This paper provides a detailed analysis of how, according to Kant, the moral badness of some third parties’ actions can be established with certainty (by anyone, not only by the agent’s own conscience or by God). This account helps clarify why Kant affirms that some forms of wrongdoing (of which there are a “multitude of woeful examples”) can be demonstrated to be immoral, while excluding the possibility of proving the moral goodness of any action. The paper concludes by arguing that (...) the possible certainty of judgements imputing immorality to actions of others is not rational but rather moral. (shrink)

In his third essay on earthquakes, Kant refers to “Pater Bina’s” electric interpretation of seismic phenomena. Although not a distinguished scholar, and maybe for that reason frequently confused with a certain “Father Isidore Binet”, Bina was nevertheless a noteworthy author. A Cassinese benedictine, Andrea Bina was a philosopher interested in sciences just like Kant; he studied Newton, translated Wolff, invented a seismoscope and was appreciated by his contemporaries at home and beyond the Alps. Kant’s laconic quotation, followed by a value (...) judgement regarding only Bina’s “audacity”, raises some questions, including, in primis those about the meaning of his hasty judgment. A plausible well-grounded answer should be looked for in the bio-bibliographical outline of the neglected author and in the perusal of his writings. The analysis of Bina’s Ragionamento sopra le cagioni de’ terremoti (1751) contributes to our knowledge of the eighteenth-century cultural background and helps us understand the degree of knowledge of the seismic phenomena acquired by men who – amidst many difficulties and hindered by the limits of their science – could only rely on secondhand data often imbued with misconceptions. Comparing Bina’s work – although indirectly – with Kant’s Fortgesetzte Betrachtung der seit einiger Zeit wahrgenommenen Erderschütterungen (1756) may help bring to light some convergences, as well as differences, which might be of use in clarifying some peculiarities of the Prussian Naturforscher. (shrink)

In this article, I explicate Kant’s position on the wide right to abortion. That is, I explore the extent to which, according to Kant’s practical philosophy, abortion is punishable, even if it involves an unjust infringement of the right to life. By focusing on the state’s right to punish, rather than the right to life or the onset of personhood, I use Kant to expose a novel range of issues and questions about the legal status of abortion (and criminal punishment (...) more generally). The article is divided into four sections. In the first, I lay the groundwork for Kant’s theory of rights and briefly canvass some of the literature on Kantian approaches to abortion. In the second, I look at Kant’s discussion of equivocal rights. In the third, I turn to Kant’s discussions of capital punishment and suicide. In the fourth, I examine Kant on honor killings, and I use his position on infanticide in order to extrapolate and explain his ideas about the right to punish in the context of abortion. (shrink)

Alois Riehl was one of the few Kantian-inspired philosophers of the late nineteenth and early twentieth century who argued for a realist approach to Kant’s original doctrine. He therefore rejected prevailing idealist reconstructions and attempted to establish a view of Kant as an important forerunner of what he programmatically called ‘critical realism.’ In the present paper it will be shown what this exactly meant for the interpretation of Kant’s and especially Riehl’s own critique of idealism as a systematic position. In (...) particular, it is stated that anti-idealism in Riehlian terms amounts to a ‘realistic rehabilitation’ of Kantian things-in-themselves. Furthermore, some connections are drawn to early-twentieth century American realism. (shrink)

In this article I intend to justify six theses: (1) Temporal becoming is founded in an intuition-form of self-intuition, whereas physical space-time is independent of any form of intuition; (2) communicable thoughts are, as Kant says, products of self-consciousness; (3) both roots of idealism are connected by the tensed form of predication; (4) the thinking subject is, as Kant says, an appearance for itself; (5) the subject has, in virtue of this nature, the capacity of mental causality; and (6) mental (...) causality is a sufficient basis for a Kantian “causality from freedom”. (shrink)

Based on a comparison of various sources, such as different editions, correspondence, reviews, and lecture transcripts, it is shown that Ludwig Heinrich Jakob’s Outline of the General Logic and Critical Elements of Metaphysics in General uses one or more transcripts of Kant’s Logic Lectures as a source. In addition to the thus far known texts by Kiesewetter and Hippel, Jakob’s textbook should therefore also be added to the list of secondary transmissions of Kant’s Logic Lectures.

It is well known that Kant connects judgment and feeling in the third Critique. However, the precise relationship between these two faculties remains virtually unexplored, in large part due to the unpopularity of Kant’s faculty psychology. This paper considers why, for Kant, judgment and feeling go together, arguing that he had good philosophical reasons for forging this connection. The discussion begins by situating these faculties within Kant’s mature faculty psychology. While the ‘power of judgment’ [Urteilskraft] is fundamentally reflective, feeling [Gefühl] (...) reveals itself as essentially non-discursive. Their systematic connection emerges through the principle of purposiveness [Zweckmäßigkeit], which the former legislates for the latter. I claim that we must understand this notion in terms of the suitability of the faculties for each other, as displayed in mere reflection. That is, we can only recognize the fitness of two things for each other through feeling, which, in turn, is the only way that we can engage in the activity of merely reflecting judgment. I conclude by gesturing at an even further way in which judgment and feeling are related, based on their mutual role in orienting all of the faculties of the human mind. (shrink)

In the Dialectic of the first Critique, Kant claims that a highest being is the transcendental ideal of speculative reason. However, the Canon of the Doctrine of Method presents the highest good as an ideal of both the speculative and the practical use of reason. In this paper, I argue (1) that the highest good is the ideal of the unity of reason – unlike the ideal in the Dialectic – insofar as (2) the highest good serves both the speculative (...) and the practical employment of reason. Accordingly, I also argue that (3) these two employments are complementary, not alternative. Kant’s argument for the ideal of the highest good in the Canon shows that the unity of reason combines the two lawful employments of reason. In order to be reason’s highest ideal, this ideal cannot just mirror the demands of speculative reason – it must also involve the other fundamental employment of reason, i. e., the practical. This highest standpoint cannot be merely speculative but must be moral as well: not just a highest ideal, but also a good (the highest good). (shrink)

According to Kant, concepts can be used in three different ways, i.e. an empirical (= pre-philosophical) use, a transcendentally real (= philosophically inadequate) use, and a transcendentally ideal (= philosophically reasonable) use. Regarding the concept of the world as a whole, however, Kant misrepresents the empirical meaning and therefore overlooks the transcendentally ideal understanding of “everything”. Along this guiding line, the paper defends Kant’s program of showing that spatiotemporal objects are conditioned by subjective, non-empirical conditions against the charge that it (...) is inconsistent with Kant’s alleged solution of the antinomies. It turns out that Kant’s program is consistent both with ontological realism about the world and with empirical realism about, e.g., the Big Bang. The remaining problem is how to formalize in modal logic unrestricted quantification in its transcendentally ideal usage. (shrink)

The article analyzes volume 19, 1793, of Neueste Critische Nachrichten, in which an anonymous review of Kant’s Religion within the boundaries of mere reason was published. Evidence is presented to establish that the review was authored by Samuel Bernhard Wilcke, a young lecturer at the University of Greifswald, who passed away the following year. After examining Wilcke’s Essay of invitation to his lectures on Kantian philosophy, the review itself is commented upon. Finally, the reviewer’s critique is related to Kant’s reply (...) in the Preface to the second edition of the Religion. (shrink)

Recently, Uriah Kriegel and Mark Timmons have suggested a “phenomenology of Kantian Respect for Persons”. They offer a reconstruction of Kant’s own account of the phenomenology of respect for persons as well as a refinement of their own. I shall argue that at least with regard to their reconstruction of Kant’s account, they do not succeed. There are a number of shortcomings, the most grievous of which is that Kant does offer a detailed phenomenology of respect in his second Critique (...) which Kriegel and Timmons, however, pay no attention to. (shrink)

The article gathers five new autographed testimonies from Kant’s life: a dedication copy to Hasse, a fragment on plagiarism, a letter of office from the second rectorate (1788), and two album-amicorum entries with a Persius quotation via Alexander Pope.

This miscellany reports on a newly found dedication copy of Kant’s Religion within the Boundaries of mere Reason (1793) to his dear friend and former student Carl Gottlieb Fischer.