Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Transformations of Transcendental Philosophy: Wolff, Kant, and Hegel.Karin de Boer - 2011 - Bulletin of the Hegel Society of Great Britain 32 (1-2):50-79.
    Shedding new light on Kant’s use of the term ‘transcendental’ in the Critique of Pure Reason, this article aims to determine the elements that Kant’s transcendental philosophy has in common with Wolffian ontology as well as the respects in which Kant turns against Wolff. On this basis I argue that Wolff’s, Kant’s and Hegel’s conceptions of metaphysics – qua first philosophy – have a deeper affinity than is commonly assumed. Bracketing the issue of Kant’s alleged subjectivism, I challenge the opposition (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • Kant's productive ontology: Knowledge, nature and the meaning of being.Beth Lord - 2003 - Dissertation, University of Warwick
    In this thesis I provide an interpretation of Kant's theories of knowledge, nature, and being in order to argue that Kant's ontology is a productive ontology: it is a theory of being that includes a notion of production. I aim to show that Kant's epistemology and philosophy of nature are based on a theory of being as productivity. The thesis contributes to knowledge in that it considers in detail Kant's ontology and theory of being, topics which have generally been ignored (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Is There Any Ontology in Aristotle?Joseph Owens - 1986 - Dialogue 25 (4):697-.
    The term “ontology”, as is well enough known, is of seventeenth-century vintage. According to current research, it first appears in the year 1613. By the end of the century it had waxed firm in common recognition. Through the influence of Christian Wolff in the following century, the eighteenth, it quickly became standard in the school tradition for the science of being in general, the science of beingquabeing. In its morphology the term showed clearly enough that it was meant to designate (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • DEBATE: Response to McWherter.Alison Assiter - 2015 - Journal of Critical Realism 14 (5):508-517.
    This contribution to a debate with Dustin McWherter evaluates his claim that Kant is a ‘non-ontologist’ or an ‘anti-ontologist’ and challenges one specific consequence which McWherter argues follows from this attribution to Kant. I argue that, while it is true that Kant restricts the domain of ‘objects’ or ‘appearances’ as he calls them to what is knowable, this does not make him an ‘anti-ontologist’.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation