This book offers a radically new account of the development and structure of the central arguments of Kant's Critique of Pure Reason: the defense of the objective validity of such categories as substance, causation, and independent existence. Paul Guyer makes far more extensive use than any other commentator of historical materials from the years leading up to the publication of the Critique and surrounding its revision, and he shows that the work which has come down to us is the result (...) of some striking and only partially resolved theoretical tensions. Kant had originally intended to demonstrate the validity of the categories by exploiting what he called 'analogies of appearance' between the structure of self-knowledge and our knowledge of objects. The idea of a separate 'transcendental deduction', independent from the analysis of the necessary conditions of empirical judgements, arose only shortly before publication of the Critique in 1781, and distorted much of Kant's original inspiration. Part of what led Kant to present this deduction separately was his invention of a new pattern of argument - very different from the 'transcendental arguments' attributed by recent interpreters to Kant - depending on initial claims to necessary truth. (shrink)

Hence, there is still controversy over which of the two versions of the deduction deserves priority and whether indeed any distinction between them can be maintained that would go beyond questions of presentation and involve the structure of the proof itself. Schopenhauer and Heidegger held that the first edition alone fully expresses Kant's unique philosophy, while Kant himself, as well as many other Kantians, have only seen a difference in the method of presentation.

Karl Ameriks here collects his most important essays to provide a uniquely detailed and up-to-date analysis of Kant's main arguments in all three major areas of his work: theoretical philosophy (Critique of Pure Reason), practical philosophy (Critique of Practical Reason), and aesthetics (Critique of Judgment). Guiding the volume is Ameriks's belief that one cannot properly understand any one of these Critiques except in the context of the other two. The essays can be read individually, but read together they offer a (...) comprehensive guide to the main themes of the most influential of all modern philosophical systems. (shrink)

This _Companion_ provides an authoritative survey of the whole range of Kant’s work, giving readers an idea of its immense scope, its extraordinary achievement, and its continuing ability to generate philosophical interest. Written by an international cast of scholars Covers all the major works of the critical philosophy, as well as the pre-critical works Subjects covered range from mathematics and philosophy of science, through epistemology and metaphysics, to moral and political philosophy.

Where the possibility of metaphysics as a science is concerned, Kant assigns the exact sciences the function of an exemplar; for these disciplines have long been well established on "the secure path of a science." Accordingly, in the Prolegomena Kant explicitly addresses the question "How is metaphysics possible as a science?" by way of the questions "How is pure mathematics possible?" and "How is pure natural science possible?" Moreover, all these questions arise directly out of the main transcendental question: "How (...) are synthetic judgments a priori possible?" The deplorable situation of the metaphysics of the day would have been entirely attributable to misappraisal of this central transcendental question. (shrink)

Die philosophische Methode ist im 17. und fruhen 18. Jahrhundert vom Vorbild der mathematischen Methode bestimmt. Die Arbeit zeigt, dass es sich dabei um unterschiedliche Methodenmodelle handelt. Diese fuhren dazu, dass sich bei Descartes, Leibniz und Wolff unter philosophischer Analysis sehr unterschiedliche Methodenansatze entwickeln. Sie bilden den historischen Hintergrund fur das analytische Programm und den Begriff der Aufklarung, was in der bisherigen Forschung oft ubersehen wurde. The philosophical method in the 17th and early 18th centuries was governed by the example (...) of the mathematical method. This work shows that there were however varying types of methods concerned. The result was that when subjected to philosophical analysis, in their works Descartes, Leibniz and Wolff developed very different approaches to their methods. These constitute the historical background for the analytical agenda and the concept of Enlightenment which has often been overlooked by researchers up to now. (shrink)

Contains a brief survey of the first Critique’s Transcendental Dialectic, but it is primarily devoted to a treatment of Kant’s changing views on the fundamental question of how to arrive at a theoretical account of the unity of the world that overcomes the shortcomings of occasionalism, theories of pre-established harmony, and naïve versions of the doctrine of ‘physical influx’. It stresses that although it is very difficult to determine exactly how Kant comes to a distinctive and stable position on this (...) question, the topic is clearly of fundamental importance in all stages of his work, and throughout all of them he favours the affirmation of real interaction between finite substances. Draws on ideas and materials from lectures by Kant, and it also relies heavily on several newly found sets of notes from Kant’s lectures on metaphysics. (shrink)

Keine ausführliche Beschreibung für "Die Überwindung des mathematischen Erkenntnisideals" verfügbar.

Cf. Jardine 1974a, p. 29; chapter 6 is 'an elegant account of developments in late scholastic debating exercises' (Jardine 1974b, 33). Cited Van den Burgh, 126 n. 95 re Grotius's method. cit. Mancosu 1996, 232 n. 39.