Two lines of argument with which kant defends the distinction between thought and intuition are examined. It is argued that attempts to establish thought and intuition as separate faculties on the basis of the immediacy and singularity of intuitions and the mediacy and generality of concepts fail. Kant's second way of making out the distinction is a transcendental account of the possibility of an intellect like ours. He argues that it is a fundamental characteristic of the human intellect that it (...) is not intuitive and that we can be brought into relation with objects only through an intuitive faculty distinct from the faculty of conceptual representation. This line of argument is reconstructed from kant's correspondence and the "critique of judgment", And it is argued that it represents "a" plausible kantian response to criticisms of his distinction. (shrink)

The essay examines kant's treatment of mechanisms and mechanical science in the major works of kant's critical period. it is argued that kant's conception of mechanism as a science must be understood through the distinctive elements the critical idea of nature developed in the "critique of pure reason" and the "critique of judgement". rather than appearing as a champion of the sufficiency of classical mechanics, kant emerges as one puzzled about the very intelligibility of the basic concepts of a mechanical (...) science. he ultimately maintains that the coherence of mechanical science derives from the regulative idea of systematic unity. (shrink)