Advertisement

Human Studies

, Volume 32, Issue 2, pp 201–223 | Cite as

On the Division Between Reason and Unreason in Kant

  • Motohide SajiEmail author
Research Paper
  • 188 Downloads

Abstract

This article examines Kant’s discussion of the division between reason and unreason in his Anthropology from a Pragmatic Point of View. On the one hand, Kant says that there is a normative, clear, and definite division between reason and unreason. On the other hand, Kant offers three arguments showing that we cannot draw such a division. First, we cannot explain the normative grounds for the division. Second, both reason and unreason are present in everyone to varying degrees in different ways. Third, Kant invalidates the division as such by characterizing what should be more incomprehensible than an extreme case of unreason as also being a rational way of life.

Keywords

Kant Reason Rule-following Unreason 

Notes

Acknowledgments

I would like to thank Andrew Domondon as well as the anonymous reviewers for Human Studies for helpful comments on earlier versions of this article. This work was partially supported by the Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research #20730107 from the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science, and Technology of Japan.

References

  1. Bell, D. (1987). The art of judgment. Mind, 96(2), 221–244.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Böhme, H., & Böhme, G. (1996). The battle of reason with the imagination. In J. Schmidt (Ed.), What is enlightenment?: Eighteenth-century answers and twentieth-century questions (pp. 426–452). Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  3. Brandom, R. B. (1994). Making it explicit: Reasoning, representing, and discursive commitment. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Butts, R. E. (1984). Kant and the double government methodology. Boston: Reidel.Google Scholar
  5. Clark, D. L. (2001). Kant’s aliens: The Anthropology and its others. The New Centennial Review, 1(2), 201–289.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Crowe, M. J. (1986). The extraterrestrial life debate, 1750–1900: The idea of a plurality of worlds from Kant to Lowell. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  7. David-Ménard, M. (2000). Kant’s “An essay on the maladies of the mind” and observations on the feeling of the beautiful and the sublime. Hypatia, 15(4), 82–98.Google Scholar
  8. Davidson, D. (2006). The essential Davidson. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  9. Deligiorgi, K. (2002). Universality, publicity, and communication: Kant’s conception of reason. European Journal of Philosophy, 10(2), 143–159.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Derrida, J. (1980). Cogito and the history of madness. In Writing and difference (A. Bass, Trans., pp. 31–63). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  11. Foucault, M. (2006). History of madness (J. Khalfa & J. Murphy, Trans.). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  12. Garver, N. (1994). This complicated life: Essays on Wittgenstein. Chicago: Open Court.Google Scholar
  13. Glock, H.-J. (1996). A Wittgenstein dictionary. Oxford: Blackwell.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Goodman, N. (1983). Fact, fiction and forecast (4th ed.). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  15. Guyer, P. (Ed.). (2006). The Cambridge companion to Kant and modern philosophy. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  16. Jaspers, K. (1977). Strindberg and Van Gogh: An attempt at a pathographic analysis with reference to parallel cases of Swedenborg and Hölderlin (O. Grunow & D. Woloshin, Trans.). Tucson: University of Arizona Press.Google Scholar
  17. Kant, I. (1766/1992). Dreams of a spirit-seer elucidated by dreams of metaphysics (D. Walford, Trans.). In D. Walford (Ed.), Theoretical philosophy 1755–1770 (pp. 301–359). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  18. Kant, I. (1783/1950). Prolegomena to any future metaphysics (P. Carus, Trans., revised by L. W. Beck). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
  19. Kant, I. (1785/1996). Groundwork of the metaphysics of morals (M. J. Gregor, Trans.). In M. J. Gregor (Ed.), Practical philosophy (pp. 37–108). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  20. Kant, I. (1787/1998). Critique of pure reason (P. Guyer & A. W. Wood, Trans.). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  21. Kant, I. (1790/1987). Critique of judgment (W. S. Pluhar, Trans.). Indianapolis: Hackett.Google Scholar
  22. Kant, I. (1793/1991). On the common saying: “This may be true in theory, but it does not apply in practice” (H. B. Nisbet, Trans.). In H. Reiss (Ed.), Political writings (pp. 61–92). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  23. Kant, I. (1797a/1996). The metaphysics of morals (M. J. Gregor, Trans.). In M. J. Gregor (Ed.), Practical philosophy (pp. 353–604). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  24. Kant, I. (1797b/1996). On a supposed right to lie from philanthropy (M. J. Gregor, Trans.). In M. J. Gregor (Ed.), Practical philosophy (pp. 605–616). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  25. Kant, I. (1798/2006). Anthropology from a pragmatic point of view (R. B. Louden, Trans.). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  26. Kant, I. (1800/1988). Logic (R. Hartman & W. Schwartz, Trans.). New York: Dover.Google Scholar
  27. Kant, I. (1902). Kants gesammelte schriften. Berlin: Walter de Gruyer.Google Scholar
  28. Kripke, S. (1982). Wittgenstein on rules and private language. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  29. Louden, R. B. (2000). Kant’s impure ethics. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  30. Nagel, T. (1974). What is it like to be a bat? The Philosophical Review, 83(4), 435–450.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. O’Neill, O. (1992). Vindicating reason. In P. Guyer (Ed.), The Cambridge companion to Kant (pp. 280–308). New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Saji, M. (2009). Three aspects of the self-opacity in the empirical subject in Kant. Philosophy & Social Criticism, 35(3), 315–337.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Sass, L. A. (1992). Madness and modernism: Insanity in the light of modern art, literature, and thought. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  34. Schwyzer, H. (1990). The unity of understanding: A study in Kantian problems. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  35. Shell, S. M. (1996). The embodiment of reason: Kant on spirit, generation, and community. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  36. Wittgenstein, L. (1968). Philosophical investigations (3rd ed., G. E. M. Anscombe, Trans.). Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  37. Wittgenstein, L. (1978). Remarks on the foundations of mathematics (revised ed., G. E. M. Anscombe, Trans.). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  38. Wright, C. (2001). Rails to infinity. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.International University of JapanMinami Uonuma-shi, NiigataJapan

Personalised recommendations