Journal of the History of Philosophy 48 (1):111-112 (2010)

Authors
Kevin Harrelson
Ball State University
Abstract
This volume contains ten essays that treat the relationship between Kant’s philosophy and those of his predecessors in the early modern canon. The essays divide into five pairs devoted respectively to Descartes, Leibniz, Locke, Berkeley, and Hume. In each case, the work of a prominent Kant scholar precedes a reply by an early modernist. This format provides the opportunity to reevaluate both Kant’s philosophy and those of his predecessors, the contention being that the latter “in our historical conscience” too often are read “in light of Kant’s reconstruction of their thought” .In this review, I discuss a selection of the articles in order to evaluate the extent to which they contribute to the stated historiographic aim of the volume. Each of the ten contributions provides a worthwhile read in isolation from the others, but the success they achieve in reassessing the relationship of Kantian to pre-Kantian philosophy varies significantly from essay to essay. Cumulatively, they offer an inspiring retort to the central arguments of that chapter of modern philosophy entitled “On the division of all philosophies into vorkantische and nachkantische.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1353/hph.0.0192
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 56,949
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Kant's Critique of Berkeley's Concept of Objectivity.Dina Emundts - 2008 - In Daniel Garber & Béatrice Longuenesse (eds.), Kant and the Early Moderns. Princeton University Press.
Kant's Human Solution to Hume's Problem.Wayne Waxman - 2008 - In Daniel Garber & Béatrice Longuenesse (eds.), Kant and the Early Moderns. Princeton University Press.
Kant's "I Think" Versus Descartes' "I Am a Thing That Thinks".Béatrice Longuenesse - 2008 - In Daniel Garber & Béatrice Longuenesse (eds.), Kant and the Early Moderns. Princeton University Press. pp. 9--31.
Berkeley and Kant.Kenneth P. Winkler - 2008 - In Daniel Garber & Béatrice Longuenesse (eds.), Kant and the Early Moderns. Princeton University Press.
Descartes' "I Am a Thing That Thinks" Versus Kant's "I Think".Jean-Marie Beyssade - 2008 - In Daniel Garber & Béatrice Longuenesse (eds.), Kant and the Early Moderns. Princeton University Press.
Kant's Critique of the Leibnizian Philosophy : Contra the Leibnizians, but Pro Leibniz.Anja Jauernig - 2008 - In Daniel Garber & Béatrice Longuenesse (eds.), Kant and the Early Moderns. Princeton, NJ, USA: Princeton University Press. pp. 41-63 (and 214-223 notes).
What Leibniz Really Said?Daniel Garber - 2008 - In Daniel Garber & Béatrice Longuenesse (eds.), Kant and the Early Moderns. Princeton University Press.
Should Hume Have Been a Transcendental Idealist?Don Garrett - 2008 - In Daniel Garber & Béatrice Longuenesse (eds.), Kant and the Early Moderns. Princeton University Press. pp. 193--208.
Kant's Transcendental Idealism and the Limits of Knowledge : Kant's Alternative to Locke's Physiology.Paul Guyer - 2008 - In Daniel Garber & Béatrice Longuenesse (eds.), Kant and the Early Moderns. Princeton University Press. pp. 79-99.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2010-01-16

Total views
41 ( #246,460 of 2,409,860 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #541,271 of 2,409,860 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes