Already a subscriber? - Login here
Not yet a subscriber? - Subscribe here

Displaying: 1-10 of 1078 documents

1. Idealistic Studies: Volume > 48 > Issue: 1
Jennifer A. Bates From the Editor
view |  rights & permissions | cited by
2. Idealistic Studies: Volume > 48 > Issue: 1
Farshid Baghai Systematic Needs of the Doctrine of Elements in Critique of Pure Reason
abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
Most interpretations of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason focus on its Doctrine of Elements, and ignore that the Doctrine of Elements needs to be grounded systematically in the Doctrine of Method. As a step toward remedying such neglect, this paper outlines the relation between the Doctrine of Elements and the Doctrine of Method within the Critique. It lays out the three systematic needs implied in the Doctrine of Elements, and shows that, in Kant’s account, these needs can be satisfied only in the Doctrine of Method. In doing so, the paper reveals the systematic dependence of the elements of cognitions on the method of cognition from pure reason.
3. Idealistic Studies: Volume > 48 > Issue: 1
Andrew Cooper Systematicity in Kant’s Third Critique
abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
Kant’s Critique of the Power of Judgment is often interpreted in light of its initial reception. Conventionally, this reception is examined in the work of Fichte, Schelling and Hegel, who found in Kant’s third Critique a new task for philosophy: the construction of an absolute, self-grounding system. This paper identifies an alternative line of reception in the work of physiologists and medical practitioners during the 1790s and early 1800s, including Kielmeyer, Reil, Girtanner and Oken. It argues that these naturalists called on Kant’s third Critique to solidify an experimental natural history that classifies organic form within a system of laws. Kant held both kinds of system in tension, which is why the third Critique remains a singular and provocative text.
4. Idealistic Studies: Volume > 48 > Issue: 1
J. Colin McQuillan Kant on Scholarship and the Public Use of Reason
abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
In “An Answer to the Question: What is Enlightenment?,” Kant defines the public use of reason as “that use which someone makes of it as a scholar before the entire public of the world of readers.” Commentators rarely note Kant’s reference to “scholarship” in this passage and, when they do, they often disagree about its meaning and significance. This paper addresses those disagreements by exploring discussions of scholarship in Kant’s logic lectures as well as in later works like The Conflict of the Faculties. These sources suggest that Kant defends a rigorous conception of scholarship, which may not be consistent with liberal and egalitarian interpretations of the public use of reason. The paper concludes that Kant’s account of the public use of reason provides only a limited defense of freedoms of speech and of the press, which is neither as liberal nor as egalitarian as other commentators have suggested.
5. Idealistic Studies: Volume > 48 > Issue: 1
Dennis Vanden Auweele The Later Schelling on Philosophical Religion and Christianity
abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
Schelling’s later philosophy (1820 onwards) was historically received as a disappointment: the once brazen Romantic and pantheist becomes a pious Christian in his old age. Indeed, Schelling’s Berlin lectures on revelation and mythology culminate in a suspicious level of Christian orthodoxy. In the last few years, a number of scholars have offered a different reading of Schelling’s Spätphilosophie, particularly by pointing out his rethinking of nature, revelation, and Christianity. In this paper, I offer a systematic reading of Schelling’s later philosophy so as to show that his views of a philosophical religion fit within the trajectory of his thought. Nevertheless, Schelling does recourse overtly hasty in (Christian) religion.
book review
6. Idealistic Studies: Volume > 48 > Issue: 1
Martin Donougho Angelica Nuzzo, Approaching Hegel’s Logic, Obliquely: Melville, Molière, Beckett
view |  rights & permissions | cited by
7. Idealistic Studies: Volume > 47 > Issue: 3
Héctor Oscar Arrese Igor The Family Right from the Background of the Fichtean Natural Right
abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
The Fichtean theory of self-consciousness and recognition, published in 1796 and 1797, must be understood in terms of the mutual formation of subjects insofar as they are rational and free beings. It is for this reason that this paper criticizes Stephen Darwall´s interpretation from the second person´s perspective. It also reconstructs the Fichtean theory of family, suggesting evidence of the relationships of recognition that structure it. In this way there are analogies between the original situation of summons and the formative relationships at the core of the family community.
8. Idealistic Studies: Volume > 47 > Issue: 3
James Furner Kant's Argument for the Formula of the End in Itself: A Logical Pluralism Interpretation
abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
One approach to Kant’s argument for the Formula of the End in Itself (FEI) takes Kant to ground FEI as a possible categorical imperative with a regressive argument that rests on a non-moral conception of rational nature. This paper presents a new, logical pluralism version of this approach. In conjunction with three other steps of argument, the logical pluralism version of the regressive argument grounds FEI by showing that an agent is rationally required to adopt a self-affirming plural standpoint, and thus to take it to have absolute worth. A logical pluralism version of the regressive argument thereby avoids three objectionable claims relied on by other versions: that (1) a rational agent must take their end to be objectively good; that (2) if an agent values their own rational nature, then they must also value others’ rational nature; and that (3) any source of value must itself be of unconditional value.
9. Idealistic Studies: Volume > 47 > Issue: 3
Christian Martin Hegel on Truth and Absolute Spirit
abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
The notion of absolute spirit, while undeniably central to Hegel’s philosophy, has been somewhat neglected in the literature. Two main lines of interpretation can be identified: a traditional metaphysical reading, according to which “absolute spirit” refers to an infinite spiritual substance, and a non-metaphysical reading, according to which it refers to activities in which human beings articulate their understanding of the principles that guide their communal life. Both types of reading are problematic exegetically as well as philosophically. This article develops an epistemological reading instead. Accordingly, “absolute spirit” refers to a kind of (self-)knowledge, which is distinct from empirical and practical knowledge. Hegel conceives of art, religion, and philosophy as species of such knowledge. While this view might seem astonishing, it can be justified by showing that it is by recourse to paradigmatic instances of artistic, religious, and philosophical activity that the otherwise indefinable notion of truth is fixed.
10. Idealistic Studies: Volume > 47 > Issue: 3
Jane F. McDonnell Quantum Monadology
abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
This paper is about the relationship between actuality and potentiality. Two paradigms are considered: (1) Leibnizian possible worlds, which is rooted in classical physics; and (2) the consistent histories quantum theory of Griffiths, Gell-Mann, Hartle, and Omnès. I explore an interesting connection between these two paradigms. The analysis goes beyond a comparison of classical and quantum physics to consider how modern physics might be integrated into a more comprehensive view of the world, in the spirit of Leibniz’s own philosophy.