Advertisement

Kant, Hegel and the Historicity of Pure Reason

Chapter
  • 239 Downloads
Part of the Palgrave Handbooks in German Idealism book series (PHGI)

Abstract

Kant rightly insisted upon distinguishing between issues of process or generation (aetiology) and issues of validity or justification; processes or sequences of events may contribute to the validity or justification of some products (such as judgments or claims), though not merely insofar as they occur, but insofar as they also satisfy relevant normative conditions or criteria. This is a key reason why empirical methods or evidence cannot suffice for Kant’s critique of rational judgment and justification, across his Critical corpus, and why Kant’s Critical philosophy requires specifically transcendental reflection, investigation and proof. Hence it is surprising that the Critique of Pure Reason closes with a chapter which is only a place-holder for some future investigation, namely, into ‘the history of pure reason’. Why and how such a chapter is a proper topic of Critical philosophy is examined, in part to show that, and how, Hegel’s 1807 Phenomenology of Spirit provides exactly what Kant’s place-holder requires, and does so by responding to the two most radical challenges to Kant’s Critical philosophy: that no such Critical reflection is required, or that any such Critical reflection is humanly impossible.

Keywords

Critical philosophy Meta-critique of reason Historicity of reason Rational justification Judgment Transcendental proof Objective deduction Subjective deduction Kant Hegel G.E. Schulze Hamman Jacobi Herder 

Bibliography

  1. Adickes, Erich. 1896. German Kantian Bibliography: Bibliography of Writings by and on Kant Which Have Appeared in Germany up to the End of 1887. Boston: Ginn.Google Scholar
  2. Beiser, Frederick C. 1987. The Fate of Reason: German Philosophy from Kant to Fichte. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  3. Bird, Graham. 2006. The Revolutionary Kant: A Commentary on the Critique of Pure Reason. Chicago: Open Court.Google Scholar
  4. Buhle, Johann Gottlieb. 1801. “Vorrede.” In Sextus Empirikus oder der Skepticismus der Griechen, Aus dem Griechischen mit Anmerkungen und Abhandlungen, herausgegeben von Johann Gottlieb Buhle, iii–viii. Lemgo: Meyer.Google Scholar
  5. Bunsen, Christian Carl Josias Freiherr von. 1868, 1869, 1871. Aus seinen Briefen und nach eigener Erinnerung, geschildert von seiner Witwe, deutsche Ausgabe, durch neue Mittheiltungen vermehrt von F. Nippold, 3 vols. Leipzig: Brockhaus.Google Scholar
  6. Butts, Robert. 1988. “The Grammar of Reason: Hamann’s Challenge to Kant.” Synthese 75: 251–283.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Collins, Ardis. 2013. Hegel’s Phenomenology: The Dialectical Justification of Philosophy’s First Principles. Montreal and Kingston: McGill-Queens University Press.Google Scholar
  8. di Giovanni, George. 2000. “The Facts of Consciousness.” In Between Kant and Hegel: Texts in the Development of Post-Kantian Idealism, edited by Harris and di Giovanni, 2nd rev. ed., 2–50. Cambridge, MA: Hackett Publishing.Google Scholar
  9. Düsing, Klaus. 1973. “Die Bedeutung des antiken Skeptizismus für Hegels Kritik der sinnlichen Gewißheit.” Hegel-Studien 8: 119–130.Google Scholar
  10. Düsing, Klaus, ed. 1988. Schellings und Hegels erste absolute Metaphysik (1801–1802). Zusammenfassende Vorlesungsnachschriften von I.P.V. Troxler. Köln: Dinter.Google Scholar
  11. Eberhard, Johann August. 1788a. “Ueber die Schranken der menschlichen Erkenntniß.” Philosophisches Magazin 1 (1): 9–29.Google Scholar
  12. Eberhard, Johann August. 1788b. “Ueber die transscendentale Aesthetik.” Philosophisches Magazin 1 (2): 117–149.Google Scholar
  13. Eberhard, Johann August. 1788c. “Ueber die logische Wahrheit, oder die transscendentale Gültigkeit der menschlichen Erkenntniß.” Philosophisches Magazin 1 (2): 150–174.Google Scholar
  14. Eberhard, Johann August. 1789a. “Weitere Anwendung der Theorie von der logischen Wahrheit oder der transscendentalen Gültigkeit der menschlichen Erkenntniß.” Philosophisches Magazin 1 (3): 243–262.Google Scholar
  15. Eberhard, Johann August. 1789b. “Ueber das Gebiet des reinen Verstandes.” Philosophisches Magazin 1 (3): 263–289.Google Scholar
  16. Eberhard, Johann August. 1789c. “Ueber den wesentlichen Unterschied der Erkenntniß durch die Sinne und durch den Verstand.” Philosophisches Magazin 1 (3): 290–306.Google Scholar
  17. Eberhard, Johann August. 1789d. “Ueber die Unterscheidung der Urtheile in analytische und synthetische.” Philosophisches Magazin 1 (3): 307–332.Google Scholar
  18. Eberhard, Johann August. 1789e. “Ausführliche Erklärung über die Absicht dieses philosophischen Magazins.” Philosophisches Magazin 1 (3): 333–339.Google Scholar
  19. Eberhard, Johann August. 1789f. “Ueber den Ursprung der menschlichen Erkenntniß.” Philosophisches Magazin 1 (4): 369–405.Google Scholar
  20. Eberhard, Johann August. 1789g. “Ueber die Antinomie der reinen Vernunft.” Philosophisches Magazin 1 (4): 469–495.Google Scholar
  21. Engels, Friedrich. 1842. Schelling und die Offenbarung. Kritik des neuesten Reaktionsversuchs gegen die freie Philosophie. Leipzig: Binder (Rpt.: MEW 41: 173–221; MEGA 1, 3: 265–314).Google Scholar
  22. Engstler, Achim. 1990. Untersuchungen zum Idealismus Salomon Maimons. Stuttgart-Bad Cannstadt: Frommann-Holzboog.Google Scholar
  23. Ferrini, Cinzia. 2009. “Reason Observing Nature.” In The Blackwell Guide to Hegel’s Phenomenology of Spirit, edited by K. R. Westphal, 92–135. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Frege, Gottlob. 1884. Grundlagen der Arithmetik. Breslau: Koebner (English translation: idem., 1953).Google Scholar
  25. Frege, Gottlob. 1893. Grundgesetze der Arithmetik. Jena: Pohle (English translation: idem., 1964).Google Scholar
  26. Frege, Gottlob. 1953. The Foundations of Arithmetic, 2nd rev. ed. Edited by J. L. Austin. New York: Harper.Google Scholar
  27. Frege, Gottlob. 1964. The Basic Laws of Arithmetic. Edited and translated by M. Furth. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  28. Fulda, Hans-Friedrich. 1975. Das Problem einer Einleitung in Hegels Wissenschaft der Logik, 2nd rev. ed. Frankfurt am Main: Klostermann.Google Scholar
  29. Götz, Johann Kaspar. 1807. Anti-Sextus, oder Über die absolute Erkenntniss von Schelling. Heidelberg: Pfæhler.Google Scholar
  30. Guyer, Paul. 1987. Kant and the Claims of Knowledge. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Hamann, Johann Gottlieb. 1784 (unpublished ms). “Metakritik über den Purismum der reinen Vernuft”.Google Scholar
  32. Hamann, Johann Gottlieb. 2007. “Metacritique on the Purism of Reason.” In Writings on Philosophy and Language, translated by K. Haynes, 205–218. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  33. Harris, Henry S., 1997. Hegel’s Ladder. 2 vols. Cambridge, MA: Hackett Publishing.Google Scholar
  34. Harris, Henry S., and George di Giovani, eds. 2000. Between Kant and Hegel: Texts in the Development of Post-Kantian Idealism, 2nd rev. ed. Cambridge, MA: Hackett Publishing.Google Scholar
  35. Hegel, G. W. F. 2009. Hegels Werk im Kontext. Edited by K. Worm. 5th Release. Berlin: InfoSoftWare.Google Scholar
  36. Heinrichs, Johannes von. 1974. Die Logik der Phänomenologie des Geistes. Bonn: Bouvier.Google Scholar
  37. Herder, Johann Gottfried von. 1787. Gott. Einige Gespräche. Gotha: Ettinger.Google Scholar
  38. Herder, Johann Gottfried von. 1799. Verstand und Erfahrung, Vernunft und Sprache. Eine Metakritik zur Kritik der reinen Vernunft. 2 vols. Wien and Prag: Haas.Google Scholar
  39. Hume, David. 1739–1740. A Treatise of Human Nature. Cited as ‘T’ by Pt.Book.§.Par. numbers, as in Hume (2000).Google Scholar
  40. Hume, David. 2000. A Treatise of Human Nature. Edited by D. F. Norton and M. J. Norton. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  41. Kant, Immanuel. 2009. Kant im Kontext III – Komplettausgabe, 2nd ed. Edited by K. Worm and S. Boeck, Release 6. Berlin: InfoSoftWare.Google Scholar
  42. Landau, Albert. 1991. Resensionen zur kantischen Philoosphie 1781–87. Bebra: Landau.Google Scholar
  43. Locke, John, 1690. An Essay Concerning Human Understanding. Edited by P. Nidditch. Oxford: The Clarendon Press, 1975. Cited as ‘Es’ by Book.Chapter.§ numbers.Google Scholar
  44. Maimon, Solomon. 1790. Versuch über die Transscendentalphilosophie. Berlin: Voss.Google Scholar
  45. Melnick, Arthur. 1989. Space, Time and Thought in Kant. Dordrecht: Kluwer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. O’Shea, James, ed. 2017. Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason: A Critical Guide. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  47. Plato. 1997a. Parmenides, 2nd rev. ed. Edited and translated by R. E. Allen. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  48. Plato. 1997b. Complete Works. Edited by J. M. Cooper, with D. S. Hutchinson. Cambridge, MA: Hackett Publishing.Google Scholar
  49. Richards, Robert. 2002. The Romantic Conception of Life: Science and Philosophy in the Age of Goethe. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Rosenberg, Jay. 2005. Accessing Kant: A Relaxed Introduction to the Critique of Pure Reason. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Schelling, Friedrich Wilhelm Joseph von. 1805. “Aphorismen zur Einleitung in die Naturphilosophie.” Jahrbücher für Medizin als Wissenschaft 1: 2–88 (Rpt. SW 1,7:140–197; HKA 1,15).Google Scholar
  52. Schulze, Gottlob Ernst. 1792. Aenesidemus: oder über die Fundamente der von dem Herrn Prof. Reinhold in Jena gelief. Elementar-Philosophie; nebst eine Verteidigung des Skeptizismus gegen die Anmassung der Vernunftkritik. Hehnstaedt, n.p. (Rpt. Berlin: Reuther & Reichard, 1911).Google Scholar
  53. Schulze, Gottlob Ernst (Anon.). 1803. “Aphorismen über das Absolute.” In Neues Museum der Philosophie und Literatur, edited by F. Bouterwek, vol. 1(2), 107–148. Leipzig. (Rpt. in Transzendentalphilosophie und Spekulation: Der Streit um die Gestallt einer Ersten Philosophie (1799–1807), edited by W. Jaeschke, Quellenband, vol. 2(1), 337–355. Hamburg, Meiner, 1993).Google Scholar
  54. Schulze, Gottlob Ernst. 2020. “Aphorisms on the Absolute,” translated and edited by K. R. Westphal, with J. Sares, and Caleb Faul, translators. (Translation of previous item; indicates original pagination). The Owl of Minerva 51. (Forthcoming).Google Scholar
  55. Seebohm, Thomas. 1972. “Der systematische Ort der Herderschen Metakritik.” Kant-Studien 63 (1): 59–73.Google Scholar
  56. Sextus Empiricus. 1933a. Against the Logicians. In Works in 4 vols., vol. 2, translated by Rev. R. G. Bury. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press (Loeb Library). Cited as ‘AL’ by Book.paragraph numbers.Google Scholar
  57. Sextus Empiricus. 1933b. Outlines of Pyrrhonism. In Works in 4 vols., vol. 1, translated by Rev. R. G. Bury. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press (Loeb Library). Cited as ‘PH’ by Book.paragraph.numbers.Google Scholar
  58. Tetens, Johann N. 1775. Über die allgemeine speculativische Philosophie. Bützow and Wismar: Boedner.Google Scholar
  59. Tetens, Johann N. 1777. Philosophische Versuche über die menschliche Natur und ihre Entwicklung. 2 vols. Leipzig: M.G. Weidmanns Erben & Reich.Google Scholar
  60. Tetens, Johann N. 1913. Über die allgemeine speculativische PhilosophiePhilosophische Versuche über die menschliche Natur und ihre Entwicklung. Edited by W. Uebele, vol. 1. Berlin: Reuther & Reichard.Google Scholar
  61. Turnbull, Robert G. 1998. The Parmenides and Plato’s Late Philosophy: Translation of and Commentary on the Parmenides with Interpretative Chapters on the Timaeus, the Theaetetus, the Sophist, and the Philebus. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.Google Scholar
  62. Westphal, Kenneth R. 1989. Hegel’s Epistemological Realism: A Study of the Aim and Method of Hegel’s Phenomenology of Spirit. Dordrecht: Kluwer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Westphal, Kenneth R. 2003. Hegel’s Epistemology: A Philosophical Introduction to the Phenomenology of Spirit. Cambridge, MA: Hackett Publishing.Google Scholar
  64. Westphal, Kenneth R., ed. 2009a. The Blackwell Guide to Hegel’s Phenomenology of Spirit. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
  65. Westphal, Kenneth R. 2009b. “Hegel’s Phenomenological Method and Analysis of Consciousness.” In The Blackwell Guide to Hegel’s Phenomenology of Spirit, edited by K.R. Westphal, 1–36. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Westphal, Kenneth R. 2013. “Hume, Empiricism and the Generality of Thought.” Dialogue: Canadian Journal of Philosophy/Revue canadienne de philosophie 52 (2): 233–270.Google Scholar
  67. Westphal, Kenneth R. 2015. “Causal Realism and the Limits of Empiricism: Some Unexpected Insights from Hegel.” HOPOS: The Journal of the International Society for the History of Philosophy of Science 5 (2): 281–317.Google Scholar
  68. Westphal, Kenneth R. 2016a. “Cognitive Psychology, Intelligence and the Realization of the Concept in Hegel’s Anti-Cartesian Epistemology.” In Hegel’s Philosophical Psychology, edited by S. Herrmann-Sinai and L. Ziglioli, 191–213. New York and London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  69. Westphal, Kenneth R. 2016b. “Back to the 3 R’s: Rights, Responsibilities and Reasoning.” SATS—Northern European Journal of Philosophy 17 (1): 21–60.Google Scholar
  70. Westphal, Kenneth R. 2017. “Kant’s Dynamical Principles: The Analogies of Experience.” In Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason: A Critical Guide, edited by J. O’Shea, 184–204. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Westphal, Kenneth R. 2018. Grounds of Pragmatic Realism: Hegel’s Internal Critique and Transformation of Kant’s Critical Philosophy. Leiden: Brill.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Westphal, Kenneth R. 2019. “Hegel’s Critique of Theoretical Spirit: Kant’s Functionalist Cognitive Psychology in Context.” In Hegel’s Philosophy of Spirit: A Critical Guide, edited by M. F. Bykova, 57–80. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Westphal, Kenneth R. 2020a. “Individuality and Human Sociality: Individualism and Our Human Zoôn Politikon.” In The Palgrave Hegel Handbook, edited by M. F. Bykova and K. R. Westphal, 133–148. London: Palgrave Macmillan (Springer Nature).Google Scholar
  74. Westphal, Kenneth R. 2020b. “Kant, Hegel and Our Fate as Zoôn Politikon.” In Hegel and Contemporary Practical Philosophy: Beyond Kantian Constructivism, edited by J. Gledhill and S. Stein, Chapter 10. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  75. Westphal, Kenneth R. 2020c. “Kant’s Analytic of Principles.” In Kant, edited by M. Timmons and S. Baiasu, Chapter 8. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  76. Westphal, Kenneth R. Forthcoming. Hegel’s Critique of Cognitive Judgment: From Naïve Realism to Understanding Causal Force.Google Scholar
  77. Wolff, Michael. 1989. “Realitätsstufen oder Entwicklung? Hegels ‘Realphilosophie’ und die Philosophie der Wissenschaften.” Hegel-Jahrbuch 8: 397–415; rev. English translation in this volume, 201–218.Google Scholar
  78. Wolff, Michael. 1995. Die Vollständigkeit der kantischen Urteilstafel. Mit einem Essay über Freges ‘Begriffsschrift. Frankfurt am Main: Klostermann.Google Scholar
  79. Wolff, Michael. 2000. “Kantische Urteilstafel und vollständige Induktion: Nachtrag zu meiner Kontroverse mit Ulrich Nortmann.” Zeitschrift für Philosophische Forschung 54 (1): 86–94.Google Scholar
  80. Wolff, Michael. 2004. “Kants Urteilstafel. Nicht nur eine Replik.” In Metaphysik und Kritik, edited by S. Doyé, M. Heinz, and U. Rameil, 109–136. Berlin: De Gruyter.Google Scholar
  81. Wolff, Michael. 2017. “How Precise is Kant’s Table of Judgments?” In Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason: A Critical Guide, edited by J. O’Shea, translated by K. R. Westphal, 83–105. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of PhilosophyBoğaziçi ÜniversitesiİstanbulTurkey

Personalised recommendations