Repliek op de kritiek van de Boer, Blomme, van den Berg en Spigt

Tijdschrift Voor Filosofie 80 (2):363-378 (2018)
Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
In this article, I respond to critiques of my book Kant’s Radical Subjectivism: Perspectives on the Transcendental Deduction (London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2017). I address issues that are raised concerning objectivity, the nature of the object, the role of transcendental apperception and the imagination, and idealism. More in particular I respond to an objection against my reading of the necessary existence of things in themselves and their relation to appearances. I also briefly respond to a question that relates to the debate on Kantian nonconceptualism, more in particular, the question whether Kant allows animals objective intentionality. Lastly, I respond to one objection against my reading of Hegel’s critique of Kant. (The copy uploaded here is an English translation of the original Dutch version that is published in the journal.)
PhilPapers/Archive ID
Upload history
First archival date: 2018-11-14
Latest version: 5 (2020-07-31)
View other versions
Added to PP index

Total views
209 ( #22,159 of 52,808 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
52 ( #11,459 of 52,808 )

How can I increase my downloads?

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