Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Kant on Limits, Boundaries, and the Positive Function of Ideas.Stephen Howard - forthcoming - European Journal of Philosophy.
    European Journal of Philosophy, EarlyView.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • The Concept of Publicness in Kant’s Critical Method of Metaphysics.Farshid Baghai - forthcoming - Philosophy and Social Criticism:019145372110001.
    Kant’s writings on political philosophy do not clearly and conclusively determine its place and significance in his critical philosophy. To address this issue, most accounts of Kant’s political philosophy concentrate on his explicitly political texts that cluster around the second and third Critiques. Although many of these interpretations illuminate different aspects of Kant’s political philosophy, they are silent with regard to a concept of publicness that is implied in the first Critique. This article suggests that Kant’s critical method of metaphysics (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Kant's Criticisms of Hume's Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion.Reed Winegar - 2015 - British Journal for the History of Philosophy 23 (5):888-910.
    According to recent commentators like Paul Guyer, Kant agrees with Hume's Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion that physico-theology can never provide knowledge of God and that the concept of God, nevertheless, provides a useful heuristic principle for scientific enquiry. This paper argues that Kant, far from agreeing with Hume, criticizes Hume's Dialogues for failing to prove that physico-theology can never yield knowledge of God and that Kant correctly views Hume's Dialogues as a threat to, rather than an anticipation of, his own (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Scepticism and the Development of the Transcendental Dialectic.Brian A. Chance - 2012 - British Journal for the History of Philosophy 20 (2):311-331.
    Kant's response to scepticism in the Critique of Pure Reason is complex and remarkably nuanced, although it is rarely recognized as such. In this paper, I argue that recent attempts to flesh out the details of this response by Paul Guyer and Michael Forster do not go far enough. Although they are right to draw a distinction between Humean and Pyrrhonian scepticism and locate Kant's response to the latter in the Transcendental Dialectic, their accounts fail to capture two important aspects (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations