One of the cornerstone books of Western philosophy, Critique of Pure Reason is Kant's seminal treatise, where he seeks to define the nature of reason itself and builds his own unique system of philosophical thought with an approach known as transcendental idealism. He argues that human knowledge is limited by the capacity for perception and attempts a logical designation of two varieties of knowledge: a posteriori, the knowledge acquired through experience; and a priori, knowledge not derived through experience. This accurate (...) translation by J. M. D. Meiklejohn offers a simple and direct rendering of Kant's work that is suitable for readers at all levels. (shrink)

Rae Langton offers a new interpretation and defense of Kant's doctrine of things in themselves. Kant distinguishes things in themselves from phenomena, and in so doing he makes a metaphysical distinction between intrinsic and relational properties of substances. Langton argues that his claim that we have no knowledge of things in themselves is not idealism, but epistemic humility: we have no knowledge of the intrinsic properties of substances. This interpretation vindicates Kant's scientific realism, and shows his primary/secondary quality distinction to (...) be superior even to modern-day competitors. And it answers the famous charge that Kant's tale of things in themselves is one that makes itself untellable. (shrink)

"Handle äußerlich so, daß der freie Gebrauch deiner Willkür mit der Freiheit von jedermann nach einem allgemeinen Gesetz zusammenbestehen könne." Dieses oberste Rechtsprinzip formulierte Kant im ersten Teil der "Metaphysik der Sitten", der "Rechtslehre" (1797). Bereits bei Erscheinen zog der Text die Kritik auf sich, er weise in seiner Anordnung Unstimmigkeiten auf, sei partiell unverständlich Die Neuedition bietet einen von Verderbtheiten völlig bereinigten Text, der damit erstmals in einer Fassung vorliegt, die Kants Argumentationsgang bruchlos nachvollziehbar werden lässt.

"With provocations on every page, this book is a philosophical feast. The specialist will find familiar ingredients assembled here in a perspicuous and compelling way, while the nonspecialist will discover a Husserl whose philosophy is made of flesh and blood." —Journal of the History of Philosophy In this thorough study of the full body of his writings, Donn Welton uncovers a Husserl very different from the established view. Arguing against established interpretations, The Other Husserl traces Husserl’s move from static to (...) genetic phenomenology and uses accounts of perception, discourse, subjectivity, and world to elaborate the scope of his systematic phenomenology. This serious reflection on the meaning of phenomenology is the first book in English to outline in full Husserl’s phenomenological method and to argue for its cogency. Welton’s stimulating interpretation highlights Husserl’s relevance for current philosophical debates. (shrink)

The distinction at the heart of Kant's philosophy is a metaphysical distinction: things in themselves are substances, bearers of intrinsic properties; phenomena are relational properties of substances. Kant says that things as we know them are composed "entirely of relations", by which he means forces. Kant's claim that we have no knowledge of things in themselves is not idealism, but humility: we have no knowledge of the intrinsic properties of substances. Kant has an empiricist starting-point. Human beings are receptive creatures. (...) We must be affected by the things of which we come to have knowledge. Kant believes that humility follows from this fact of receptivity. Humility does follow from receptivity, once a further premise is supplied. Kant believes that relational properties, causal powers in particular, are not reducible to intrinsic properties, and that intrinsic properties are therefore causally inert. Receptivity implies that we can have knowledge only of what can affect us. Irreducibility implies, in Kant's view, that intrinsic properties cannot affect us. Humility follows from these. This interpretation finds support in a range of critical and pre-critical writings, but there is a special focus on an early anti-Leibnizian argument for irreducibility that has considerable philosophical merit. One advantage of this interpretation is that the following famous contradiction is dissolved: things in themselves exist, and are the causes of phenomena, and we have no knowledge of them as they are in themselves. Moreover Kant's scientific realism, surprising on an idealist interpretation, makes sense. It does not conflict with Kant's claim that he makes all the qualities secondary--he means that he makes them powers, or in Locke's terms, tertiary qualities. Kant's "primary"/secondary quality distinction is superior to widely accepted alternatives, and his application of the irreducibility argument to the primary qualities challenges some current orthodoxies. Kant's commitment to the unobservables of science is permitted by his understanding of receptivity: we can have knowledge of anything that can affect us. Kant's scientific realism, and his humility, thus have a common source. (shrink)

This entirely new translation of Critique of Pure Reason by Paul Guyer and Allan Wood is the most accurate and informative English translation ever produced of this epochal philosophical text. Though its simple, direct style will make it suitable for all new readers of Kant, the translation displays a philosophical and textual sophistication that will enlighten Kant scholars as well. This translation recreates as far as possible a text with the same interpretative nuances and richness as the original.

"Lch _ke nur an, dass es gar nicMs Ungewohnliches sei, sowohl im gemeinen Gespriiche, als in den Schriften, durch Vergleichung der Gedanken, welche ein Vertasser aber seinen Gegenstand aussert, ihn sogar besser, u lIerstehen, als er sich selbst lIerstand, indem er seinen Begrilf nicht genugsam be stimmte utJd dadurch bisweilen seiner eigenen Absicht ent gegen redete oder auch dachte." Diesen Sat, aus Kanis "Kritik der, einen Vernunft" hat Husserl aut die Titelseite seines Exemplars lion Kants Hauptwerk geschrieben. Ober die Beziehungen (...) zwischen Husseds Phiinomenologie und der Kantischen und neukantianischen Philosophie ist schon Vieles ge schrieben worden. Dabei wurden die verschiedensten Auffassun gen geaussert; man kann sagen, dass hier die ganze Skala mogli cher Deutungen durchgangen wurde. Am einen Ende dieser Skala steht Hussed als Antipode Kants und jeglichen N eukantianismus, am andem Ende der N eukantianer Hussed; und dazwischen liegen nuanciertere Bilder. Offenbar sind die Beziehungen zwi schen Hussed einerseits und Kant und den Neukantianem an dererseits komplexer Natur; offenbar bestehen hier aber auch innere Beziehungen, seien sie nun positiver oder negativer Art. Es drangte Hussed selbst danach, sich iiber sein Verhaltnis zur Philosophie Kants klar auszusprechen_ Fiir sein letztes Werk, fiir die Krisis, hatte er eine Auseinandersetzung mit Kant geplant.l Bevor er aber diesen Plan ausfiihren konnte, erreichte ihn der Tod. (shrink)

-Selected papers on phenomenology offers the best work in this field by the acclaimed historian of philosophy, Karl Schuhmann (1941-2003), displaying the extraordinary range and depth of his unique scholarship, -Topics covered include the development of Husserl's concept of intentionality, Husserl and Indian philosophy, the origins of speech act theory in Munich phenomenology, the historical background of the notion of "phenomenology", and Johannes Daubert's critique of Martin Heidegger, -This book brings together, in chronological arrangement, fourteen papers. Though thirteen of these (...) were published before in some form, several were not easily accessible so far. In addition, a substantial piece of research, Schuhmann's chronicle of Johannes Daubert, appears here for the first time, -All articles have been edited in accordance with the author's wishes, and incorporate his later additions and corrections. (shrink)

Husserl und die transzendentale Intersubjektivität analyses the transcendental relevance of intersubjectivity, and argues that an intersubjective transformation of transcendental philosophy can already be found in phenomenology, especially in Husserl. Husserl eventually came to believe that an analysis of transcendental subjectivity was a conditio sine qua non for a phenomenological philosophy. Drawing on both published and unpublished manuscripts the book examines his reasons for this conviction and delivers a detailed analysis of his radical and complex concept of intersubjectivity, showing that precisely (...) his reflections on transcendental intersubjectivity are capable of clarifying his phenomenological core-concepts, thus making possible a new understanding of his philosophy. Against this background the book then attempts to establish to what extent the phenomenological approach to intersubjectivity can contribute to the current discussions of intersubjectivity. This is achieved through a systematic confrontation with the language-pragmatical positions of Apel and Habermas. Die Abhandlung untersucht die transzendentale Relevanz der Intersubjektivität und zeigt, daß eine intersubjektive Transformation der Transzendentalphilosophie schon innerhalb der Phänomenologie - besonders der Husserlschen - zu finden ist. Husserl gelangte zu der Auffassung, daß eine Analyse und Einbeziehung der transzendentalen Intersubjektivität als conditio sine qua non für eine phänomenologische Philosophie zu betrachten sei. Die Gründe, die Husserl zu dieser Überzeugung führten, werden herausgearbeitet. Dabei weist die Analyse des radikalen und komplexen Begriffs der Intersubjektivität auf, daß erst seine Überlegungen zur transzendentalen Intersubjektivität viele phänomenologische Grundbegriffe ins rechte Licht stellen können und darüber hinaus ein neues Grundverständnis seiner Phänomenologie ermöglichen. Vor diesem Hintergrund wird die Frage, inwieweit die Phänomenologie zur gegenwärtigen Intersubjektivitätsdiskussion beitragen kann, durch eine systematische Auseinandersetzung mit der sprachpragmatischen Intersubjektivitätstheorie von Apel und Habermas beantwortet. (shrink)