Synthese 23 (1):24 - 46 (1971)
|Abstract||A demarcation between kant's general metaphysics (transcendental principles) and his special metaphysics is attempted, through a discussion of kant's three accounts of lawlikeness, 'transcendental', 'empirical' and 'metaphysical'. the distinctions are defended via a number of 'indicators' in kant's writings, and the 'looseness of fit' between the different types of lawlikeness is discussed|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Juhani Pietarinen (1974). Inductive Immodesty and Lawlikeness. Philosophy of Science 41 (2):196-198.
Alice Drewery (2005). The Logical Form of Universal Generalizations. Australasian Journal of Philosophy 83 (3):373 – 393.
Oliver Sensen (2011). Kant's Conception of Inner Value. European Journal of Philosophy 19 (2):262-280.
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.
C. Z. Elgin (1980). Lawlikeness and the End of Science. Philosophy of Science 47 (1):56-68.
Hein van den Berg (2011). Kant's Conception of Proper Science. Synthese 183 (1):7-26.
Hein Berg (2011). Kant's Conception of Proper Science. Synthese 183 (1):7-26.
N. Jardine (2003). Hermeneutic Strategies in Gerd Buchdahl's Kantian Philosophy of Science. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 34 (1):183-208.
John H. Zammito (2008). Kant's "Naturalistic" History of Mankind? Some Reservations. Journal of the Philosophy of History 2 (1):29-62.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads39 ( #34,698 of 722,837 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #60,541 of 722,837 )
How can I increase my downloads?