In Anders Moe Rasmussen & Markus Gabriel (eds.), German Idealism Today. De Gruyter. pp. 3-26 (2017)

Authors
Katerina Deligiorgi
University of Sussex
Abstract
(2017) 'Interest and Agency', in Gabriel, Markus and Rasmussen, Anders Moe (eds.) German Idealism Today. De Guyter Verlag. Abstract: Undeterred by Kant’s cautionary advice, contemporary defenders of free will advance substantive metaphysical theses in support of their views. This is perhaps unsurprising given the mixed reception of Kant’s solution of the conflict between freedom and natural necessity, which is supposed to vindicate reason’s withdrawal from speculation. Kant argues that neither libertarians nor determinists can win, because they deal with concepts of unrestricted scope, and proposes instead to regiment the reference conditions of each concept and to specify the domain, ‘world’, proper to each. However, the precise character of this solution, its conceptual and metaphysical commitments, continues to be a matter of controversy among Kant scholars. In particular, there is ever-renewed concern about the incipient dualism of the position. Although I will be examining some of this material, my primary aim in this paper is not to make a contribution to the interpretative debate about the antinomy. Rather, I want to draw on two lessons from Kant’s treatment of the antinomy to argue for the importance of a certain way of putting the problem of human freedom.
Keywords Kant, idealism, freedom agency, spontaneity
Categories (categorize this paper)
Buy the book Find it on Amazon.com
DOI 10.1515/9783110498615-001
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy

 PhilArchive page | Other versions
External links

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.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

The 'Ought' and the 'Can'.Katerina Deligiorgi - 2018 - Con-Textos Kantianos 8:324-347.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

The Phenomenology of Agency.Tim Bayne - 2008 - Philosophy Compass 3 (1):182-202.
What Rights (If Any) Do Children Have.Harry Brighouse - 2002 - In David Archard & Colin M. Macleod (eds.), The Moral and Political Status of Children. Oxford University Press. pp. 31--52.
The Problem of Original Agency.Don Berkich - 2017 - Southwest Philosophy Review 33 (1):75-82.
Agency and Two‐Way Powers.Maria Alvarez - 2013 - Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 113 (1pt1):101-121.
Structures of Agency: Essays.Michael E. Bratman - 2007 - Oxford University Press.
Might Does Not Make Right.Bruce B. Suttle - 2010 - Think 9 (25):89-92.
Development Officers and Discrimination.William L. Barthelemy & Sheldon Wein - 1996 - Journal of Philosophical Research 21:433-443.
Oxford Studies in Agency and Responsibility.Shoemaker David (ed.) - forthcoming - Oxford University Press.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2017-09-30

Total views
45 ( #221,289 of 2,403,084 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
8 ( #88,980 of 2,403,084 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes