Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Leibniz and the Ground of Possibility.S. Newlands - 2013 - Philosophical Review 122 (2):155-187.
    Leibniz’s views on modality are among the most discussed by his interpreters. Although most of the discussion has focused on Leibniz’s analyses of modality, this essay explores Leibniz’s grounding of modality. Leibniz holds that possibilities and possibilia are grounded in the intellect of God. Although other early moderns agreed that modal truths are in some way dependent on God, there were sharp disagreements surrounding two distinct questions: (1) On what in God do modal truths and modal truth-makers depend? (2) What (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   16 citations  
  • Backing Into Spinozism.Samuel Newlands - 2016 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 93 (3):511-537.
    One vexing strand of Spinozism asserts that God's nature is more expansive than traditionally conceived and includes properties like being extended. In this paper, I argue that prominent early moderns embrace metaphysical principles about causation, mental representation, and modality that pressure their advocates towards such an expansive account of God's nature in similar ways. I further argue that the main early modern escape route, captured in notions like “eminent containment,” fails to adequately relieve the metaphysical pressures towards Spinozism. The upshot (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Knowledge, Anxiety, Hope: How Kant's First and Third Questions Relate.Andrew Chignell - 2021 - In Beatrix Himmelmann & Camilla Serck-Hanssen (eds.), The Court of Reason. Berlin: De Gruyter. pp. 127-149.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • God, Powers, and Possibility in Kant’s Beweisgrund.Michael Oberst - manuscript
    This paper proposes a novel reading of Kant’s account of the dependence of possibility on God in the pre-Critical Beweisgrund. I argue that Kant has a theistic-potentialist conception of the way God grounds possibility, according to which God grounds possibility by his understanding and will. The reason is that Kant accepts what I call the Principle of Possible Existence: If something is possible, then it is possible that it exists. Furthermore, I explore the connection between causal powers and possibility, the (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • The Dialectical Illusion in Kant’s Only Possible Argument for the Existence of God.Noam Hoffer - 2020 - Kantian Review 25 (3):339-363.
    The nature of Kant’s criticism of his pre-Critical ‘possibility proof’ for the existence of God, implicit in the account of the Transcendental Ideal in the Critique of Pure Reason, is still under dispute. Two issues are at stake: the error in the proof and diagnosis of the reason for committing it. I offer a new way to connect these issues. In contrast with accounts that locate the motivation for the error in reason’s interest in an unconditioned causal ground of all (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • The Possibility Proof is Not What Remains From Kant's Beweisgrund.Michael Oberst - 2020 - Kantian Review 25 (2):219-242.
    The so-called ‘possibility proof’ in Kant's pre-CriticalBeweisgrundhas been widely discussed in the literature, and it is a common view that he never really abandoned it. As I shall argue, this reading is mistaken. I aim to show that the natural illusion in theCritique of Pure Reason, which is usually taken to be the possibility proof turned into a transcendental illusion, has both a different conclusion and a different argument than the possibility proof. Rather, what remains fromBeweisgrundis what I will call (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Kant's Only Possible Argument and Chignell's Real Harmony.Uygar Abaci - 2014 - Kantian Review 19 (1):1-25.
    Andrew Chignell recently proposed an original reconstruction of Kant's ‘Only Possible Argument’ for the existence of God. Chignell claims that what motivates the ‘Grounding Premise’ of Kant's proof, ‘real possibility must be grounded in actuality’, is the requirement that the predicates of a really possible thing must be ‘really harmonious’, i.e. compatible in an extra-logical or metaphysical sense. I take issue with Chignell's reconstruction. First, the pre-Critical Kant does not present ‘real harmony’ as a general condition of real possibility. Second, (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  • Kant and the ‘Monstrous’ Ground of Possibility: A Reply to Abaci and Yong.Andrew Chignell - 2014 - Kantian Review 19 (1):53-69.
    I reply to recent criticisms by Uygar Abaci and Peter Yong, among others, of my reading of Kant's pre-Critical of God's existence, and of its fate in the Critical period. Along the way I discuss some implications of this debate for our understanding of Kant's modal metaphysics and modal epistemology generally.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  • The Early Kant’s Newtonianism.Eric Watkins - 2013 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 44 (3):429-437.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  • The Relation Between God and the World in the Pre-Critical Kant: Was Kant a Spinozist?Noam Hoffer - 2016 - Kantian Review 21 (2):185-210.
    Andrew Chignell and Omri Boehm have recently argued that Kant’s pre-Critical proof for the existence of God entails a Spinozistic conception of God and hence substance monism. The basis for this reading is the assumption common in the literature that God grounds possibilities by exemplifying them. In this article I take issue with this assumption and argue for an alternative Leibnizian reading, according to which possibilities are grounded in essences united in God’s mind (later also described as Platonic ideas intuited (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  • God, Totality and Possibility in Kant's Only Possible Argument.Peter Yong - 2014 - Kantian Review 19 (1):27-51.
    There has been a groundswell of interest in the account of modality that Kant sets forth in his pre-Critical Only Possible Argument. Andrew Chignell's reconstruction of Kant's theistic argument in terms of what he calls has a prima facie advantage in that it appears to be able to block the plurality objection (namely, that even if every modal fact presupposes some ground, this does not entail that all modal facts share the same ground). I argue that it is both textually (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations