Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Show Summary Details
More options …

Kant-Studien

Philosophische Zeitschrift der Kant-Gesellschaft

Ed. by Baum, Manfred / Dörflinger, Bernd / Klemme, Heiner F.


CiteScore 2018: 0.37

SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) 2018: 0.193
Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) 2018: 1.972

Online
ISSN
1613-1134
See all formats and pricing
More options …
Volume 110, Issue 2

Issues

An Antinomy Between Regulative Principles: An Aporetic Resolution to the Antinomy of Teleological Judgment

Aaron Halper
  • Corresponding author
  • School of Philosophy, Catholic University of America, Graduate Student Washington. D.C., U.S.A.,
  • Email
  • Other articles by this author:
  • De Gruyter OnlineGoogle Scholar
Published Online: 2019-06-06 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/kant-2019-2003

Abstract

The antinomy of teleological judgment has increasingly been understood as a conflict between regulative principles. But it is not clear why regulative principles can be in conflict at all, since Kant otherwise takes the realization that two conflicting principles are regulative to be sufficient to resolve an antinomy. I argue that in Kant’s view regulative principles do not conflict with one another only if they are reducible to reason’s interest in systematicity. Given that the principles of this antinomy do conflict, they must not be reducible to reason’s interest in systematicity. I argue that teleology is thus not reducible to reason’s interest because it is fundamentally unlawful. I then use this irreducibility to account for Kant’s appeal to the supersensible in this context.

Keywords: Kant; Teleology; Antinomy; Philosophy of Biology

Bibliography

  • Allison, Henry E. “Kant’s Antinomy of Teleological Judgment.” The Southern Journal of Philosophy XXX, Supplement, 1991, 25-42.Google Scholar

  • Aristotle. Physics. In: The Complete Works of Aristotle. Ed. Jonathon Barnes. Princeton, NJ, 1984.Google Scholar

  • Breitenbach, Angela: “Teleology in Biology: A Kantian Perspective.” In: Kant Yearbook: Teleology. Edited by Dietmar H. Heidemann. Berlin/New York 2009, 31-56.Google Scholar

  • —. “Two Views on Nature: A Solution of Kant’s Antinomy of Mechanism and Teleology.” In: British Journal for the History of Philosophy 16/2, 2008, 351-369.Web of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • Förster, Eckart: “Von der Eigentümlichkeit unseres Verstands in Ansehung der Urteilskraft.” In: Immanuel Kant: Kritik der Urteilskraft. Edited by O. Höffe and I. Goy. Berlin 2008, 259-274.Google Scholar

  • Ginsborg, Hannah: “Kant’s Biological Teleology and its Philosophical Significance.” In: The Blackwell Companion to Kant. Edited by Graham Bird. Oxford 2006, 455-469.Google Scholar

  • —. The Normativity of Nature: Essays on Kant’s Critique of Judgement. First edition. Oxford 2015.Google Scholar

  • —. “Two Kinds of Mechanical Inexplicability in Kant and Aristotle.” In: Journal of the History of Philosophy 42/1, 2004, 33-65.Google Scholar

  • Guyer, Paul. Kant’s System of Nature and Freedom. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005.Google Scholar

  • —. “Kant’s Ambitions in the Third Critique.” In The Cambridge Companion to Kant and Modern Philosophy. Edited by Paul Guyer. Cambridge 2006, 533-587.Google Scholar

  • Kant, Immanuel: Critique of the Power of Judgment. Edited by Paul Guyer and Allen W. Wood. Cambridge 2000.Google Scholar

  • —. Critique of Pure Reason. Translated by Allen Wood and Paul Guyer. New York, NY, 1998.Web of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • McLaughlin, Peter: Kant’s Critique of Teleology in Biological Explanation: Antinomy and Teleology. [Vol. 16. Studies in the History of Philosophy.] Lewiston/New York 1990.Google Scholar

  • —. What Functions Explain: Functional Explanation and Self-Reproducing Systems. Cambridge 2001.Google Scholar

  • Quarfood, Marcel: “The Antinomy of Teleological Judgment: What it is and how it is Solved.” In: Kant’s Theory of Biology. Edited by Ina Goy and Eric Watkins. Berlin/Boston 2014, 167-183.Google Scholar

  • Teufel, Thomas: “What is the Problem of Teleology in Kant’s Critique of the Teleological Power of Judgment?” In: Northern European Journal of Philosophy 12, 2011, 198-236.Google Scholar

  • —. “Wholes that Cause their Parts: Organic Self-Reproduction and the Reality of Biological Teleology.” In: Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences 42, 2011, 252-260.Google Scholar

  • Watkins, Eric: “Nature in General as a System of Ends.” In: Kant’s Theory of Biology. Edited by Ina Goy and Eric Watkins. Berlin/Boston 2014, 117-130.Google Scholar

  • —. “The Antinomy of Teleological Judgment.” In: Kant Yearbook 1, 2009, 197-221.Google Scholar

  • Wood, Allen: “The Antinomies of Pure Reason.” In: The Cambridge Companion to Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason. Edited by Paul Guyer. New York 2010, 245-265.Google Scholar

  • Zuckert, Rachel: Kant on Beauty and Biology: An Interpretation of the ‘Critique of Judgment.’ Cambridge 2007.Google Scholar

  • Zumbach, Clark: The Transcendent Science: Kant’s Conception of Biological Methodology. Boston 1984.Google Scholar

About the article

Published Online: 2019-06-06

Published in Print: 2019-06-01


Citation Information: Kant-Studien, Volume 110, Issue 2, Pages 211–235, ISSN (Online) 1613-1134, ISSN (Print) 0022-8877, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/kant-2019-2003.

Export Citation

© 2019 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston.Get Permission

Comments (0)

Please log in or register to comment.
Log in