Skip to main content
    • Aa
    • Aa

Reply to Edward Kanterian

  • Graham Bird (a1)

The reply to Kanterian offers a rebuttal of his central criticisms. It reaffirms the difference between Kant's arguments in the Aesthetic and at B 148-9; it rejects the alleged error of logic in Fischer's (and my) arguments; and it rejects Kanterian's reading of passages in the Preface (A xx-xxii) and of the Amphiboly. Beyond these specific points Kanterian assumes that Kant's project in the first Critique cannot be understood as a ‘descriptive metaphysics’ and so begs the question at issue.

Linked references
Hide All

This list contains references from the content that can be linked to their source. For a full set of references and notes please see the PDF or HTML where available.

Jonathan Bennett (1966) Kant's Analytic. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

P. F. Strawson (1959) Individuals. London: Routledge.

Barry Stroud (1984) The Significance of Philosophical Scepticism. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

Kantian Review
  • ISSN: 1369-4154
  • EISSN: 2044-2394
  • URL: /core/journals/kantian-review
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *



Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 3
Total number of PDF views: 13 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 141 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between September 2016 - 19th August 2017. This data will be updated every 24 hours.