David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Continent 1 (2):94-101 (2011)
In the Kritik der reinen Vernunft (1781) Kant introduced the transcendental method on a precarious footing and he never shied away from the fact that the transcendental method is structured, and I mean it in the most direct sense possible, aporetically. The aporetic element, the unstable core within Kantian thought, is the distinction between phenomenal and noumenal content in the chapter entitled "On the ground of the distinction [Unterscheidung] of all objects [Gegenstände] in general into phenomena and noumena" (Kant A236/B295-A260/B315). This distinction is noteworthy for introducing into the philosophical tradition the notion of the thing-in-itself [Ding-an-sich]. Depending on your interests this is either the most profound or absurd of ideas in our tradition. I prefer to think of it as the most productive notion in our tradition. We can see its generative function at work almost immediately when it spurred the German idealists into thinking obscenely ingenious thoughts, but the phenomenal-noumenal distinction, hereafter the aporetic distinction, remains an ever-persistent aporia for all continental thinking after Kant. In this article I want to focus on how the aporetic distinction functions in its generative capacity with an emphasis on its ontological rather than epistemological register. Considered as such I claim that it is possible to identify in the aporetic distinction a generative capacity (or logic or function) that is intrinsic to both it and all thought responding to it including, or perhaps especially, the speculative responses.
|Keywords||speculative realism continental philosophy|
|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
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Paul Ennis (2011). Continental Realism. Zero Books.
Gabriele Gava (2015). Kant's Synthetic and Analytic Method in the Critique of Pure Reason and the Distinction Between Philosophical and Mathematical Syntheses. European Journal of Philosophy 23 (3):728-749.
Simon Critchley (1997). What is Continental Philosophy? International Journal of Philosophical Studies 5 (3):347 – 363.
Martha I. Gibson (2011). A Revolution in Method, Kant's “Copernican Hypothesis”, and the Necessity of Natural Laws. Kant-Studien 102 (1):1-21.
Ash Gobar (1988). Erklärung and Begründung in Kantian Epistemology. Philosophy Research Archives 14:343-358.
Emily Carson (2004). Metaphysics, Mathematics and the Distinction Between the Sensible and the Intelligible in Kant's Inaugural Dissertation. Journal of the History of Philosophy 42 (2):165-194.
Rae Langton (1998). Kantian Humility: Our Ignorance of Things in Themselves. Oxford University Press.
Theodore Di Maria Jr (2002). Kant's View of the Self In the First Critique. Idealistic Studies 32 (3):191-202.
Paul Ennis (2011). The Transcendental Core of Correlationism. Cosmos and History: The Journal of Natural and Social Philosophy 7 (1):37-48.
Seung-Kee Lee (2009). The Synthetic a Priori in Kant and German Idealism. Archiv für Geschichte der Philosophie 91 (3):288-328.
Gaven Kerr (2011). Kant's Transcendental Idealism. International Philosophical Quarterly 51 (2):195-222.
Adi Ophir (2001). How to Take Aim at the Heart of the Present and Remain Analytic. International Journal of Philosophical Studies 9 (3):401 – 415.
Andrew Botterell (2009). A Primer on the Distinction Between Justification and Excuse. Philosophy Compass 4 (1):172-196.
Added to index2012-01-08
Total downloads46 ( #88,954 of 1,793,158 )
Recent downloads (6 months)6 ( #137,784 of 1,793,158 )
How can I increase my downloads?