David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Journal of the History of Philosophy 41 (2):209-229 (2003)
This essay partly builds on and partly criticizes a striking idea of Dieter Henrich. Henrich argues that Kant's distinction in the first Critique between the question of fact (quid facti) and the question of law (quid juris) provides clues to the argumentative structure of a philosophical "Deduction". Henrich suggests that the unity of apperception plays a role analogous to a legal factum. By contrast, I argue, first, that the question of fact in the first Critique is settled by the Metaphysical Deduction, which establishes the purity of origin of the Categories, and, second, that in the second Critique, the relevant factum is the Fact of Reason, which amounts to the fact that the Moral Law is pure in origin.
|Keywords||Henrich deduction transcendental deduction metaphysical deduction fact of reason factum metaphor legal metaphor Kant quid facti|
|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
Konstantin Pollok (2008). 'An Almost Single Inference' – Kant's Deduction of the Categories Reconsidered. Archiv für Geschichte der Philosophie 90 (3):323-345.
Melissa McBay Merritt (2006). Science and the Synthetic Method of the Critique of Pure Reason. Review of Metaphysics 59 (3):517-539.
Nathan Bauer (2010). Kant's Subjective Deduction. British Journal for the History of Philosophy 18 (3):433-460.
A. B. Dickerson (2003). Kant on Representation and Objectivity. Cambridge University Press.
Christian Klotz & Soraya Nour (2007). The Legitimating Fact in the Transcendental Deduction of the Categories: On Dieter Henrich's Reading of Kant. Kriterion 3 (se):0-0.
Dieter Henrich (1982). The Proof-Structure of Kant's Transcendental Deduction. In Ralph Charles Sutherland Walker (ed.), Kant on Pure Reason. Oxford University Press. 640 - 659.
Robert Hanna (2011). Kant's Non-Conceptualism, Rogue Objects, and The Gap in the B Deduction. International Journal of Philosophical Studies 19 (3):399 - 415.
Curtis Bowman (2003). A Deduction of Kant's Concept of the Highest Good. Journal of Philosophical Research 28:45-63.
Michael Barker (2001). The Proof Structure of Kant's A-Deduction. Kant-Studien 92 (3):259-282.
Anil Gomes (2010). Is Kant's Transcendental Deduction of the Categories Fit for Purpose? Kantian Review 15 (2):118-137.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads197 ( #3,190 of 1,099,910 )
Recent downloads (6 months)46 ( #2,032 of 1,099,910 )
How can I increase my downloads?