Defending the Traditional Interpretations of Kant’s Formula of a Law of Nature

Theoria 66 (158):76-102 (2019)
Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
Abstract
In this paper I defend the traditional interpretations of Kant’s Formula of a Law of Nature from recent attacks leveled by Faviola Rivera-Castro, James Furner, Ido Geiger, Pauline Kleingeld and Sven Nyholm. After a short introduction, the paper is divided into four main sections. In the first, I set out the basics of the three traditional interpretations, the Logical Contradiction Interpretation, the Practical Contradiction Interpretation and the Teleological Contradiction Interpretation. In the second, I examine the work of Geiger, Kleingeld and Nyholm: these three commentators reject the traditional interpretations entirely, but I argue that this rejection is ill-founded. In the third and fourth, I take a detailed look at Furner’s work, work in which he seeks to revise (rather than reject) the traditional interpretations. I argue that, despite his more modest aims, Furner’s revision is also ill-founded.
PhilPapers/Archive ID
KAHDTT-3
Upload history
First archival date: 2019-04-25
Latest version: 1 (2019-09-26)
View other versions
Added to PP index
2018-10-17

Total views
267 ( #18,835 of 54,385 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
53 ( #12,644 of 54,385 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads since first upload
This graph includes both downloads from PhilArchive and clicks on external links on PhilPapers.