David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Synthese 183 (1):7-26 (2011)
Kant is well known for his restrictive conception of proper science. In the present paper I will try to explain why Kant adopted this conception. I will identify three core conditions which Kant thinks a proper science must satisfy: systematicity, objective grounding, and apodictic certainty. These conditions conform to conditions codified in the Classical Model of Science. Kant’s infamous claim that any proper natural science must be mathematical should be understood on the basis of these conditions. In order to substantiate this reading, I will show that only in this way it can be explained why Kant thought (1) that mathematics has a particular foundational function with respect to the natural sciences and (2) as such secures their scientific status
|Keywords||Kant Proper science Objective grounding Mathematics|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
Andrew Chignell (2007). Kant's Concepts of Justification. Noûs 41 (1):33–63.
Willem R. de Jong & Arianna Betti (2010). The Classical Model of Science: A Millennia-Old Model of Scientific Rationality. Synthese 174 (2):185-203.
Michael Friedman (1992). Kant and the Exact Sciences. Harvard University Press.
Paul Guyer (2005). Kant's System of Nature and Freedom: Selected Essays. Oxford University Press,Clarendon ;.
William Harper (2002). Newton's Argument for Universal Gravitation. In I. Bernard Cohen & George E. Smith (eds.), The Cambridge Companion to Newton. Cambridge University Press. 174--201.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Hein van den Berg (2011). Kant's Conception of Proper Science. Synthese 183 (1):7-26.
Thomas Sturm (2001). How Not to Investigate the Human Mind: Kant on the Impossibility of Empirical Psychology. In Eric Watkins (ed.), Kant and the Sciences. Oxford University Press.
Eric Watkins (ed.) (2001). Kant and the Sciences. Oxford University Press.
Kenneth R. Westphal (1995). ‘Kant’s Proof of the Law of Inertia’. In H. Robinson (ed.), Proceedings of the 8th International Kant Congress. Marquette University Press.
Oliver Sensen (2011). Kant's Conception of Inner Value. European Journal of Philosophy 19 (2):262-280.
John H. Zammito (2008). Kant's "Naturalistic" History of Mankind? Some Reservations. Journal of the Philosophy of History 2 (1):29-62.
Edward MacKinnon (1978). The Development of Kant's Conception of Scientific Explanation. PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1978:18 - 30.
Laurence Thomas (2005). Moral Equality and Natural Inferiority. Social Theory and Practice 31 (3):379-404.
Jens Timmermann (2007). Simplicity and Authority: Reflections on Theory and Practice in Kant's Moral Philosophy. Journal of Moral Philosophy 4 (2):167-182.
Quassim Cassam (2003). Can Transcendental Epistemology Be Naturalized? Philosophy 78 (2):181-203.
Michael Friedman (2006). Kant, Skepticism, and Idealism. Inquiry 49 (1):26 – 43.
Lisa Shabel (1998). Kant on the `Symbolic Construction' of Mathematical Concepts. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 29 (4):589-621.
Thomas Teufel (2011). Kant's Non -Teleological Conception of Purposiveness. Kant-Studien 102 (2):232-252.
Houston Smit & Mark Timmons (2011). The Moral Significance of Gratitude in Kant's Ethics. Southern Journal of Philosophy 49 (4):295-320.
Added to index2011-10-04
Total downloads19 ( #128,010 of 1,696,619 )
Recent downloads (6 months)2 ( #250,163 of 1,696,619 )
How can I increase my downloads?