Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-vvkck Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-26T10:07:03.583Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Never Mind the Intuitive Intellect: Applying Kant’s Categories to Noumena

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 February 2018

Colin Marshall
Colin Marshall*
Affiliation:
University of Washington
*
Email: crmarsh@uw.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

According to strong metaphysical readings of Kant, Kant accepts noumenal substances and causes. Against such readings, Markus Kohl has recently argued that, for Kant, (a) an intuitive intellect is a decisive measure for reality, but (b) an intuitive intellect would not represent noumena as substances or causes. Against Kohl, I argue that the intuitive intellect might indirectly represent noumenal substances and causes, which is enough to save the strong metaphysical reading. In addition, I show how Kant’s apparently anti-metaphysical statements about the content of the categories can be read in a metaphysically friendly way.

Keywords

Kantnoumenacategoriesintuitive intellectMarkus Kohl
Type
Articles
Information
Kantian Review , Volume 23 , Issue 1 , March 2018 , pp. 27 - 40
Copyright
© Kantian Review 2018 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Adams, Robert M. (1997) ‘Things in Themselves’. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 57, 801–825.Google Scholar
Allais, Lucy (2010) ‘Kant’s Argument for Transcendental Idealism in the Transcendental Aesthetic’. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, 110 (1), 47–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Allais, Lucy (2015) Manifest Reality: Kant’s Idealism and his Realism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Allison, Henry (2004) Kant’s Transcendental Idealism. 2nd ed. New Haven: Yale University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boehm, Omri (2014) Kant’s Critique of Spinoza. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
deRosset, Louis (2013) ‘Grounding Explanations’. Philosophers’ Imprint, 13 (7), 1–26.Google Scholar
Gram, Moltke S. (1981) ‘Intellectual Intuition: The Continuity Thesis’. Journal of the History of Ideas, 42 (2), 287–304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kant, Immanuel (1900–) Kants Gesammelte Schriften. Ed. German Academy of Sciences. Berlin: De Gruyter.Google Scholar
Kant, Immanuel (1992) Theoretical Philosophy 1755–1770. Trans. David Walford and Ralf Meerbote. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Kant, Immanuel (1996) Practical Philosophy. Trans. Mary Gregor. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Kant, Immanuel (1997a) Critique of Pure Reason. Trans. Paul Guyer and Allen Wood. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Kant, Immanuel (1997b) Lectures on Metaphysics. Trans. Karl Ameriks and Steve Naragon. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kant, Immanuel (2000) Critique of the Power of Judgment. Trans. Paul Guyer and Eric Matthews. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Kohl, Markus (2015) ‘Kant on the Inapplicability of the Categories to Things in Themselves’. British Journal for the History of Philosophy, 23, 90–114.Google Scholar
Locke, John (1979) Essay Concerning Human Understanding. Ed. Peter H. Nidditch. (Oxford: Oxford University Press).Google Scholar
Marshall, Colin ( forthcoming) ‘Kant’s Derivation of the Moral “Ought” from a Metaphysical “Is”’. In Nicholas Stang and Karl Schafer (eds), The Sensible and Intelligible Worlds (Oxford: Oxford University Press).Google Scholar
Raven, Michael ( forthcoming) ‘(Re)discovering Ground’. In K. M. Becker and I. Thomson (eds), Cambridge History of Philosophy, 1945 to 2015 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).Google Scholar
Spinoza, Baruch (1988) The Collected Works of Spinoza, vol. 1. Ed. and trans. Edwin Curley. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Wilson, Margaret (1996) ‘Spinoza’s Theory of Knowledge’. In Don Garrett (ed.), The Cambridge Companion to Spinoza (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press), pp. 89–141.Google Scholar