of provincial bourgeois. Nature had destined them to weigh coffee and sugar, but Fate determined that they should weigh other things and placed on the scales of the one a king, on the scales of the other a god."[51]
When his body was transferred to a new burial spot, his skull was measured during the exhumation and found to be larger than the average German male's with a "high and broad" forehead.[52] His forehead has been an object of interest ever since it became well known through his portraits: "In Döbler's portrait and in Kiefer's faithful if expressionistic reproduction of it—as well as in many of the other late eighteenth- and early nineteenth-century portraits of Kant—the forehead is remarkably large and decidedly retreating."[53]
Kant's mausoleum adjoins the northeast corner of Königsberg Cathedral in Kaliningrad, Russia. The mausoleum was constructed by the architect Friedrich Lahrs and was finished in 1924, in time for the bicentenary of Kant's birth. Originally, Kant was buried inside the cathedral, but in 1880 his remains were moved to a neo-Gothic chapel adjoining the northeast corner of the cathedral. Over the years, the chapel became dilapidated and was demolished to make way for the mausoleum, which was built on the same location. The tomb and its mausoleum are among the few artifacts of German times preserved by the Soviets after they captured the city.[54]
Into the 21st century, many newlyweds bring flowers to the mausoleum. Artifacts previously owned by Kant, known as Kantiana, were included in the Königsberg City Museum; however, the museum was destroyed during World War II. A replica of the statue of Kant that in German times stood in front of the main University of Königsberg building was donated by a German entity in the early 1990s and placed in the same grounds. After the expulsion of Königsberg's German population at the end of World War II, the University of Königsberg where Kant taught was replaced by the Russian-language Kaliningrad State University, which appropriated the campus and surviving buildings. In 2005, the university was renamed Immanuel Kant State University of Russia.[55] The name change, which was considered a politically-charged issue due to the residents having mixed feelings about its German past,[56] was announced at a ceremony attended by Russian president Vladimir Putin and German chancellor Gerhard Schröder,[57][58][59] and the university formed a Kant Society, dedicated to the study of Kantianism. In 2010, the university was again renamed to Immanuel Kant Baltic Federal University.[60]
Philosophy
[edit]Like many of his contemporaries, Kant was greatly impressed with the scientific advances made by Newton and others. This new evidence of the power of human reason called into question for many the traditional authority of politics and religion. In particular, the modern mechanistic view of the world called into question the very possibility of morality; for, if there is no agency, there cannot be any responsibility.[61][62]
The aim of Kant's critical project is to secure human autonomy, the basis of religion and morality, from this threat of mechanism—and to do so in a way that preserves the advances of modern science.[63] In the Critique of Pure Reason, Kant summarizes his philosophical concerns in the following three questions:
- What can I know?
- What should I do?
- What may I hope?[64]
The Critique of Pure Reason focuses upon the first question and opens a conceptual space for an answer to the second question. It argues that even though we cannot strictly know that we are free, we can—and for practical purposes, must—think of ourselves as free. In Kant's own words, "I had to deny knowledge in order to make room for faith."[65] Our rational faith in morality is further developed in the Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals and the Critique of Practical Reason.[66][67]
The Critique of the Power of Judgment argues we may rationally hope for the harmonious unity of the theoretical and practical domains treated in the first two Critiques on the basis, not only of its conceptual possibility, but also on the basis of our affective experience of natural beauty and, more generally, the organization of the natural world.[68] In Religion within the Bounds of Mere Reason, Kant endeavors to complete his answer to this third question.[69]
These works all place the active, rational human subject at the center of the cognitive and moral worlds. In brief, Kant argues that the mind itself necessarily makes a constitutive contribution to knowledge, that this contribution is transcendental rather than psychological, and that to act autonomously is to act according to rational moral principles.[70]
Kant's critical project
[edit]Kant's 1781 (revised 1787) Critique of Pure Reason has often been cited as the most significant volume of metaphysics and epistemology in modern philosophy.[71] In the first Critique, and later on in other works as well, Kant frames the "general" and "real problem of pure reason" in terms of the following question: "How are synthetic judgments a priori possible?"[72][73] To understand this claim, it is necessary to define some terms. First, Kant makes a distinction between two sources of knowledge:
- Cognitions a priori: "cognition independent of all experience and even of all the impressions of the senses".
- Cognitions a posteriori: cognitions that have their sources in experience—that is, which are empirical.[74]
Second, he makes a distinction in terms of the form of knowledge:
- Analytic judgements: judgements in which the predicate concept is contained in the subject concept; e.g., "All bachelors are unmarried", or "All bodies take up space". These can also be called "judgments of clarification".
- Synthetic judgements: judgements in which the predicate concept is not contained in the subject concept; e.g., "All bachelors are alone", "All swans are white", or "All bodies have weight". These can also be called "judgments of amplification".[75]
An analytic judgement is true by nature of strictly conceptual relations. All analytic judgements are a priori since basing an analytic judgement on experience would be absurd.[76] By contrast, a synthetic judgement is one the content of which includes something new in the sense that it is includes something not already contained in the subject concept. The truth or falsehood of a synthetic statement depends upon something more than what is contained in its concepts. The most obvious form of synthetic judgement is a simple empirical observation.[77]
Philosophers such as David Hume believed that these were the only possible kinds of human reason and investigation, which Hume called "relations of ideas" and "matters of fact".[78] Establishing the synthetic a priori as a third mode of knowledge would allow Kant to push back against Hume's skepticism about such matters as causation and metaphysical knowledge more generally. This is because, unlike a posteriori cognition, a priori cognition has "true or strict ... universality" and includes a claim of "necessity".[79][77] Kant himself regards it as uncontroversial that we do have synthetic a priori knowledge—most obviously, that of mathematics. That 7 + 5 = 12, he claims, is a result not contained in the concepts of seven, five, and the addition operation.[80] Yet, although he considers the possibility of such knowledge to be obvious, Kant nevertheless assumes the burden of providing a philosophical proof that we have a priori knowledge in mathematics, the natural sciences, and metaphysics. It is the twofold aim of the Critique both to prove and to explain the possibility of this knowledge.[81] Kant says "There are two stems of human cognition, which may perhaps arise from a common but to us unknown root, namely sensibility and understanding, through the first of which objects are given to us, but through the second of which they are thought."[82]
Kant's term for the object of sensibility is intuition, and his term for the object of the understanding is concept. In general terms, the former is a non-discursive representation of a particular object, and the latter is a discursive (or mediate) representation of a general type of object.[83] The conditions of possible experience require both intuitions and concepts, that is, the affection of the receptive sensibility and the actively synthesizing power of the understanding.[84][e] Thus the statement: "Thoughts without content are empty, intuitions without concepts are blind."[86] Kant's basic strategy in the first half of his book will be to argue that some intuitions and concepts are pure—that is, are contributed entirely by the mind, independent of anything empirical. Knowledge generated on this basis, under certain conditions, can be synthetic a priori. This insight is known as Kant's "Copernican revolution", because, just as Copernicus advanced astronomy by way of a radical shift in perspective, so Kant here claims do the same for metaphysics.[87][88] The second half of the Critique is the explicitly critical part. In this "transcendental dialectic", Kant argues that many of the claims of traditional rationalist metaphysics violate the criteria he claims to establish in the first, "constructive" part of his book.[89][90] As Kant observes, however, "human reason, without being moved by the mere vanity of knowing it all, inexorably pushes on, driven by its own need to such questions that cannot be answered by any experiential use of reason".[91] It is the project of "the critique of pure reason" to establish the limits as to just how far reason may legitimately so proceed.[92]
Doctrine of transcendental idealism
[edit]The section of the Critique entitled "The transcendental aesthetic" introduces Kant's famous metaphysics of transcendental idealism. Something is "transcendental" if it is a necessary condition for the possibility of experience, and "idealism" denotes some form of mind-dependence that must be further specified. The correct interpretation of Kant's own specification remains controversial.[93] The metaphysical thesis then states that human beings only experience and know phenomenal appearances, not independent things-in-themselves, because space and time are nothing but the subjective forms of intuition that we ourselves contribute to experience.[94][95] Nevertheless, although Kant says that space and time are "transcendentally ideal"—the pure forms of human sensibility, rather than part of nature or reality as it exists in-itself—he also claims that they are "empirically real", by which he means "that 'everything that can come before us externally as an object' is in both space and time, and that our internal intuitions of ourselves are in time".[96][94] However Kant's doctrine is interpreted, he wished to distinguish his position from the subjective idealism of Berkeley.[97]
Paul Guyer, although critical of many of Kant's arguments in this section, writes of the "Transcendental Aesthetic" that it "not only lays the first stone in Kant's constructive theory of knowledge; it also lays the foundation for both his critique and his reconstruction of traditional metaphysics. It argues that all genuine knowledge requires a sensory component, and thus that metaphysical claims that transcend the possibility of sensory confirmation can never amount to knowledge."[98]
Interpretive disagreements
[edit]One interpretation, known as the "two-world" interpretation, regards Kant's position as a statement of epistemological limitation, meaning that we are not able to transcend the bounds of our own mind, and therefore cannot access the "thing-in-itself". On this particular view, the thing-in-itself is not numerically identical to the phenomenal empirical object.[99] Kant also spoke, however, of the thing-in-itself or transcendent object as a product of the (human) understanding as it attempts to conceive of objects in abstraction from the conditions of sensibility. Following this line of thought, a different interpretation argues that the thing-in-itself does not represent a separate ontological domain but simply a way of considering objects by means of the understanding alone; this is known as the "two-aspect" view.[100][101] On this alternative view, the same objects to which we attribute empirical properties like color, size, and shape are also, when considered as they are in themselves, the things-in-themselves, otherwise inaccessible to human knowledge.[102]
Kant's theory of judgment
[edit]Following the "Transcendental Analytic" is the "Transcendental Logic". Whereas the former was concerned with the contributions of the sensibility, the latter is concerned, first, with the contributions of the understanding ("Transcendental Analytic") and, second, with the faculty of reason as the source of both metaphysical errors and genuine regulatory principles ("Transcendental Dialectic"). The "Transcendental Analytic" is further divided into two sections. The first, "Analytic of Concepts", is concerned with establishing the universality and necessity of the pure concepts of the understanding (i.e., the categories). This section contains Kant's famous "transcendental deduction". The second, "Analytic of Principles", is concerned with the application of those pure concepts in empirical judgments. This second section is longer than the first and is further divided into many sub-sections.[103]
Transcendental deduction of the categories of the understanding
[edit]The "Analytic of Concepts" argues for the universal and necessary validity of the pure concepts of the understanding, or the categories, for instance, the concepts of substance and causation. These twelve basic categories define what it is to be a thing in general—that is, they articulate the necessary conditions according to which something is a possible object of experience. These, in conjunction with the a priori forms of intuition, are the basis of all synthetic a priori cognition. According to Guyer and Wood, "Kant's idea is that just as there are certain essential features of all judgments, so there must be certain corresponding ways in which we form the concepts of objects so that judgments may be about objects."[104]
Kant provides two central lines of argumentation in support of his claims about the categories. The first, known as the "metaphysical deduction", proceeds analytically from a table of the Aristotelian logical functions of judgment. As Kant was aware, this assumes precisely what the skeptic rejects, namely, the existence of synthetic a priori cognition. For this reason, Kant also supplies a synthetic argument that does not depend upon the assumption in dispute.[105]
This argument, provided under the heading "Transcendental Deduction of the Pure Concepts of the Understanding", is widely considered to be both the most important and the most difficult of Kant's arguments in the Critique. Kant himself said that it is the one that cost him the most labor.[106] Frustrated by its confused reception in the first edition of his book, he rewrote it entirely for the second edition.[107][108]
The "Transcendental Deduction" gives Kant's argument that these pure concepts apply universally and necessarily to the objects that are given in experience. According to Guyer and Wood, "He centers his argument on the premise that our experience can be ascribed to a single identical subject, via what he calls the 'transcendental unity of apperception,' only if the elements of experience given in intuition are synthetically combined so as to present us with objects that are thought through the categories."[109]
Kant's principle of apperception is that "The I think must be able to accompany all my representations; for otherwise something would be represented in me that could not be thought at all, which is as much as to say that the representation would either be impossible or else at least would be nothing for me."[110] The necessary possibility of the self-ascription of the representations of self-consciousness, identical to itself through time, is an a priori conceptual truth that cannot be based on experience.[111] This is only a bare sketch of one of the arguments that Kant presents.
Principles of pure understanding
[edit]Kant's deduction of the categories in the "Analytic of Concepts", if successful, demonstrates its claims about the categories only in an abstract way. The task of the "Analytic of Principles" is to show both that they must universally apply to objects given in actual experience (i.e., manifolds of intuition) and how it is they do so.[112] In the first book of this section on the "schematism", Kant connects each of the purely logical categories of the understanding to the temporality of intuition to show that, although non-empirical, they do have purchase upon the objects of experience. The second book continues this line of argument in four chapters, each associated with one of the category groupings. In some cases, it adds a connection to the spatial dimension of intuition to the categories it analyzes.[113] The fourth chapter of this section, "The Analogies of Experience", marks a shift from "mathematical" to "dynamical" principles, that is, to those that deal with relations among objects. Some commentators consider this the most significant section of the Critique.[114] The analogies are three in number:
- Principle of persistence of substance: Kant is here concerned with the general conditions of determining time-relations among the objects of experience. He argues that the unity of time implies that "all change must consist in the alteration of states in an underlying substance, whose existence and quantity must be unchangeable or conserved."[115]
- Principle of temporal succession according to the law of causality: Here Kant argues that "we can make determinate judgments about the objective succession of events, as contrasted to merely subjective successions of representations, only if every objective alteration follows a necessary rule of succession, or a causal law." This is Kant's most direct rejoinder to Hume's skepticism about causality.[116]
- Principle of simultaneity according to the law of reciprocity or community: The final analogy argues that "determinate judgments that objects (or states of substance) in different regions of space exists simultaneously are possible only if such objects stand in mutual causal relation of community or reciprocal interaction." This is Kant's rejoinder to Leibniz's thesis in the Monadology.[117][118]
The fourth section of this chapter, which is not an analogy, deals with the empirical use of the modal categories. That was the end of the chapter in the A edition of the Critique. The B edition includes one more short section, "The Refutation of Idealism". In this section, by analysis of the concept of self-consciousness, Kant argues that his transcendental idealism is a "critical" or "formal" idealism that does not deny the existence of reality apart from our subjective representations.[119] The final chapter of "The Analytic of Principles" distinguishes phenomena, of which we can have genuine knowledge, from noumena, a term which refers to objects of pure thought that we cannot know, but to which we may still refer "in a negative sense".[120] An Appendix to the section further develops Kant's criticism of Leibnizian-Wolffian rationalism by arguing that its "dogmatic" metaphysics confuses the "mere features of concepts through which we think things ... [with] features of the objects themselves". Against this, Kant reasserts his own insistence upon the necessity of a sensible component in all genuine knowledge.[121]
Critique of metaphysics
[edit]The second of the two Divisions of "The Transcendental Logic", "The Transcendental Dialectic", contains the "negative" portion of Kant's Critique, which builds upon the "positive" arguments of the preceding "Transcendental Analytic" to expose the limits of metaphysical speculation. In particular, it is concerned to demonstrate as spurious the efforts of reason to arrive at knowledge independent of sensibility. This endeavor, Kant argues, is doomed to failure, which he claims to demonstrate by showing that reason, unbounded by sense, is always capable of generating opposing or otherwise incompatible conclusions. Like "the light dove, in free flight cutting through the air, the resistance of which it feels", reason "could get the idea that it could do even better in airless space".[122] Against this, Kant claims that, absent epistemic friction, there can be no knowledge. Nevertheless, Kant's critique is not entirely destructive. He presents the speculative excesses of traditional metaphysics as inherent in our very capacity of reason. Moreover, he argues that its products are not without some (carefully qualified) regulative value.[123]
On the concepts of pure reason
[edit]Kant calls the basic concepts of metaphysics "ideas". They are different from the concepts of understanding in that they are not limited by the critical stricture limiting knowledge to the conditions of possible experience and its objects. "Transcendental illusion" is Kant's term for the tendency of reason to produce such ideas.[124] Although reason has a "logical use" of simply drawing inferences from principles, in "The Transcendental Dialectic", Kant is concerned with its purportedly "real use" to arrive at conclusions by way of unchecked regressive syllogistic ratiocination.[125] The three categories of relation, pursued without regard to the limits of possible experience, yield the three central ideas of traditional metaphysics:
- The soul: the concept of substance as the ultimate subject;
- The world in its entirety: the concept of causation as a completed series; and
- God: the concept of community as the common ground of all possibilities.[125]
Although Kant denies that these ideas can be objects of genuine cognition, he argues that they are the result of reason's inherent drive to unify cognition into a systematic whole.[124] Leibnizian-Wolffian metaphysics was divided into four parts: ontology, psychology, cosmology, and theology. Kant replaces the first with the positive results of the first part of the Critique. He proposes to replace the following three with his later doctrines of anthropology, the metaphysical foundations of natural science, and the critical postulation of human freedom and morality.[126]
Dialectical inferences of pure reason
[edit]In the second of the two Books of "The Transcendental Dialectic", Kant undertakes to demonstrate the contradictory nature of unbounded reason. He does this by developing contradictions in each of the three metaphysical disciplines that he contends are in fact pseudosciences. This section of the Critique is long and Kant's arguments are extremely detailed. In this context, it not possible to do much more than enumerate the topics of discussion. The first chapter addresses what Kant terms the paralogisms—i.e., false inferences—that pure reason makes in the metaphysical discipline of rational psychology. He argues that one cannot take the mere thought of "I" in the proposition "I think" as the proper cognition of "I" as an object. In this way, he claims to debunk various metaphysical theses about the substantiality, unity, and self-identity of the soul.[127] The second chapter, which is the longest, takes up the topic Kant calls the antinomies of pure reason—that is, the contradictions of reason with itself—in the metaphysical discipline of rational cosmology. Originally, Kant had thought that all transcendental illusion could be analyzed in antinomic terms.[128] He presents four cases in which he claims reason is able to prove opposing theses with equal plausibility:
- That "reason seems to be able to prove that the universe is both finite and infinite in space and time";
- that "reason seems to be able to prove that matter both is and is not infinitely divisible into ever smaller parts";
- that "reason seems to be able to prove that free will cannot be a causally efficacious part of the world (because all of nature is deterministic) and yet that it must be such a cause"; and,
- that "reason seems to be able to prove that there is and there is not a necessary being (which some would identify with God)".[129][130]
Kant further argues in each case that his doctrine of transcendental idealism is able to resolve the antinomy.[129] The third chapter examines fallacious arguments about God in rational theology under the heading of the "Ideal of Pure Reason". (Whereas an idea is a pure concept generated by reason, an ideal is the concept of an idea as an individual thing.[131]) Here Kant addresses and claims to refute three traditional arguments for the existence of God: the ontological argument, the cosmological argument, and the physio-theological argument (i.e., the argument from design).[132] The results of the transcendental dialectic so far appear to be entirely negative. In an Appendix to this section, Kant rejects such a conclusion. The ideas of pure reason, he argues, have an important regulatory function in directing and organizing our theoretical and practical inquiry. Kant's later works elaborate upon this function at length and in detail.[133]
Moral thought
[edit]Kant developed his ethics, or moral philosophy, in three works: Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals (1785), Critique of Practical Reason (1788), and Metaphysics of Morals (1797). With regard to morality, Kant argued that the source of the good lies not in anything outside the human subject, either in nature or given by God, but rather is only the good will itself. A good will is one that acts from duty in accordance with the universal moral law that the autonomous human being freely gives itself. This law obliges one to treat humanity—understood as rational agency, and represented through oneself as well as others—as an end in itself rather than (merely) as means to other ends the individual might hold. Kant is known for his theory that all moral obligation is grounded in what he calls the "categorical imperative", which is derived from the concept of duty. He argues that the moral law is a principle of reason itself, not based on contingent facts about the world, such as what would make us happy; to act on the moral law has no other motive than "worthiness to be happy".[134]
Idea of freedom
[edit]In the Critique of Pure Reason, Kant distinguishes between the transcendental idea of freedom, which as a psychological concept is "mainly empirical" and refers to "whether a faculty of beginning a series of successive things or states from itself is to be assumed",[135] and the practical concept of freedom as the independence of our will from the "coercion" or "necessitation through sensuous impulses". Kant finds it a source of difficulty that the practical idea of freedom is founded on the transcendental idea of freedom,[136] but for the sake of practical interests uses the practical meaning, taking "no account of ... its transcendental meaning", which he feels was properly "disposed of" in the Third Antinomy, and as an element in the question of the freedom of the will is for philosophy "a real stumbling block" that has embarrassed speculative reason.[135]
Kant calls practical "everything that is possible through freedom"; he calls the pure practical laws that are never given through sensuous conditions, but are held analogously with the universal law of causality, moral laws. Reason can give us only the "pragmatic laws of free action through the senses", but pure practical laws given by reason a priori dictate "what is to be done".[135][137] Kant's categories of freedom function primarily as conditions for the possibility for actions (i) to be free, (ii) to be understood as free, and (iii) to be morally evaluated. For Kant, although actions as theoretical objects are constituted by means of the theoretical categories, actions as practical objects (objects of practical use of reason, and which can be good or bad) are constituted by means of the categories of freedom. Only in this way can actions, as phenomena, be a consequence of freedom, and be understood and evaluated as such.[138]
Categorical imperative
[edit]Kant makes a distinction between categorical and hypothetical imperatives. A hypothetical imperative is one that we must obey to satisfy contingent desires. A categorical imperative binds us regardless of our desires: for example, everyone has a duty to respect others as individual ends in themselves, regardless of circumstances, even though it is sometimes in our narrowly selfish interest to not do so. These imperatives are morally binding because of the categorical form of their maxims, rather than contingent facts about an agent.[139] Unlike hypothetical imperatives, which bind us insofar as we are part of a group or society which we owe duties to, we cannot opt out of the categorical imperative, because we cannot opt out of being rational agents. We owe a duty to rationality by virtue of being rational agents; therefore, rational moral principles apply to all rational agents at all times.[140] Stated in other terms, with all forms of instrumental rationality excluded from morality, "the moral law itself, Kant holds, can only be the form of lawfulness itself, because nothing else is left once all content has been rejected".[141]
Kant provides three formulations for the categorical imperative. He claims that these are necessarily equivalent, as all being expressions of the pure universality of the moral law as such;[142] many scholars are not convinced.[143] The formulas are as follows:
- Formula of Universal Law:
- Formula of Humanity as End in Itself:
- "So act that you use humanity, as much in your own person as in the person of every other, always at the same time as an end and never merely as a means".[145]
- Formula of Autonomy:
Kant defines maxim as a "subjective principle of volition", which is distinguished from an "objective principle or 'practical law.'" While "the latter is valid for every rational being and is a 'principle according to which they ought to act[,]' a maxim 'contains the practical rule which reason determines in accordance with the conditions of the subject (often their ignorance or inclinations) and is thus the principle according to which the subject does act.'"[150]
Maxims fail to qualify as practical laws if they produce a contradiction in conception or a contradiction in the will when universalized. A contradiction in conception happens when, if a maxim were to be universalized, it ceases to make sense, because the "maxim would necessarily destroy itself as soon as it was made a universal law".[151] For example, if the maxim 'It is permissible to break promises' was universalized, no one would trust any promises made, so the idea of a promise would become meaningless; the maxim would be self-contradictory because, when it is universalized, promises cease to be meaningful. The maxim is not moral because it is logically impossible to universalize—that is, we could not conceive of a world where this maxim was universalized.[152] A maxim can also be immoral if it creates a contradiction in the will when universalized. This does not mean a logical contradiction, but that universalizing the maxim leads to a state of affairs that no rational being would desire.
"The Doctrine of Virtue"
[edit]As Kant explains in the 1785 Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals and as its title directly indicates, that text is "nothing more than the search for and establishment of the supreme principle of morality".[153] His promised Metaphysics of Morals was much delayed and did not appear until its two parts, "The Doctrine of Right" and "The Doctrine of Virtue", were published separately in 1797 and 1798.[154] The first deals with political philosophy, the second with ethics. "The Doctrine of Virtue" provides "a very different account of ordinary moral reasoning" than the one suggested by the Groundwork.[155] It is concerned with duties of virtue or "ends that are at the same time duties".[156] It is here, in the domain of ethics, that the greatest innovation by The Metaphysics of Morals is to be found. According to Kant's account, "ordinary moral reasoning is fundamentally teleological—it is reasoning about what ends we are constrained by morality to pursue, and the priorities among these ends we are required to observe".[157]
There are two sorts of ends that it is our duty to have: our own perfection and the happiness of others (MS 6:385). "Perfection" includes both our natural perfection (the development of our talents, skills, and capacities of understanding) and moral perfection (our virtuous disposition) (MS 6:387). A person's "happiness" is the greatest rational whole of the ends the person set for the sake of her own satisfaction (MS 6:387–388).[158]
Kant's elaboration of this teleological doctrine offers up a moral theory very different from the one typically attributed to him on the basis of his foundational works alone.
Political philosophy
[edit]Part of a series on |
Liberalism |
---|
Part of the Politics series |
Republicanism |
---|
Politics portal |
In Towards Perpetual Peace: A Philosophical Project, Kant listed several conditions that he thought necessary for ending wars and creating a lasting peace. They included a world of constitutional republics.[159] His classical republican theory was extended in the Doctrine of Right, the first part of the Metaphysics of Morals (1797).[160] Kant believed that universal history leads to the ultimate world of republican states at peace, but his theory was not pragmatic. The process was described in Perpetual Peace as natural rather than rational:
What affords this guarantee (surety) is nothing less than the great artist nature (natura daedala rerum) from whose mechanical course purposiveness shines forth visibly, letting concord arise by means of the discord between human beings even against their will; and for this reason nature, regarded as necessitation by a cause the laws of whose operation are unknown to us, is called fate, but if we consider its purposiveness in the course of the world as the profound wisdom of a higher cause directed to the objective final end of the human race and predetermining this course of the world, it is called providence.[161]
Kant's political thought can be summarized as republican government and international organization: "In more characteristically Kantian terms, it is doctrine of the state based upon the law (Rechtsstaat) and of eternal peace. Indeed, in each of these formulations, both terms express the same idea: that of legal constitution or of 'peace through law.'"[162] "Kant's political philosophy, being essentially a legal doctrine, rejects by definition the opposition between moral education and the play of passions as alternate foundations for social life. The state is defined as the union of men under law. The state rightly so called is constituted by laws which are necessary a priori because they flow from the very concept of law. A regime can be judged by no other criteria nor be assigned any other functions, than those proper to the lawful order as such."[163]
Kant opposed "democracy", which at his time meant direct democracy, believing that majority rule posed a threat to individual liberty. He stated that "democracy in the strict sense of the word is necessarily a despotism because it establishes an executive power in which all decide for and, if need be, against one (who thus does not agree), so that all, who are nevertheless not all, decide; and this is a contradiction of the general will with itself and with freedom."[164]
As with most writers at the time, Kant distinguished three forms of government—namely, democracy, aristocracy, and monarchy—with mixed government as the most ideal form of it.[165] He believed in republican ideals and forms of governance, and rule of law brought on by them.[166] Although Kant published this as a "popular piece", Mary J. Gregor points out that two years later, in The Metaphysics of Morals, Kant claims to demonstrate systematically that "establishing universal and lasting peace constitutes not merely a part of the doctrine of right, but rather the entire final end of the doctrine of right within the limits of mere reason".[167][168]
The Doctrine of Right, published in 1797, contains Kant's most mature and systematic contribution to political philosophy. It addresses duties according to law, which are "concerned only with protecting the external freedom of individuals" and indifferent to incentives. Although there is a moral duty "to limit ourselves to actions that are right, that duty is not part of [right] itself".[155] Its basic political idea is that "each person's entitlement to be his or her own master is only consistent with the entitlements of others if public legal institutions are in place".[169] He formulates the universal principle of right as:
Any action is right if it can coexist with everyone's freedom in accordance with a universal law, or if on its maxim the freedom of choice of each can coexist with everyone's freedom in accordance with a universal law. (MS 6:230).[155]
Religious writings
[edit]Starting in the 20th century, commentators tended to see Kant as having a strained relationship with religion, although in the nineteenth century this had not been the prevalent view. Karl Leonhard Reinhold, whose letters helped make Kant famous, wrote: "I believe that I may infer without reservation that the interest of religion, and of Christianity in particular, accords completely with the result of the Critique of Reason."[170] According to Johann Schultz, who wrote one of the first commentaries on Kant: "And does not this system itself cohere most splendidly with the Christian religion? Do not the divinity and beneficence of the latter become all the more evident?"[171] The reason for these views was Kant's moral theology and the widespread belief that his philosophy was the great antithesis to Spinozism, which was widely seen as a form of sophisticated pantheism or even atheism. As Kant's philosophy disregarded the possibility of arguing for God through pure reason alone, for the same reasons it also disregarded the possibility of arguing against God through pure reason alone.
Kant directs his strongest criticisms of the organization and practices of religious organizations at those that encourage what he sees as a religion of counterfeit service to God.[172] Among the major targets of his criticism are external ritual, superstition, and a hierarchical church order. He sees these as efforts to make oneself pleasing to God in ways other than conscientious adherence to the principle of moral rightness in choosing and acting upon one's maxims. Kant's criticisms on these matters, along with his rejection of certain theoretical proofs for the existence of God that were grounded in pure reason (particularly the ontological argument) and his philosophical commentary on some Christian doctrines, have resulted in interpretations that see Kant as hostile to religion in general and to Christianity in particular.[173] Other interpreters, nevertheless, consider that Kant was trying to mark off defensible from indefensible Christian belief.[174]
Regarding Kant's conception of religion, some critics have argued that he was sympathetic to deism.[175] Other critics have argued that Kant's moral conception moves from deism to theism (as moral theism), for example Allen W. Wood,[176] as well as Merold Westphal.[177] As for Kant's book Religion within the Bounds of Mere Reason, it was emphasized that Kant reduced religiosity to rationality, religion to morality, and Christianity to ethics;[178] however, many interpreters, including Wood,[179] alongside Lawrence Pasternack,[180] now agree with Stephen Palmquist's claim that a better way of reading Kant's Religion is to see him as raising morality to the status of religion.[181]
Aesthetics
[edit]Kant discusses the subjective nature of aesthetic qualities and experiences in Observations on the Feeling of the Beautiful and Sublime (1764). Kant's contribution to aesthetic theory is developed in the Critique of the Power of Judgment (1790), where he investigates the possibility and logical status of "judgments of taste". In the "Critique of Aesthetic Judgment", the first major division of the Critique of the Power of Judgment, Kant used the term "aesthetic" in a manner that resembles its modern sense.[182] In the Critique of Pure Reason, to note essential differences between judgments of taste, moral judgments, and scientific judgments, Kant abandoned the term "aesthetic" as "designating the critique of taste", noting that judgments of taste could never be "directed" by "laws a priori".[183] After A. G. Baumgarten, who wrote Aesthetica (1750–58),[f] Kant was one of the first philosophers to develop and integrate aesthetic theory into a unified and comprehensive philosophical system, utilizing ideas that played an integral role throughout his philosophy.[184] In the chapter "Analytic of the Beautiful" in the Critique of the Power of Judgment, Kant states that beauty is not a property of an artwork or natural phenomenon, but is instead consciousness of the pleasure that attends the 'free play' of the imagination and the understanding. Even though it appears that we are using reason to decide what is beautiful, the judgment is not a cognitive judgment,[g] "and is consequently not logical, but aesthetical".[185]
A pure judgement of taste is subjective since it refers to the emotional response of the subject and is based upon nothing but esteem for an object itself: it is a disinterested pleasure, and we feel that pure judgements of taste (i.e., judgements of beauty), lay claim to universal validity.[186] This universal validity is not derived from a determinate concept of beauty but from common sense.[187] Kant also believed that a judgment of taste shares characteristics with a moral judgment: both are disinterested, and we hold them to be universal.[188] In the chapter "Analytic of the Sublime," Kant identifies the sublime as an aesthetic quality that, like beauty, is subjective, but unlike beauty, it refers to an indeterminate relationship between the faculties of the imagination and reason. It also shares the character of moral judgments in its engagement with reason.[189] The feeling of the sublime, divided into two distinct modes (the mathematical and the dynamical sublime),[190] describes two subjective moments that concern the relationship of the faculty of the imagination to reason. Some commentators argue that Kant's critical philosophy contains a third kind of the sublime, the moral sublime, which is the aesthetic response to the moral law or a representation, and a development of the "noble" sublime in Kant's theory of 1764.[191]
The mathematical sublime results from the failure of the imagination to comprehend natural objects that appear boundless and formless, or appear "absolutely great".[192] This imaginative failure is then recuperated through the pleasure taken in reason's assertion of the concept of infinity. In this move the faculty of reason proves itself superior to our fallible sensible self.[193] In the dynamical sublime, there is the sense of annihilation of the sensible self as the imagination tries to comprehend a vast might. This power of nature threatens us but through the resistance of reason to such sensible annihilation, the subject feels a pleasure and a sense of the human moral vocation. This appreciation of moral feeling through exposure to the sublime helps to develop moral character. Kant developed a theory of humor,[194] which has been interpreted as an "incongruity" theory. He illustrated his theory of humor by telling three narrative jokes in the Critique of Judgment. He thought that the physiological impact of humor is akin to that of music.[195]
Kant developed a distinction between an object of art as a material value subject to the conventions of society and the transcendental condition of the judgment of taste as a "refined" value in his Idea for a Universal History with a Cosmopolitan Aim (1784). In the Fourth and Fifth Theses of that work he identified all art as the "fruits of unsociableness" due to men's "antagonism in society"[196] and, in the Seventh Thesis, asserted that while such material property is indicative of a civilized state, only the ideal of morality and the universalization of refined value through the improvement of the mind "belongs to culture".[197]
Anthropology
[edit]Kant lectured on anthropology, the study of human nature, for twenty-three years.[198] His Anthropology from a Pragmatic Point of View was published in 1798. Transcripts of Kant's lectures on anthropology were published for the first time in 1997 in German.[199] Kant was among the first people of his time to introduce anthropology as an intellectual area of study, long before the field gained popularity, and his texts are considered to have advanced the field. His point of view was to influence the works of later philosophers such as Martin Heidegger and Paul Ricoeur.[200]
Kant was the first to suggest using a dimensionality approach to human diversity. He analyzed the nature of the Hippocrates-Galen four temperaments and plotted in two dimensions "what belongs to a human being's faculty of desire": "his natural aptitude or natural predisposition" and "his temperament or sensibility".[201] Cholerics were described as emotional and energetic, phlegmatics as balanced and weak, sanguines as balanced and energetic, and melancholics as emotional and weak. These two dimensions reappeared in all subsequent models of temperament and personality traits. Kant viewed anthropology in two broad categories: (1) the physiological approach, which he referred to as "what nature makes of the human being"; and (2) the pragmatic approach, which explores the things that a human "can and should make of himself".[202]
Racism
[edit]Kant's theory of race and his prejudicial beliefs are among the most contentious areas of recent Kant scholarship.[203][204][205] While few, if any, dispute the overt racism and chauvinism present in his work, a more contested question is the degree to which it degrades or invalidates his other contributions. His most severe critics assert that Kant intentionally manipulated science to support chattel slavery and discrimination.[206][207][203] Others acknowledge that he lived in an era of immature science, with many erroneous beliefs, some racist, all appearing decades before evolution, molecular genetics, and other sciences that today are taken for granted.[203][204][208][209] Kant was one of the most notable Enlightenment thinkers to defend racism. Philosopher Charles W. Mills is unequivocal: "Kant is also seen as one of the central figures in the birth of modern 'scientific' racism. Whereas other contributors to early racial thought like Carolus Linnaeus and Johann Friedrich Blumenbach had offered only 'empirical' (scare-quotes necessary!) observation, Kant produced a full-blown theory of race."[210]
Using the four temperaments of ancient Greece, Kant proposed a hierarchy of racial categories including white Europeans, black Africans, and red Native Americans.[211] Although he was a proponent of scientific racism for much of his career, Kant's views on race changed significantly in the last decade of his life, and he ultimately rejected racial hierarchies and European colonialism in Perpetual Peace: A Philosophical Sketch (1795).[205][212][211][h] Kant was an opponent of miscegenation, believing that whites would be "degraded" and that "fusing of races" is undesirable, for "not every race adopts the morals and customs of the Europeans". He states that "instead of assimilation, which was intended by the melting together of the various races, nature has here made a law of just the opposite".[215] Kant was also an anti-Semite, believing that Jews were incapable of transcending material forces, which a moral order required. In this way, Jews are presented as the opposite of autonomous, rational Christians, and therefore incapable of being incorporated into an ethical Christian society. In his "Anthropology", Kant called the Jews "a nation of cheaters" and portrayed them as "a group that has followed not the path of transcendental freedom but that of enslavement to the material world".[216]
Mills wrote that Kant has been "sanitized for public consumption", his racist works conveniently ignored.[217] Robert Bernasconi stated that Kant "supplied the first scientific definition of race". Emmanuel Chukwudi Eze is credited with bringing Kant's contributions to racism to light in the 1990s among Western philosophers, who he believed often glossed over this part of his life and works.[218] Pauline Kleingeld argues that, while Kant "did defend a racial hierarchy until at least the end of the 1780s", his views on race changed significantly in works published in the last decade of his life. In particular, she argues that Kant rejected past views related to racial hierarchies and the diminished rights or moral status of non-whites in Perpetual Peace (1795). This work also saw him providing extended arguments against European colonialism, which he claimed was morally unjust and incompatible with the equal rights held by indigenous populations. Kleingeld argues that this shift in Kant's views later in life has often been forgotten or ignored in the literature on Kant's racist anthropology, and that the shift suggests a belated recognition of the fact that racial hierarchy was incompatible with a universalized moral framework.[205]
While Kant's racist rhetoric is indicative of the state of scholarship and science during the 18th century, German philosopher Daniel-Pascal Zorn explains the risk of taking period quotations out of context. Many of Kant's most outrageous quotations are from a series of articles from 1777–1788, a public exchange among Kant, Herder, natural scientist Georg Forster, and other scholars prominent in that period.[219][220][221] Kant asserts that all races of humankind are of the same species, challenging the position of Forster and others that the races were distinct species. While his commentary is clearly biased at times, certain extreme statements were patterned specifically to paraphrase or counter Forster and other authors.[203][204] By considering the full arc of Kant's scholarship, Zorn notes the progression in both his philosophical and his anthropological works, "with which he argues, against the zeitgeist, for the unity of humanity".[204]
Influence and legacy
[edit]Kant's influence on Western thought has been profound.[i] Although the basic tenets of Kant's transcendental idealism (i.e., that space and time are a priori forms of human perception rather than real properties and the claim that formal logic and transcendental logic coincide) have been claimed to be falsified by modern science and logic,[222][223][224] and no longer set the intellectual agenda of contemporary philosophers, Kant is credited with having innovated the way philosophical inquiry has been carried on at least up to the early nineteenth century. This shift consisted of several closely related innovations that, although highly contentious in themselves, have become important in subsequent philosophy and in the social sciences broadly construed:
- The human subject seen as the center of inquiry into human knowledge, such that it is impossible to philosophize about things as they exist independently of human perception or of how they are "for us";[225]
- the notion that is possible to discover and systematically explore the inherent limits of the human ability to know entirely a priori;
- the notion of the "categorical imperative", an assertion that people are naturally endowed with the ability and obligation toward right reason and acting. Perhaps his most famous quote is drawn from the Critique of Practical Reason: "Two things fill my mind with ever new and increasing admiration and reverence ... : the starry heavens above me and the moral law within me";[226]
- the concept of "conditions of possibility", as in his notion of "the conditions of possible experience"; that is, that things, knowledge, and forms of consciousness rest on prior conditions that make them possible, so that, to understand or to know them, several conditions must be understood:
- the claim that objective experience is actively constituted or constructed by the functioning of the human mind;
- the concept of moral autonomy as central to humanity; and
- the assertion of the principle that human beings should be treated as ends rather than as mere means.
Kant's ideas have been incorporated into a variety of schools of thought. These include German idealism,[227] Marxism,[228] positivism,[229] phenomenology,[230] existentialism,[231] critical theory,[232] linguistic philosophy,[233] structuralism,[234] post-structuralism,[235] and deconstruction.[236]
Historical influence
[edit]During his own life, much critical attention was paid to Kant's thought. He influenced Reinhold, Fichte, Schelling, Hegel, and Novalis during the 1780s and 1790s. Samuel Taylor Coleridge was greatly influenced by Kant and helped to spread awareness of him, and of German Idealism generally, in the UK and the US. In his Biographia Literaria (1817), he credits Kant's ideas in coming to believe that the mind is not a passive, but an active agent in the apprehension of reality. Hegel was one of Kant's first major critics. In Hegel's view the entire project of setting a "transcendental subject" (i.e., human consciousness) apart from the living individual as well as from nature, history, and society was fundamentally flawed,[237] although parts of that very project could be put to good use in a new direction. Similar concerns motivated Hegel's criticisms of Kant's concept of moral autonomy, to which Hegel opposed an ethic focused on the "ethical life" of the community.[j] In a sense, Hegel's notion of "ethical life" is meant to subsume, rather than replace, Kantian ethics. And Hegel can be seen as trying to defend Kant's idea of freedom as going beyond finite "desires", by means of reason. Thus, in contrast to later critics like Nietzsche or Russell, Hegel shares some of Kant's concerns.[k]
Kant's thinking on religion was used in Britain by philosophers such as Thomas Carlyle[238] to challenge the nineteenth-century decline in religious faith. British Catholic writers, notably G. K. Chesterton and Hilaire Belloc, followed this approach.[239] Criticisms of Kant were common in the realist views of the new positivism at that time. Arthur Schopenhauer was strongly influenced by Kant's transcendental idealism. Like G. E. Schulze, Jacobi, and Fichte before him, Schopenhauer was critical of Kant's theory of the thing-in-itself. Things-in-themselves, they argued, are neither the cause of what we observe, nor are they completely beyond our access. Ever since the Critique of Pure Reason, philosophers have been critical of Kant's theory of the thing-in-itself. Many have argued that, if such a thing exists beyond experience, then one cannot posit that it affects us causally, since that would entail stretching the category "causality" beyond the realm of experience.[l]
With the success and wide influence of Hegel's writings, Kant's own influence began to wane, but a re-examination of his ideas began in Germany in 1865 with the publication of Kant und die Epigonen by Otto Liebmann, whose motto was "Back to Kant". There proceeded an important revival of Kant's theoretical philosophy, known as Neo-Kantianism. Kant's notion of "critique" has been more broadly influential. The early German Romantics, especially Friedrich Schlegel in his "Athenaeum Fragments", used Kant's reflexive conception of criticism in their Romantic theory of poetry.[240] Also in aesthetics, Clement Greenberg, in his classic essay "Modernist Painting", uses Kantian criticism, what Greenberg refers to as "immanent criticism", to justify the aims of abstract painting, a movement Greenberg saw as aware of the key limitation—flatness—that makes up the medium of painting.[241] French philosopher Michel Foucault was also greatly influenced by Kant's notion of "critique" and wrote several pieces on Kant for a re-thinking of the Enlightenment as a form of "critical thought". He went so far as to classify his own philosophy as a "critical history of modernity, rooted in Kant".[242]
Kant believed that mathematical truths were forms of synthetic a priori knowledge, which means they are necessary and universal, yet known through the a priori intuition of space and time, as transcendental preconditions of experience.[243] Kant's often brief remarks about mathematics influenced the mathematical school known as intuitionism, a movement in philosophy of mathematics opposed to Hilbert's formalism, and Frege and Bertrand Russell's logicism.[m]
Influence on modern thinkers
[edit]With his Perpetual Peace, Kant is considered to have foreshadowed many of the ideas that have come to form the democratic peace theory, one of the main controversies in political science.[244] More concretely, constructivist theorist Alexander Wendt proposed that the anarchy of the international system could evolve from the "brutish" Hobbesian anarchy understood by realist theorists, through Lockean anarchy, and ultimately a Kantian anarchy in which states would see their self-interests as inextricably linked to the well being of other states, thus transforming international politics into a far more peaceful form.[245]
Prominent recent Kantians include the British philosophers P. F. Strawson,[n] Onora O'Neill,[246] and Quassim Cassam,[247] and the American philosophers Wilfrid Sellars[248] and Christine Korsgaard.[o] Due to the influence of Strawson and Sellars, among others, there has been a renewed interest in Kant's view of the mind. Central to many debates in philosophy of psychology and cognitive science is Kant's conception of the unity of consciousness.[p]
Jürgen Habermas and John Rawls are two significant political and moral philosophers whose work is strongly influenced by Kant's moral philosophy.[q] They have argued against relativism,[249] supporting the Kantian view that universality is essential to any viable moral philosophy. Mou Zongsan's study of Kant has been cited as a highly crucial part in the development of Mou's personal philosophy, namely New Confucianism. Widely regarded as the most influential Kant scholar in China, Mou's rigorous critique of Kant's philosophy—having translated all three of Kant's critiques—served as an ardent attempt to reconcile Chinese and Western philosophy whilst increasing pressure to Westernize in China.[250][251]
Because of the thoroughness of Kant's paradigm shift, his influence extends well beyond this to thinkers who neither specifically refer to his work nor use his terminology. Kant's influence extended to the social, behavioral, and physical sciences—as in the sociology of Max Weber, the psychology of Jean Piaget, and Carl Gustav Jung.[252][253] Kant's work on mathematics and synthetic a priori knowledge is also cited by theoretical physicist Albert Einstein as an early influence on his intellectual development, although it was one which he later criticized and rejected.[254] In the 2020s, there was a renewed interest in Kant's theory of mind from the point of view of formal logic and computer science.[255]
Bibliography
[edit]Unless otherwise noted, all citations are to The Cambridge Edition of the Works of Immanuel Kant in English Translation, 16 vols., ed. Guyer, Paul, and Wood, Allen W. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992. Citations in the article are to individual works per abbreviations in List of Major works below.
- Theoretical Philosophy, 1755-1770. Ed. and trans. David Walford with Ralf Meerbote. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992.
- Lectures on Logic. Ed. and trans. J. Michael Young. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992.
- Opus postumum. Ed. Eckart Förster, trans. Eckart Förster and Michael Rosen. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993
- Practical Philosophy. Ed. and trans. Mary J. Gregor. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996.
- Religion and Rational Theology. Ed. and trans.Allen W. Wood and George di Giovanni. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996
- Lectures on Metaphysics. Ed. and trans. Karl Ameriks and Steve Naragon. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997.
- Lectures on Ethics. Ed. Peter Heath and J.B. Schneewind, trans. Peter Heath. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997.
- Critique of Pure Reason. Ed. and trans. Paul Guyer and Allen W. Wood. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998.
- Correspondence. Ed. and trans. Arnulf Zweig. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999.
- Critique of the Power of Judgment. Ed. Paul Guyer, trans. Paul Guyer and Eric Matthews. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000.
- Theoretical Philosophy after 1781. Ed. Henry Allison and Peter Heath, trans. Gary Hatfield, Michael Friedman, Henry Allison, and Peter Heath. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002.
- Notes and Fragments. Ed. Paul Guyer, trans. Curtis Bowman, Paul Guyer, and Frederick Rauscher. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005.
- Anthropology, History, and Education, Ed. Günter Zöller and Robert B. Louden. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007.
- Lectures on Anthropology, Ed. Allen W. Wood and Robert B. Louden Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2012.
- Natural Science, Ed. Eric Watkins. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2012.
List of major works
[edit]Abbreviations used in body of article are boldface in brackets. Unless otherwise noted, pagination is to the critical Akademie edition, which can be found in the margins of the Cambridge translations.
- 1749: Thoughts on the True Estimation of Living Forces (Gedanken von der wahren Schätzung der lebendigen Kräfte)
- 1755: Universal Natural History and Theory of the Heavens [UNH] (Allgemeine Naturgeschichte und Theorie des Himmels)
- 1755: Brief Outline of Certain Meditations on Fire (Meditationum quarundam de igne succinta delineatio (master's thesis under Johann Gottfried Teske))[256][257][258][259]
- 1755: A New Elucidation of the First Principles of Metaphysical Cognition (Principiorum primorum cognitionis metaphysicae nova dilucidatio (doctoral thesis))[260][r]
- 1756: The Use in Natural Philosophy of Metaphysics Combined with Geometry, Part I: Physical Monadology [PM] (Metaphysicae cum geometrica iunctae usus in philosophia naturali, cuius specimen I. continet monadologiam physicam, abbreviated as Monadologia Physica (thesis as a prerequisite of associate professorship))[261]
- 1762: The False Subtlety of the Four Syllogistic Figures (Die falsche Spitzfindigkeit der vier syllogistischen Figuren)
- 1763: The Only Possible Argument in Support of a Demonstration of the Existence of God (Der einzig mögliche Beweisgrund zu einer Demonstration des Daseins Gottes)
- 1763: Attempt to Introduce the Concept of Negative Magnitudes into Philosophy [NQ] (Versuch den Begriff der negativen Größen in die Weltweisheit einzuführen)
- 1764: Observations on the Feeling of the Beautiful and Sublime [OFBS] (Beobachtungen über das Gefühl des Schönen und Erhabenen)
- 1764: Essay on the Illness of the Head (Über die Krankheit des Kopfes)
- 1764: Inquiry Concerning the Distinctness of the Principles of Natural Theology and Morality (the Prize Essay) [PNTM] (Untersuchungen über die Deutlichkeit der Grundsätze der natürlichen Theologie und der Moral)
- 1766: Dreams of a Spirit-Seer [DSS] (Träume eines Geistersehers)[262]
- 1768: On the Ultimate Ground of the Differentiation of Regions in Space [1768] (Von dem ersten Grunde des Unterschiedes der Gegenden im Raume)[263]
- 1770: Dissertation on the Form and Principles of the Sensible and the Intelligible World [ID] (De mundi sensibilis atque intelligibilis forma et principiis [doctoral thesis])[264][265][266]
- 1775: On the Different Races of Man (Über die verschiedenen Rassen der Menschen)
- 1781: First edition of the Critique of Pure Reason [CPuR A][267] (Kritik der reinen Vernunft)[268]
- 1783: Prolegomena to Any Future Metaphysics [PFM] (Prolegomena zu einer jeden künftigen Metaphysik)
- 1784: "An Answer to the Question: What Is Enlightenment?" [WE?] ("Beantwortung der Frage: Was ist Aufklärung?")[269]
- 1784: "Idea for a Universal History with a Cosmopolitan Purpose" [UH] ("Idee zu einer allgemeinen Geschichte in weltbürgerlicher Absicht")
- 1785: "Determination of the Concept of a Human Race" [DCHR] (Bestimmung des Begriffs einer Menschenrace)
- 1785: Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals [G] (Grundlegung zur Metaphysik der Sitten)
- 1786: Metaphysical Foundations of Natural Science [MFNS] (Metaphysische Anfangsgründe der Naturwissenschaft)
- 1786: "What does it mean to orient oneself in thinking?" [OT]("Was heißt: sich im Denken orientieren?")
- 1786: Conjectural Beginning of Human History [CB] (Mutmaßlicher Anfang der Menschengeschichte)
- 1787: Second edition of the Critique of Pure Reason [CPuR B][270] (Kritik der reinen Vernunft)[271]
- 1788: Critique of Practical Reason [CPracR] (Kritik der praktischen Vernunft)[272]
- 1790: Critique of Judgment [CPJ] (Kritik der Urteilskraft)[273]
- 1793: Religion within the Bounds of Bare Reason [RBMR] (Die Religion innerhalb der Grenzen der bloßen Vernunft)[45][274]
- 1793: On the Old Saw: That May be Right in Theory But It Won't Work in Practice [TP] (Über den Gemeinspruch: Das mag in der Theorie richtig sein, taugt aber nicht für die Praxis)
- 1795: Perpetual Peace: A Philosophical Sketch[275] [PP] ("Zum ewigen Frieden")[276]
- 1797: Metaphysics of Morals [MM] (Metaphysik der Sitten). First part is The Doctrine of Right, which has often been published separately as The Science of Right.
- 1798: Anthropology from a Pragmatic Point of View [APPV] (Anthropologie in pragmatischer Hinsicht)
- 1798: Conflict of Faculties [CF][277] (Der Streit der Fakultäten)[278]
- 1800: Logic (Logik)
- 1803: On Pedagogy (Über Pädagogik)[279]
- 1804: Opus Postumum [OP]
- 1817: Lectures on Philosophical Theology (Immanuel Kants Vorlesungen über die philosophische Religionslehre edited by K.H.L. Pölitz) [The English edition of A.W. Wood & G.M. Clark (Cornell, 1978) is based on Pölitz' second edition, 1830, of these lectures.][s]
Collected works in German
[edit]Wilhelm Dilthey inaugurated the Academy edition (the Akademie-Ausgabe abbreviated as AA or Ak) of Kant's writings (Gesammelte Schriften, Königlich-Preußische Akademie der Wissenschaften, Berlin, 1902–38) in 1895,[280] and served as its first editor. The volumes are grouped into four sections:
- I. Kant's published writings (vols. 1–9),
- II. Kant's correspondence (vols. 10–13),
- III. Kant's literary remains, or Nachlass (vols. 14–23), and
- IV. Student notes from Kant's lectures (vols. 24–29).
An electronic version is also available: Elektronische Edition der Gesammelten Werke Immanuel Kants (vols. 1–23).
Notes
[edit]- ^ UK: /kænt/,[1][2] US: /kɑːnt/,[3][4] German: [ɪˈmaːnu̯eːl kant];[5][6]
- ^ Kant himself seems to have found his contribution not significant enough that he published his arguments in a newspaper commentary on the prize question and did not submit them to the Academy: "Whether the Earth has Undergone an Alteration of its Axial Rotation". Kant's Cosmogony. Translated by Hastie, William. Glasgow: James Maclehose. 1900 [1754]. pp. 1–11. Retrieved 29 March 2022.. The prize was instead awarded in 1756 to P. Frisi, who incorrectly argued against the slowing down of the spin.[26]
- ^ Since he had written his last habilitation thesis 14 years earlier, a new habilitation thesis was required (see S.J. McGrath, Joseph Carew (eds.), Rethinking German Idealism, Palgrave Macmillan, 2016, p. 24).
- ^ It has been noted that in 1778, in response to one of these offers by a former pupil, Kant wrote, "Any change makes me apprehensive, even if it offers the greatest promise of improving my condition, and I am persuaded by this natural instinct of mine that I must take heed if I wish that the threads which the Fates spin so thin and weak in my case to be spun to any length. My great thanks, to my well-wishers and friends, who think so kindly of me as to undertake my welfare, but at the same time a most humble request to protect me in my current condition from any disturbance."[36]
- ^ More technically, Kant puts his general point that all genuine knowledge requires both sensory input and intellectual organization by saying that all knowledge requires both "intuitions" and "concepts" (e.g., A 50 / B 74). Intuitions and concepts are two different species of the genus "representation" (Vorstellung), Kant's most general term for any cognitive state (see A 320 / B 376–7). At the outset of the "Transcendental Aesthetic", Kant states that an "intuition" is our most direct or "immediate" kind of representation of objects, in contrast to a "concept" which always represents an object "through a detour (indirecte)"—that is, merely by some "mark" or property that the object has (A 19 / B 33). In his logic textbook, Kant defines an intuition as a "singular representation"—that is, one that represents a particular object—while a concept is always a "universal (repraesentation per notas communes)", which represents properties common to many objects (Logic, §1, 9:91).[85]
- ^ Beardsley, Monroe. "History of Aesthetics". Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Vol. 1, section on "Toward a unified aesthetics", p. 25, Macmillan 1973. Baumgarten coined the term "aesthetics" and expanded, clarified, and unified Wolffian aesthetic theory, but had left the Aesthetica unfinished (See also: Tonelli, Giorgio. "Alexander Gottlieb Baumgarten". Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Vol. 1, Macmillan 1973). In Bernard's translation of the Critique of Judgment he indicates in the notes that Kant's reference in § 15 in regard to the identification of perfection and beauty is probably a reference to Baumgarten.
- ^ Kant's general discussions of the distinction between "cognition" and "conscious of" are also given in the Critique of Pure Reason (notably A320/B376), and section V and the conclusion of section VIII of his Introduction in Logic.
- ^ Kant wrote that "[Whites] contain all the impulses of nature in affects and passions, all talents, all dispositions to culture and civilization and can as readily obey as govern. They are the only ones who always advance to perfection." He describes South Asians as "educated to the highest degree but only in the arts and not in the sciences". He goes on that Hindustanis can never reach the level of abstract concepts and that a "great hindustani man" is one who has "gone far in the art of deception and has much money". He states that the Hindus always stay the way they are and can never advance. About black Africans, Kant wrote that "they can be educated but only as servants, that is they allow themselves to be trained". To Kant, "the Negro can be disciplined and cultivated, but is never genuinely civilized. He falls of his own accord into savagery." Native Americans, Kant opined, "cannot be educated". He calls them unmotivated, lacking affect, passion and love, and describes them as too weak for labor, unfit for any culture, and too phlegmatic for diligence. He said that Native Americans are "far below the Negro, who undoubtedly holds the lowest of all remaining levels by which we designate the different races". Kant stated that "Americans and Blacks cannot govern themselves. They thus serve only for slaves."[213][214]
- ^ Oliver A. Johnson claims, "With the possible exception of Plato's Republic, (Critique of Pure Reason) is the most important philosophical book ever written." Article on Kant within the collection Great thinkers of the Western World, Ian P. McGreal, Ed., HarperCollins, 1992.
- ^ Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel, Natural Law: The Scientific Ways of Treating Natural Law, Its Place in Moral Philosophy, and Its Relation to the Positive Sciences. trans. T. M. Knox. Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1975. Hegel's mature view and his concept of "ethical life" is elaborated in his Philosophy of Right. Hegel, Philosophy of Right. trans. T. M. Knox. Oxford University Press, 1967.
- ^ Robert Pippin's Hegel's Idealism (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989) emphasizes the continuity of Hegel's concerns with Kant's. Robert Wallace, Hegel's Philosophy of Reality, Freedom, and God (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005) explains how Hegel's Science of Logic defends Kant's idea of freedom as going beyond finite "inclinations", contra skeptics such as David Hume.
- ^ For a review of this problem and the relevant literature see The Thing in Itself and the Problem of Affection in the revised edition of Henry Allison's Kant's Transcendental Idealism.
- ^ Körner, Stephan, The Philosophy of Mathematics, Dover, 1986. For an analysis of Kant's writings on mathematics see, Friedman, Michael, Kant and the Exact Sciences, Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 1992.
- ^ Strawson, P. F., The Bounds of Sense: An Essay on Kant's Critique of Pure Reason. Routledge: 2004. When first published in 1966, this book forced many Anglo-American philosophers to reconsider Kant's Critique of Pure Reason.
- ^ Korsgaard, Christine. Creating the Kingdom of Ends. Cambridge; New York: Cambridge University Press, 1996.ISBN 978-0-521-49644-5 Not a commentary, but a defense of a broadly Kantian approach to ethics.
- ^ Brook, Andrew. Kant and the Mind. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1994. See also, Meerbote, R. "Kant's Functionalism". In: J. C. Smith, ed. Historical Foundations of Cognitive Science. Dordrecht, Holland: Reidel, 1991. Brook has an article on Kant's View of the Mind in the Stanford Encyclopedia Archived 9 July 2010 at the Wayback Machine
- ^ See Habermas, J. Moral Consciousness and Communicative Action. Trans. Christian Lenhardt and Shierry Weber Nicholsen. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press, 1996. For Rawls see, Rawls, John. Theory of Justice Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 1971. Rawls has a well-known essay on Kant's concept of good. See, Rawls, "Themes in Kant's Moral Philosophy" in Kant's Transcendental Deductions. Ed. Eckart Förster. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1989.
- ^ available online at Bonner Kant-Korpus Archived 6 March 2016 at the Wayback Machine.
- ^ As noted by Allen W. Wood in his Introduction, p. 12. Wood further speculates that the lectures themselves were delivered in the Winter of 1783–84.
References
[edit]Citations
[edit]- ^ "Kant" Archived 27 September 2019 at the Wayback Machine. Collins English Dictionary.
- ^ "Kant" Archived 23 October 2014 at the Wayback Machine. Random House Webster's Unabridged Dictionary.
- ^ Wells, John C. (2008). Longman Pronunciation Dictionary (3rd ed.). Longman. ISBN 978-1-4058-8118-0.
- ^ Jones, Daniel (2011). Roach, Peter; Setter, Jane; Esling, John (eds.). Cambridge English Pronouncing Dictionary (18th ed.). Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-0-521-15255-6.
- ^ "Immanuel". Duden (in German). Archived from the original on 20 December 2020. Retrieved 20 October 2018.
- ^ "Kant". Duden (in German). Archived from the original on 20 October 2018. Retrieved 20 October 2018.
- ^ Jemberie, Abraham Tsehay (2017). "A Critical Analysis of Immanuel Kant's Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals". International Journal of Research and Review. 4 (3): 54–75.
- ^ Grenfell, Michael (2017). "Bourdieu, Kant and Art – Michael Grenfell". Michael Grenfell. Retrieved 22 April 2024.
- ^ Bird, Otto Allen; Duignan, Brian (20 July 1998). "Immanuel Kant". Encyclopedia Britannica Online. Retrieved 23 April 2024.
- ^ "Immanuel Kant (1724–1804)". Modern German Thought from Kant to Habermas: An Annotated German-Language Reader. Studies in German Literature Linguistics and Culture. Boydell & Brewer. 16 August 2023. pp. 21–56. ISBN 9781571137708.
- ^ Khan, Naveeda (25 March 2021). "Kant and Anthropology" (PDF). Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Anthropology. doi:10.1093/acrefore/9780190854584.013.311. ISBN 978-0-19-085458-4. Retrieved 9 November 2023.
- ^ "Cosmopolis". Koenigsberg-is-dead.de. 23 April 2001. Archived from the original on 22 March 2009. Retrieved 24 July 2009.
- ^ a b Kuehn 2001, p. 26.
- ^ R.K. Murray, "The Origin of Immanuel Kant's Family Name", Kantian Review 13(1), March 2008, pp. 190–193.
- ^ Rosa Kohlheim, Volker Kohlheim, Duden – Familiennamen: Herkunft und Bedeutung von 20.000 Nachnamen, Bibliographisches Institut & F.A. Brockhaus AG, Mannheim 2005, p. 365.
- ^ Haupt, Viktor. "Rede des Bohnenkönigs – Von Petersburg bis Panama – Die Genealogie der Familie Kant" (PDF). freunde-kants.com (in German). p. 7. Archived from the original on 25 September 2015.
- ^ Pasternack, Lawrence; Fugate, Courtney (2020). "Kant's Philosophy of Religion". In Zalta, Edward N. (ed.). The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Spring 2020 ed.). Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University. Retrieved 25 February 2021.
- ^ Kuehn 2001, p. 47.
- ^ Kuehn 2001, p. 169.
- ^ The American International Encyclopedia (New York: J.J. Little & Ives, 1954), Vol. IX.
- ^ Porter, Burton (2010). What the Tortoise Taught Us: The Story of Philosophy. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers. p. 133.
- ^ "Die Freimaurer im Alten Preußen 1738–1806" (PDF) (in German). Archived (PDF) from the original on 19 November 2020.
- ^ Kuehn 2001, p. 94.
- ^ Kuehn 2001, p. 98.
- ^ Eric Watkins (ed.), Immanuel Kant: Natural Science, Cambridge University Press, 2012: "Thoughts on the true estimation..." Archived 7 March 2016 at the Wayback Machine.
- ^ Schönfeld, Martin (2000). The Philosophy of the Young Kant: The Precritical Project. Oxford University Press. p. 84. ISBN 978-0-19-513218-2.
- ^ a b Brush, Stephen G. (2014). A History of Modern Planetary Physics: Nebulous Earth. Cambridge University Press. p. 7. ISBN 978-0-521-44171-1.
- ^ See:
- Kant, I. (1756a) "Von den Ursachen der Erderschütterungen bei Gelegenheit des Unglücks, welches die westliche Länder von Europa gegen das Ende des vorigen Jahres betroffen hat" [On the causes of the earthquakes on the occasion of the disaster which affected the western countries of Europe towards the end of last year] In: Königlich Preussischen Akademie der Wissenschaften (Royal Prussian Academy of Sciences), ed.s (1902) Kant's gesammelte Schriften [Kant's collected writings] (in German) Berlin, Germany: G. Reimer. vol. 1, pp. 417–427.
- Kant, I. (1756b) "Geschichte und Naturbeschreibung der merkwürdigsten Vorfälle des Erdbebens, welches an dem Ende des 1755sten Jahres einen großen Theil der Erde erschüttert hat" [History and description of the nature of the most remarkable events of the earthquake which shook a large part of the Earth at the end of the year 1755], ibid. pp. 429–461.
- Kant, I. (1756c) "Immanuel Kants fortgesetzte Betrachtung der seit einiger Zeit wahrgenommenen Erderschütterungen" [Immanuel Kant's continued consideration of the earthquakes that were felt some time ago], ibid. pp. 463–472.
- Amador, Filomena (2004) "The causes of 1755 Lisbon earthquake on Kant" In: Escribano Benito, J.J.; Español González, L.; Martínez García, M.A., ed.s. Actas VIII Congreso de la Sociedad Española de Historia de las Ciencias y de las Técnicas [Proceedings of the Eighth Congress of the Spanish Society of the History of the Sciences and Technology] (in English) Logroño, Spain: Sociedad Española de Historia de las Ciencias y de las Técnicas (Universidad de la Rioja), vol. 2, pp. 485–495.
- ^ a b Richards, Paul (1974). "Kant's Geography and Mental Maps". Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers (61): 1–16. doi:10.2307/621596. ISSN 0020-2754. JSTOR 621596.
- ^ Elden, Stuart (2009). "Reassessing Kant's geography" (PDF). Journal of Historical Geography. 35 (1): 3–25. doi:10.1016/j.jhg.2008.06.001. Archived (PDF) from the original on 1 August 2020. Retrieved 27 September 2019.
- ^ Gamow, George (1947). One Two Three... Infinity. New York: Viking P. pp. 300ff.
- ^ Cf., for example, Susan Shell, The Embodiment of Reason (Chicago, 1996)
- ^ Watkins, Erik (2009). Kant's Critique of Pure Reason: Background Source Materials. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. p. 276. ISBN 978-0-521-78162-6.
- ^ a b Smith, Homer W. (1952). Man and His Gods. New York: Grosset & Dunlap. p. 404.
- ^ Kant, PFM 4:260
- ^ Christopher Kul-Want and Andrzej Klimowski, Introducing Kant (Cambridge: Icon Books, 2005).[page needed] ISBN 978-1-84046-664-5
- ^ Kant, CPuR A188-211/B233-56
- ^ Dorrien, Gary (2012). Kantian Reason and Hegelian Spirit: The Idealistic Logic of Modern Theology. Malden, MA: John Wiley & Sons. p. 37. ISBN 978-0-470-67331-7.
- ^ Kuehn 2001, pp. 250–254.
- ^ Copleston, Frederick Charles (2003). The Enlightenment: Voltaire to Kant. p. 146.
- ^ Sassen, Brigitte. Kant's Early Critics: The Empiricist Critique of the Theoretical Philosophy. 2000.
- ^ Ein Jahrhundert deutscher Literaturkritik, vol. III, Der Aufstieg zur Klassik in der Kritik der Zeit (Berlin, 1959), p. 315; as quoted in Gulyga, Arsenij. Immanuel Kant: His Life and Thought. Trans. Marijan Despaltović. Boston: Birkhäuser, 1987.
- ^ Kuehn 2001, pp. 268–269.
- ^ Guyer, Paul (2006). The Cambridge Companion to Kant and Modern Philosophy. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. p. 631. ISBN 978-0-521-82303-6.
- ^ a b Werner S. Pluhar, Religion within the Bounds of Bare Reason Archived 4 March 2020 at the Wayback Machine. 2009. Description Archived 1 February 2020 at the Wayback Machine & Contents. With an Introduction Archived 3 August 2020 at the Wayback Machine by Stephen Palmquist. Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing Company,
- ^ a b c d e Derrida, Vacant Chair p. 44.
- ^ "Open letter by Kant denouncing Fichte's Philosophy". Korpora.org (in German). Archived from the original on 19 July 2011. Retrieved 24 July 2009.
- ^ Peirce, C.S., Collected Papers of Charles Sanders Peirce, v. 1, (HUP, 1960), 'Kant and his Refutation of Idealism' p. 15
- ^ Kant, Immanuel, Logic, G.B. Jäsche (ed), R.S. Hartman, W. Schwarz (translators), Indianapolis, 1984, p. xv.
- ^ Karl Vorländer, Immanuel Kant: Der Mann und das Werk, Hamburg: Meiner, 1992, p. II 332.
- ^ "Heine on Immanuel Kant" (PDF). Archived (PDF) from the original on 23 November 2015. Retrieved 10 July 2015.
- ^ Examined Lives, From Socrates to Nietzsche, James Miller p. 284
- ^ Immanuel Kant and the Bo(a)rders of Art History Mark Cheetham, in The Subjects of Art History: Historical Objects in Contemporary Perspectives, p. 16
- ^ Beyer, Susanne (25 July 2014). "Resurrecting Königsberg: Russian City Looks to German Roots". Spiegel Online. Archived from the original on 4 February 2018. Retrieved 3 February 2018.
- ^ Zieliński, Miłosz J. (2018). "Kant's Future: Debates about the Identity of Kaliningrad Oblast". Slavic Review. 77 (4): 937–956. doi:10.1017/slr.2018.291. ISSN 0037-6779. JSTOR 26644305.
- ^ "Kaliningrad Struggles With German Legacy". DW News. 2 July 2005. Retrieved 23 April 2024.
- ^ Dempsey, Judy (1 July 2005). "Russian enclave lands in diplomatic donnybrook". The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331. Retrieved 23 April 2024.
- ^ "Iran the Topic in Baltic Sea Meeting". Agence-France Press. 3 July 2005. Retrieved 23 April 2024 – via DW News.
- ^ Ypi, Lea (20 April 2024). "Kant and the case for peace". Financial Times. ISSN 0307-1766. Retrieved 23 April 2024.
- ^ "Executive order on establishing Immanuel Kant University". President of Russia. 13 October 2010. Retrieved 23 April 2024.
- ^ Kant CPuR Bxxviii–Bxxx
- ^ di Giovanni 2005.
- ^ Rohlf 2020, §2.1.
- ^ Kant, CPuR A804–05/B833
- ^ Kant, CPuR Bxxx
- ^ Guyer 2014, pp. 7–8.
- ^ Jankowiak 2023.
- ^ Guyer 2014, pp. 6–8.
- ^ di Giovanni, George. (1996) "Translator's Introduction", In Religion and Rational Theology. Cambridge University Press. p.49, citing Kant in correspondence with Stäudlin.
- ^ Rohlf 2020.
- ^ Rohlf, Michael. "Immanuel Kant". Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Archived from the original on 14 November 2019. Retrieved 29 May 2019.
- ^ Kant, CPuR B135
- ^ Guyer 2014, p. 51.
- ^ Kant, CPuR B1–3
- ^ Kant, CPuR A6–8/B10–12
- ^ Kant, CPuR B11
- ^ a b Guyer 2014, pp. 52–54.
- ^ Hume, David. An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding. Section 4; Part 1.
- ^ Kant, CPuR B3–4
- ^ Kant, CPuR B14–17
- ^ Guyer 2014, p. 55.
- ^ Kant, CPuR A15/B29, emphases added
- ^ Guyer 2014, pp. 32, 61.
- ^ Rohlf 2020, §2.12.
- ^ Guyer 2014, pp. 60–61.
- ^ Kant, CPuR A51/B75
- ^ Kant, CPuR Bxvi–xviii
- ^ Rohlf 2020, §2.2.
- ^ Jankowiak 2023, 2(g).
- ^ Guyer 2014, ch. 4.
- ^ Kant, CPuR B21
- ^ Kant, CPuR Axi–xii
- ^ Jankowiak 2023, §2(d).
- ^ a b Rohlf 2020, §3.
- ^ Kant CPuR A43/B59–60, A369
- ^ Kant CPuR A28/B44, A34–35/B51–51
- ^ Stang 2022, §2.3.
- ^ Guyer 2014, p. 60.
- ^ Allison, Henry E. (2004). Kant's Transcendental Idealism: An Interpretation and Defense. Yale University Press. pp. 25–28. ISBN 978-0300102666.
- ^ Rohlf 2020, §§3.1–3.2.
- ^ Stang 2022, §§4–5.
- ^ Langton, Rae (1998). Kantian Humility: Our Ignorance of Things in Themselves. Oxford University Press. pp. 105–107. ISBN 9780199243174.
- ^ Guyer & Wood 1998, pp. 4–13.
- ^ Guyer & Wood 1998, p. 8.
- ^ Guyer 2014, pp. 89–90.
- ^ Kant, CPuR Axi
- ^ Jankowiak 2023, §2(e).
- ^ Rohlf 2020, §4.
- ^ Guyer & Wood 1998, p. 9.
- ^ Kant, CPuR B131-32
- ^ Rohlf 2020, §4.1.
- ^ Guyer & Wood 1998, pp. 9–10.
- ^ Guyer & Wood 1998, pp. 10–11.
- ^ Guyer & Wood 1998, p. 11.
- ^ see Kant, CPuR A182–26/B224–36
- ^ see Kant, CPuR A186–211/B232–56
- ^ see Kant, CPuR A211-15/B256-62
- ^ Guyer & Wood 1998, pp. 11–12.
- ^ Guyer & Wood 1998, p. 12.
- ^ Guyer & Wood 1998, pp. 12–13.
- ^ Guyer & Wood 1998, p. 13.
- ^ Kant, CPuR A5/B8
- ^ Guyer, Paul (1987). Kant and the Claims of Knowledge. Cambridge University Press. pp. 52–55. ISBN 978-0521317245.
- ^ a b Jankowiak 2023, §2(g).
- ^ a b Guyer & Wood 1998, p. 15.
- ^ Guyer & Wood 1998, p. 14.
- ^ Jankowiak 2023, §2(g.i).
- ^ Guyer & Wood 1998, p. 16.
- ^ a b Jankowiak 2023, §2(g.ii).
- ^ Guyer & Wood 1998, pp. 16–17.
- ^ Guyer & Wood 1998, p. 17.
- ^ Jankowiak 2023, §2(g.iii).
- ^ Guyer & Wood 1998, p. 18.
- ^ Kant, CPuR A806/B834
- ^ a b c Kant, CPuR A448/B467
- ^ Kant, CPuR A533–34/B561–62
- ^ Kant, CPuR A800–02/B 828–30
- ^ Susanne Bobzien, 'Die Kategorien der Freiheit bei Kant', in Kant: Analysen, Probleme, Kritik Vol. 1, 1988, 193–220.
- ^ Driver 2007, p. 83.
- ^ Johnson 2008.
- ^ Schneewind 2010, p. 261.
- ^ Kant, G. 4:420–421, 436.
- ^ Wood, Allen. (2017) Formulas of the Moral Law. Cambridge University Press, pp. 74–78
- ^ a b Kant, G 4:421
- ^ Kant, G 4:429
- ^ Kant, G 4:431; cf. 4:432
- ^ Kant, G 4:440; cf. 4:432, 434, 438
- ^ Kant, G 4:439; cf. 4:433, 437–439
- ^ Wood, Allen. (2017) Formulas of the Moral Law. Cambridge University Press, p.6
- ^ Caygill, Howard. (1995) A Kant Dictionary. Blackwell Publishing, p. 289, citing GMM.
- ^ Kant, G 4:403.
- ^ Driver 2007, p. 88.
- ^ Kant, GMM 4:392.
- ^ Gregor, Mary J. (1996) "Translator's note on the text of The metaphysics of morals". In Practical Philosophy. The Cambridge Edition of the Works of Immanuel Kant, p. 355.
- ^ a b c Wood 2006, p. 68.
- ^ Kant, MM. 6:382–391.
- ^ Wood 2006, p. 69.
- ^ Wood 2006, p. 70.
- ^ Kant, PP 8:349–353
- ^ Manfred Riedel, Between Tradition and Revolution: The Hegelian Transformation of Political Philosophy, Cambridge 1984
- ^ Kant, PP 8:360–362
- ^ Hassner, Pierre. "Immanuel Kant", in History of Political Philosophy, edited by Leo Strauss and Joseph Cropsey, The University of Chicago Press, 1987, pp. 581–582
- ^ Hassner, Pierre. "Immanuel Kant", in History of Political Philosophy, edited by Leo Strauss and Joseph Cropsey, The University of Chicago Press, 1987, p. 603
- ^ Kant, PP 8:352
- ^ Kant, PP 8:352
- ^ Kant, PP 8:349-8:353
- ^ Kant, MM 6:355
- ^ Gregor, Mary J. "Introduction", in Practical Philosophy. Cambridge University Press, p. 313
- ^ Ripstein, Arthur. (2009) Force and Freedom: Kant's Legal and Political Philosophy. Harvard University Press, p. 9.
- ^ Karl Leonhard Reinhold, Letters on the Kantian Philosophy (1786), 3rd Letter
- ^ Johann Schultz, Exposition of Kant's Critique of Pure Reason (1784), 141.
- ^ Kant, RBMR Part IV, First part, First section [6:157–163]
- ^ E.g., Walsh, W. H., 1967, "Kant, Immanuel: Philosophy of Religion", The Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Volume Four, Paul Edwards (ed.), New York: Macmillan Publishing Co. Inc. & The Free Press, 322.
- ^ Pasternack, Lawrence; Rossi, Philip. "Kant's Philosophy of Religion". In Zalta, Edward N. (ed.). Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2014 ed.). Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University. Archived from the original on 9 July 2010. Retrieved 18 October 2019.
- ^ For example Peter Byrne, who wrote about Kant's relationship with deism. Byrne, Peter (2007), Kant on God, London: Ashgate, p. 159.
- ^ Wood, Allen W. (1970), Kant's moral religion, London and Ithaca: Cornell University Press, p. 16.
- ^ Westphal, Merold (2010), The Emergence of Modern Philosophy of Religion, in Taliaferro, Charles, Draper, Paul and Quinn, Philip (editors), A Companion to Philosophy of Religion, Oxford: Blackwell, p. 135.
- ^ Iţu, Mircia (2004), Dumnezeu şi religia în concepţia lui Immanuel Kant din Religia în limitele raţiunii, in Boboc, Alexandru and Mariş, N.I. (editors), Studii de istoria filosofiei universale, volume 12, Bucharest: Romanian Academy.
- ^ Wood, Allen W. (2020), Kant and Religion, Cambridge University Press, p.2.
- ^ See e.g., Lawrence Pasternack, Routledge Philosophy Guidebook to Kant on Religion within the Boundaries of Mere Reason (New York, Routledge, 2014), pp. 239–240.
- ^ Palmquist, Stephen (1992), "Does Kant Reduce Religion to Morality?", Kant-Studien 83.2, pp. 129–148.
- ^ Critique of Judgment in "Kant, Immanuel", Encyclopedia of Philosophy, volume 5, Macmillan, 2006, accessed on 16 November 2024
- ^ Kant, CPuR A22/B36
- ^ German Idealism in "History of Aesthetics" Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Vol 1. Macmillan, 1973.
- ^ Kant, CPJ §1
- ^ Kant, CPJ §§ 20–22
- ^ Kant, CPJ §40
- ^ Guyer, Paul (1997). Kant and the Claims of Taste. Harvard University Press. pp. 15–20. ISBN 978-0674500358.
- ^ Clewis, Robert R. (2009). The Kantian Sublime and the Revelation of Freedom. Cambridge University Press. pp. 48–52. ISBN 978-0521760867.
- ^ Kant, CPJ §24
- ^ Clewis, Robert (2009). "The Kantian Sublime and the Revelation of Freedom". Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Archived from the original on 20 October 2012. Retrieved 8 December 2011.
- ^ Kant, CPJ §§23–25
- ^ Kant, CPJ §§25–26
- ^ Kant, CPJ §54
- ^ Jakobidze-Gitman, Alexander (2020). "Kant's Situated Approach to Musicking and Joking". Journal of Interdisciplinary Music Studies. 10: 17–33. doi:10.25364/24.10:2020.2.
- ^ Kant, UH 8:20–22
- ^ Kant, UH 8:24–26.
- ^ Wilson, Holly (2006). Kant's Pragmatic Anthropology. Albany: State University of New York Press. p. 7. ISBN 978-0-7914-6849-4.
- ^ Thomas Sturm, Kant und die Wissenschaften vom Menschen (Paderborn: Mentis Verlag, 2009).
- ^ Piercey, Robert; Philosophy Documentation Center (2011). "Kant and the Problem of Hermeneutics: Heidegger and Ricoeur on the Transcendental Schematism". Idealistic Studies. 41 (3): 187–202. doi:10.5840/idstudies201141315. ISSN 0046-8541.
- ^ Kant APPV 7:285
- ^ Kant APPV 7:119
- ^ a b c d Mikkelsen, Jon M., ed. (2013). Kant and the Concept of Race. Albany, New York: State University of New York Press. pp. 12–30. ISBN 978-1438443614.
- ^ a b c d Zorn, Daniel-Pascal (2020). "Kant—a Racist?". Public History Weekly. 2020 (8). doi:10.1515/phw-2020-17156. ISSN 2197-6376. S2CID 225247836.
- ^ a b c Kleingeld 2007, pp. 573–592.
- ^ Eze, Emmanuel (1997). "The Color of Reason: the Idea of 'Race' in Kant's Anthropology". In Eze, Emmanuel Chukwudi (ed.). Postcolonial African Philosophy: A Critical Reader. Blackwell. pp. 103–140. Retrieved 20 April 2023.
- ^ Serequeberhan, T. (1996). "Eurocentrism in Philosophy: the Case of Immanuel Kant". The Philosophical Forum. S2CID 170547963.
- ^ "The Philosophy Junkie: Immanuel Kant's Racism and Sexism with Professors Lucy Allais and Helga Varden on Apple Podcasts". Apple Podcasts. Retrieved 20 April 2023.
- ^ Geismann, Georg (1 January 2022). "Why Kant Was Not a 'Racist'". Jahrbuch für Recht und Ethik/Annual Review of Law and Ethics. 30 (1): 263–357. doi:10.3790/jre.30.1.263. ISSN 0944-4610. S2CID 255676303.
- ^ Mills 2017, p. 95.
- ^ a b Kant, Immanuel (1997) [1775, 1777]. "On the Different Races of Man". In Eze, Emmanuel Chukwudi (ed.). Race and the Enlightenment: a reader. Cambridge, Mass.: Blackwell. pp. 38–49. ISBN 0-631-20136-X. OCLC 34663347.
- ^ Mills 2017, pp. 91–112.
- ^ Mills 2017, pp. 169–193.
- ^ Bowersox 2016.
- ^ Kant APPV 7:320
- ^ Shrage 2019.
- ^ Mills 2017, pp. 95–97.
- ^ Bouie 2018.
- ^ Mikkelsen, Jon M., ed. (2013). Kant and the Concept of Race: late eighteenth-century writings. Jon M. Mikkelsen. Albany: State University of New York Press. ISBN 978-1-4619-4312-9. OCLC 861693001.
- ^ Kuehn 2001, pp. 298–301, 343–345.
- ^ cf. Kant, DCHR 8:91-106
- ^ Strawson, Peter. Bounds of Sense: Essay on Kant's "Critique of Pure Reason". ASIN 0415040302.
- ^ "Einstein on Kant". University of Pittsburgh. Archived from the original on 9 August 2020. Retrieved 2 September 2020.
- ^ Perrick, Michael (1985). "Kant and Kripke on Necessary Empirical Truths". Mind. 94 (376): 596–598. doi:10.1093/mind/XCIV.376.596. ISSN 0026-4423. JSTOR 2254731.
- ^ Stephen Palmquist, "The Architectonic Form of Kant's Copernican Logic", Metaphilosophy 17:4 (October 1986), pp. 266–288; revised and reprinted as Chapter III of Kant's System of Perspectives Archived 14 April 2012 at the Wayback Machine: An architectonic interpretation of the Critical philosophy (Lanham: University Press of America, 1993).
- ^ Kant, CPracR 5:161
- ^ Beiser, Frederick C. (2002). German Idealism: The Struggle Against Subjectivism, 1781–1801. Harvard University Press. pp. Part I. ISBN 978-0674007703.
- ^ McLellan, David (1998). Marxism after Marx. Palgrave Macmillan. pp. 22–25. ISBN 978-0333738399.
- ^ Kolakowski, Leszek (1972). Positivist Philosophy: From Hume to the Vienna Circle. Penguin Books. pp. 67–69. ISBN 0140212248.
- ^ Carman, Taylor (2008). Merleau-Ponty. Routledge. pp. 34–36. ISBN 978-0415360616.
- ^ Kaufmann, Walter (1989). Existentialism: From Dostoevsky to Sartre. Meridian Books. pp. 9–12. ISBN 978-0452009301.
- ^ Habermas, Jürgen (1987). The Philosophical Discourse of Modernity: Twelve Lectures. MIT Press. pp. 109–113. ISBN 978-0745608303.
- ^ Dummett, Michael (1996). Origins of Analytical Philosophy. Harvard University Press. pp. 45–47. ISBN 978-0674644731.
- ^ Piaget, Jean (2001). Structuralism. Routledge. pp. 10–12. ISBN 978-0415262491.
- ^ Norris, Christopher (2003). Deconstruction: Theory and Practice. Routledge. pp. 40–42. ISBN 978-0415061742.
- ^ Culler, Jonathan (2007). On Deconstruction: Theory and Criticism after Structuralism. Cornell University Press. pp. 53–56. ISBN 978-0801479182.
- ^ Hegel, Georg Wilhelm Friedrich (1827). Encyclopedia of the Philosophical Sciences in Basic Outline. Heidelberg. pp. 14–15.
- ^ Cody, David. "Carlyle: Sources and Influence". The Victorian Web. Retrieved 28 July 2023.
- ^ Morse, David (2000). The Age of Virtue: British Culture from the Restoration to Romanticism. Macmillan. pp. 198–200. ISBN 978-0333913918.
- ^ Schlegel, Friedrich. "Athenaeum Fragments", in Philosophical Fragments. Trans. Peter Firchow. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press, 1991. See especially fragments Nos. 1, 43, 44.
- ^ Greenberg, Clement. "Modernist Painting", in The Philosophy of Art, ed. Alex Neill and Aaron Ridley, McGraw-Hill, 1995.
- ^ See "Essential Works of Foucault: 1954–1984 vol. 2: Aesthetics, Method, and Epistemology". Ed. by James Faubion, Trans. Robert Hurley et al. New York City: The New Press, 1998 (2010 reprint). See "Foucault, Michel, 1926 –" entry by Maurice Florence.
- ^ For a discussion and qualified defense of this position, see Stephen Palmquist, "A Priori Knowledge in Perspective: (I) Mathematics, Method and Pure Intuition", The Review of Metaphysics 41:1 (September 1987), pp. 3–22.
- ^ Ray, James Lee (1998). "Does Democracy Cause Peace?". Annual Review of Political Science. 1: 27–46. doi:10.1146/annurev.polisci.1.1.27. Archived from the original on 17 February 2008.
- ^ Wendt, Alexander (1999). Social Theory of International Politics. Cambridge University Press. pp. chapter 6.
- ^ Aridi, Sara (14 March 2017). "Onora O'Neill Wins Holberg Prize for Academic Research". The New York Times. Archived from the original on 9 January 2019. Retrieved 9 January 2019.
- ^ Cassam, Q. The Possibility of Knowledge Oxford: 2009
- ^ Sellars, Wilfrid, Science and Metaphysics: Variations on Kantian Themes. Ridgeview Publishing Company, 1967
- ^ Habermas, J. (1994): The Unity of Reason in the Diversity of Its Voices. In: Habermas, J. (Ed.): Postmetaphysical Thinking. Political Essays, Cambridge, Massachusetts: 115–148.
- ^ Palmquist, Stephen (2010). Cultivating Personhood: Kant and Asian Philosophy. Hong Kong: De Gruyter, Inc. p. 25. ISBN 978-3-11-022624-9.
- ^ Wing-Cheuk, Chan (21 February 2006). "Mou Zongsan's Transformation of Kant's Philosophy". Journal of Chinese Philosophy. 33 (1): 1. doi:10.1111/j.1540-6253.2006.00340.x.
- ^ Balanovskiy, Valentin (2016). "Whether jung was a kantian?". Con-Textos Kantianos (4): 118–126. doi:10.5281/zenodo.2550828. Archived from the original on 20 December 2020. Retrieved 29 May 2020.
- ^ Balanovskiy, Valentin (2017). "Kant and Jung on the prospects of Scientific Psychology". Estudos Kantianos. 5 (1): 357–390. doi:10.36311/2318-0501.2017.v5n1.26.p375. Archived from the original on 20 December 2020. Retrieved 29 May 2020.
- ^ Isaacson, Walter. "Einstein: His Life and Universe". p. 20.
- ^ Theodora Achourioti & Michiel van Lambalgen, 'A Formalization of Kant's Transcendental Logic', The Review of Symbolic Logic, 4 (2011), 254–289.
- ^ The thesis was submitted on 17 April 1755. "The public examination was held four weeks later on 13 May, and the degree was formally awarded on 12 June" (Eric Watkins, Kant: Natural Science, Cambridge University Press, 2012, p. 309).
- ^ Eric Watkins (ed.), Kant and the Sciences, Oxford University Press, 2001, p. 27.
- ^ Martin Schonfeld, The Philosophy of the Young Kant: The Precritical Project, Oxford University Press, 2000, p. 74.
- ^ Available online at Bonner Kant-Korpus Archived 6 March 2016 at the Wayback Machine.
- ^ The thesis was publicly disputed on 27 September 1755 (Kuehn 2001, p. 100).
- ^ Kant's application for the position was unsuccessful. He defended it on 10 April 1756 (Kuehn 2001, p. 102).
- ^ Available online at Archive.org.
- ^ Immanuel Kant, "Concerning the ultimate ground of the differentiation of directions in space" Archived 16 July 2018 at the Wayback Machine.
- ^ The thesis was publicly disputed on 21 August 1770 (Kuehn 2001, p. 189).
- ^ Available online at Google Books Archived 3 August 2020 at the Wayback Machine.
- ^ English translation available online at Wikisource.
- ^ Immanuel Kant. "The Critique of Pure Reason". Etext.library.adelaide.edu.au. Archived from the original on 2 December 2008. Retrieved 24 July 2009.
- ^ Immanuel Kant. "Immanuel Kant: Kritik der reinen Vernunft – 1. Auflage – Kapitel 1" (in German). Projekt Gutenberg-DE. Archived from the original on 9 June 2007. Retrieved 24 July 2009.
- ^ Frank-Christian Lilienweihs (10 June 1999). "Immanuel Kant: Beantwortung der Frage: Was ist Aufklaerung?". Prometheusonline.de. Archived from the original on 1 August 2009. Retrieved 24 July 2009.
- ^ "Critique of Pure Reason". Hkbu.edu.hk. 31 October 2003. Archived from the original on 27 April 2009. Retrieved 24 July 2009.
- ^ "Immanuel Kant: Kritik der reinen Vernunft – 2. Auflage – Kapitel 1" (in German). Projekt Gutenberg-DE. 20 July 2009. Archived from the original on 26 December 2005. Retrieved 24 July 2009.
- ^ Immanuel Kant. "Immanuel Kant: Kritik der praktischen Vernunft – Kapitel 1" (in German). Projekt Gutenberg-DE. Archived from the original on 9 June 2007. Retrieved 24 July 2009.
- ^ s:The Critique of Judgment
- ^ Immanuel Kant. "Religion within the Limits of Reason Alone by Immanuel Kant 1793". Marxists.org. Archived from the original on 1 June 2009. Retrieved 24 July 2009.
- ^ "Immanuel Kant, "Perpetual Peace"". Mountr Holyoke. Archived from the original on 6 April 2019. Retrieved 24 July 2009.
- ^ "Immanuel Kant: Zum ewigen Frieden, 12.02.2004 (Friedensratschlag)". Uni-kassel.de. Archived from the original on 23 September 2009. Retrieved 24 July 2009.
- ^ "Kant, The Contest of Faculties". Chnm.gmu.edu. 1798. Archived from the original on 4 August 2011. Retrieved 24 July 2009.
- ^ Immanuel Kant. "Immanuel Kant: Der Streit der Facultäten – Kapitel 1" (in German). Projekt Gutenberg-DE. Archived from the original on 9 June 2007. Retrieved 24 July 2009.
- ^ Available online at DeutschesTextArchiv.de Archived 10 March 2016 at the Wayback Machine.
- ^ Immanuel Kant, Notes and Fragments, Cambridge University Press, 2005, p. xvi.
Works cited
[edit]- Bernasconi, Robert (2010). "Defining Race Scientifically: A response to Michael Banton". Ethnicities. 10 (1): 141–148. doi:10.1177/14687968100100010802. ISSN 1468-7968. JSTOR 23890861. S2CID 143925406.
- Bouie, Jamelle (5 June 2018). "How the Enlightenment Created Modern Race Thinking and Why We Should Confront It". Slate. Archived from the original on 15 June 2020. Retrieved 15 June 2020.
- Bowersox, Jeff (4 February 2016). "Kant on the different human races (1777)". Black Central Europe. Archived from the original on 16 June 2020. Retrieved 16 June 2020.
- Caygill, Howard (1995). A Kant Dictionary. Blackwell Publishing.
- Eze, Emmanuel Chukwudi (1997a). Postcolonial African Philosophy: A Critical Reader. Wiley. pp. 103–131. ISBN 978-0-631-20339-1. Archived from the original on 20 December 2020. Retrieved 15 June 2020.
- Eze, Emmanuel Chukwudi (1997b). Race and the Enlightenment: A Reader. Wiley. pp. 39–48. ISBN 978-0-631-20136-6. Archived from the original on 20 December 2020. Retrieved 15 June 2020.
- Driver, Julia (2007). Ethics: The Fundamentals. Blackwell. ISBN 978-1-4051-1154-6.
- di Giovanni, George (2005). Freedom and Religion in Kant and His Immediate Successors. Cambridge University Press.
- Guyer, Paul (2014). Kant. Routledge.
- Guyer, Paul; Wood, Alan W. (1998). "Introduction to the Critique of Pure Reason [Editors' Introduction]". The Critique of Pure Reason. Cambridge University Press.
- Jankowiak, Tim (2023). Immanuel Kant. The Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Retrieved 4 March 2023.
- Johnson, Robert (2008). "Kant's Moral Philosophy". Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Retrieved 11 September 2013.
- Kant, Immanuel (2010). Eze, Emmanuel Chukwudi (ed.). "Kant on the Different Races of Man" (PDF). UMass Amherst. Archived (PDF) from the original on 1 August 2020. Retrieved 15 June 2020.
- Kleingeld, Pauline (October 2007). "Kant's Second Thoughts on Race" (PDF). The Philosophical Quarterly. 57 (229): 573–592. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9213.2007.498.x. hdl:11370/e15b6815-5eab-42d6-a789-24a2f6ecb946. S2CID 55185762. Archived (PDF) from the original on 16 February 2019. Retrieved 14 December 2020.
- Kuehn, Manfred (2001). Kant: a Biography. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-0-521-49704-6.
- Mills, Charles W. (2017). Black Rights/White Wrongs: The Critique of Racial Liberalism. Oxford University Press. pp. 169–193. doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780190245412.001.0001. ISBN 978-0-19-024545-0. Archived from the original on 16 June 2020. Retrieved 15 June 2020.
- Rohlf, Michael (2020). Edward N. Zalta (ed.). Immanuel Kant. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2020 Edition).
- Schneewind, J. B. (2010). "Autonomy, Obligation, and Virtue: An Overview of Kant's Moral Philosophy". Essays on the History of Moral Philosophy. Oxford University Press.
- Shrage, Laurie (18 March 2019). "Should we continue to teach thinkers like Kant, Voltaire and Hume without mention of the harmful prejudices they helped legitimize?". The New York Times. Retrieved 10 November 2022.
- Stang, Nicholas F. (2022). Edward N. Zalta & Uri Nodelman (ed.). Kant's Transcendental Idealism. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2022 Edition).
- Wood, Allen (1999). Kant's Ethical Thought. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-0521648363.
- Wood, Allen (2006). "Kant's Practical Philosophy". In Karl Ameriks (ed.). The Cambridge Companion to German Idealism. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-0801486043.
- Wood, Allen (2008). Kantian Ethics. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-0521671149.
External links
[edit]- Works by Immanuel Kant at Project Gutenberg
- Works by or about Immanuel Kant at the Internet Archive
- Works by Immanuel Kant at LibriVox (public domain audiobooks)
- KantPapers, authors and papers database powered by PhilPapers, focused on Kant, and located at Cornell University
- At the Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy:
- At the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy:
- Immanuel Kant
- Kant and Hume on Causality
- Kant and Hume on Morality
- Kant's Account of Reason
- Kant's Aesthetics and Teleology
- Kant's Critique of Metaphysics
- Kant's Moral Philosophy
- Kant's Philosophical Development
- Kant's Philosophy of Mathematics
- Kant's Philosophy of Religion
- Kant's Philosophy of Science
- Kant's Social and Political Philosophy
- Kant's Theory of Judgment
- Kant's Transcendental Arguments
- Kant's View of the Mind and Consciousness of Self
- Kant's Views on Space and Time
- Kantian Conceptualism/Nonconceptualism
- Leibniz's Influence on Kant
- Immanuel Kant
- 1724 births
- 1804 deaths
- 18th-century anthropologists
- 18th-century essayists
- 18th-century German male writers
- 18th-century German philosophers
- 18th-century German writers
- 18th-century philosophers
- 18th-century Prussian people
- 19th-century German anthropologists
- 19th-century German essayists
- German male essayists
- 19th-century German male writers
- 19th-century German non-fiction writers
- 19th-century German philosophers
- 19th-century Prussian people
- 19th-century social scientists
- Academic staff of the University of Königsberg
- Age of Enlightenment
- Enlightenment philosophers
- German epistemologists
- German agnostics
- German ethicists
- German idealists
- German logicians
- German Lutherans
- German male non-fiction writers
- German nationalists
- German political philosophers
- Humor researchers
- Idealists
- Kantianism
- Kantian philosophers
- Lecturers
- Logicians
- Members of the Prussian Academy of Sciences
- Metaphilosophers
- Natural philosophers
- Ontologists
- People of the Age of Enlightenment
- German philosophers of art
- German philosophers of culture
- German philosophers of education
- German philosophers of history
- Philosophers of law
- Philosophers of literature
- Philosophers of logic
- German philosophers of mind
- German philosophers of religion
- German philosophers of science
- Philosophers of sexuality
- Philosophers of social science
- Philosophers of war
- Philosophy writers
- Political liberals (international relations)
- Rationalists
- Theoretical historians
- Theorists on Western civilization
- University of Königsberg alumni
- Writers about activism and social change
- Writers about religion and science
- Natural law ethicists