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
Abstract
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
SCHROD-14
Revision history
First archival date: 2018-11-14
Latest version: 4 (2018-12-06)
View upload history
References found in this work BETA

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Added to PP index
2018-08-12

Total views
122 ( #23,953 of 43,016 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
58 ( #10,981 of 43,016 )

How can I increase my downloads?

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