The Loss of the Great Outdoors: Neither Correlationist Gem nor Kantian Catastrophe

Perspectives 7 (1):14-27 (2017)
Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
Abstract
This article concerns Quentin Meillassoux’s claim that Kant’s revolution is responsible for philosophy’s catastrophic loss of the ‘great outdoors’, of our knowledge of things as they are in themselves. I argue that Meillassoux’s critique of Kant’s ‘weak’ correlationism and his defence of ‘strong’ correlationism are predicated on a fallacious argument and the traditional, but in my view mistaken, metaphysical interpretation of Kant’s transcendental distinction. I draw on Henry Allison’s interpretation of Kant’s idealism to argue that when Kant’s transcendental distinction is understood epistemologically we can avoid the fallacious reasoning underpinning Meillassoux’s argument, and at the very least attenuate his concerns about the ‘Kantian catastrophe’.
Keywords
No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories
No categories specified
(categorize this paper)
ISBN(s)
PhilPapers/Archive ID
LOVTLO-4
Upload history
Archival date: 2018-12-09
View other versions
Added to PP index
2018-07-11

Total views
35 ( #48,233 of 52,929 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
6 ( #49,113 of 52,929 )

How can I increase my downloads?

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