Antinomy of Reason or Transcendental Deduction? Making Sense of the Dialectic of Pure Practical Reason
The present article focuses on the antinomy of pure practical reason and the deduction of the Highest Good in the (in the second ). Although Kant claims that the contains both the antinomy and the deduction, the boundaries dividing one from the other are at best vague. It is difficult to make out wh...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Kant-Studien 2023-03, Vol.114 (1), p.1-32 |
---|---|
1. Verfasser: | |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | The present article focuses on the antinomy of pure practical reason and the deduction of the Highest Good in the
(in the second
). Although Kant claims that the
contains both the antinomy and the deduction, the boundaries dividing one from the other are at best vague. It is difficult to make out where the antinomy of practical reason ends and where the deduction begins. To locate both and to distinguish one from the other (with special attention paid to the modality of the Highest Good) are the chief aims of this article. Additionally but no less importantly, I show, against the line of criticism originally traceable to Schopenhauer, that the antinomy of practical reason amounts to more than a reflection of Kant’s “architectonic obsession.” Not only does the antinomy of practical reason correspond to a genuine dialectical problem in the
, but it also shares a fundamental (even if not immediately apparent) similarity with the antinomy of pure speculative reason. Finally, I consider Kant’s transcendental deduction of the Highest Good against the backdrop of his other deductions, especially the deduction of the categories in the
, and defend it against the charge of potential circularity. |
---|---|
ISSN: | 0022-8877 1613-1134 |
DOI: | 10.1515/kant-2022-2040 |