Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-77f85d65b8-v2srd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-04-17T14:23:35.478Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

References

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 December 2025

Edited by
Wolfram Gobsch  and
Thomas Land
Wolfram Gobsch
Affiliation:
Universität Zürich
Thomas Land
Affiliation:
University of Victoria, British Columbia
Get access

Information

Type
Chapter
Information
The Aristotelian Kant , pp. 272 - 289
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2026

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.)

Book purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Adams, Robert Merrihew. 1994. Leibniz: Determinist, Theist, Idealist. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Allais, Lucy. 2015. Manifest Reality: Kant’s Idealism and His Realism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Allison, Henry. 1983. Kant’s Transcendental Idealism. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Allison, Henry. 1990. Kant’s Theory of Freedom. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Allison, Henry. 2004. Kant’s Transcendental Idealism. Revised and enlarged edition. New Haven: Yale University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Allison, Henry. 2011. Kant’s Groundwork for the Metaphysics of Morals: A Commentary. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Allison, Henry. 2015. Kant’s Transcendental Deduction: An Analytical-Historical Commentary. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Allison, Henry. 2020. Kant’s Conception of Freedom: A Developmental Account and Critical Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ameriks, Karl. 2000. Kant’s Theory of Mind. 2nd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ameriks, Karl. 2003. Interpreting Kant’s Critiques. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ameriks, Karl. 2006. “The Critique of Metaphysics: The Structure and Fate of Kant’s Dialectic.” The Cambridge Companion to Kant and Modern Philosophy, edited by Guyer, Paul, 269–302. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Amijee, Fatema. 2021. “Principle of Sufficient Reason.” Encyclopedia of Early Modern Philosophy and the Sciences, edited by Jalobeanu, Dana and Wolfe, Charles T., 1–10. Cham: Springer.Google Scholar
Anderson, R. Lanier. 2015. The Poverty of Conceptual Truth: Kant’s Analytic/Synthetic Distinction and the Limits of Metaphysics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anderson, R. Lanier. 2022. “Transcendental Idealism as Formal Idealism.” European Journal of Philosophy 30 (3), 899–923.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Annas, Julia. 1992. Hellenistic Philosophy of Mind. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Aquila, Richard. 1997. “Self as Matter and Form: Some Reflections on Kant’s View of the Soul.” Figuring the Self, edited by Klemm, D. and Zöller, G., 31–54. Albany: SUNY Press.Google Scholar
Aquinas, Thomas. 1948. Summa Theologica. 3 vols. Translated by Fathers of the English Dominican Province. New York: Benziger Brothers.Google Scholar
Aquinas, Thomas. 1949. De Ente et Essentia. Translated as On Being and Essence by Armand Maurer. Toronto: Pontifical Institute of Mediaeval Studies.Google Scholar
Aquinas, Thomas. 1965. De Principiis Naturae. Translated as “The Principles of Nature,” in Selected Writings of St. Thomas Aquinas, edited by Goodwin, Robert P.. New York: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
Aquinas, Thomas. 2007. Commentary on Aristotle’s On Interpretation. Translated by Jean Oesterle. South Bend: Dumb Ox Books.Google Scholar
Aquinas, Thomas. 2008. Commentary on Aristotle’s Posterior Analytics. Translated by Ralph McInerny. South Bend: Dumb Ox Books.Google Scholar
Aristotle, . 1900. ΗΘΙΚΑ ΝΙΚΟΜΑΧΕΙΑ: The Ethics of Aristotle, edited by Burnet, J.. London: Methuen.Google Scholar
Aristotle, . 1984. Complete Works: The Revised Oxford Translation. 2 vols. Edited by Barnes, Jonathan. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Arnauld, Antoine, and Nicole, Pierre. (1662) 1996. Logic or the Art of Thinking. Translated and edited by Buroker, Jill Vance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ayers, Michael. 1991. Locke: Epistemology and Ontology. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Bacin, Stefano, and Bagnoli, Carla, eds. (forthcoming) Rationality, Agency, and Ethics: New Perspectives on Kantian Constitutivism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Bagnoli, Carla. 2011. “Emotions and the Categorical Authority of Moral Reasons.” Morality and the Emotions, edited by Bagnoli, C., 62–81. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bagnoli, Carla. 2021. “The Practical Significance of the Categorical Imperative.” Oxford Studies in Normative Ethics, 11: 178–99. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Bagnoli, Carla, ed. 2022. Ethical Constructivism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bagnoli, Carla. forthcoming. “Radical Evil and the Power of Shared Agency.” Good and Evil in German Idealism, edited by Christoph Halbig and Wolfram Gobsch, special issue of Philosophical Topics.Google Scholar
Baumgarten, Alexander Gottlieb. (1739) 2011. Metaphysica. Translated and edited by Gawlick, Günter and Kreimendahl, Lothar. Bad Cannstatt: Frommann-Holzboog.Google Scholar
Baumgarten, Alexander Gottlieb, and Kant, Immanuel. (1760) 2020. Elements of First Practical Philosophy, with Kant’s Reflections on Moral Philosophy. Edited and translated by Fugate, Courtney and Hymers, John. London: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar
Baxley, Anne Margaret. 2010. Kant’s Theory of Virtue: The Value of Autocracy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beck, Lewis White. 1963. A Commentary on Kant’s Critique of Practical Reason. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Beere, Jonathan. 2009. Doing and Being: An Interpretation of Aristotle’s Metaphysics Theta. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berg, Anastasia. 2021. “Kant on Moral Respect.” Archiv für Geschichte der Philosophie 103 (4): 730–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bittner, Rüdiger. 1974. “Maximen.” Akten des 4. International Kant Congress Mainz 1974, edited by Funke, Gerhard, 2: 485–98. Berlin: De Gruyter.Google Scholar
Blecher, Ian. 2013. “Kant on Formal Modality.” Kant-Studien 104 (1): 44–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boehm, Omri. 2014. Kant’s Critique of Spinoza. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boehm, Omri. 2016. “The Principle of Sufficient Reason, the Ontological Argument and the Is/Ought Distinction.” European Journal of Philosophy 24 (3), 556–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boyle, Matthew. 2009. “Two Kinds of Self-Knowledge.” Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 78 (1), 133–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boyle, Matthew. 2011. “‘Making Up Your Mind’ and the Activity of Reason.” Philosophers’ Imprint 11 (17), 1–24.Google Scholar
Boyle, Matthew. 2016. “Additive Theories of Rationality: A Critique.” European Journal of Philosophy 24 (3), 527–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boyle, Matthew. 2020. “Kant on Logic and the Laws of the Understanding.” The Logical Alien: Conant and His Critics, edited by Miguens, Sofia, 117–44. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Brandt, Reinhard. 1991. Die Urteilstafel: Kritik der reinen Vernunft. A67–76; B92–101. Hamburg: Meiner.Google Scholar
Brewer, Talbot. 2001. “Rethinking Our maxims: Perceptual Salience and Practical Judgment in Kantian Ethics.” Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 4 (3), 219–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brewer, Talbot. 2002. “Maxims and Virtues.” Philosophical Review 111 (4), 549–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Broadie, Sarah. 1991. Ethics with Aristotle. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Brook, Andrew. 1994. Kant and the Mind. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brook, Andrew. 2016. “Review of Kant on Mind, Action, and Ethics by Julian Wuerth.” Philosophical Review 125 (2), 302–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brucker, Johann Jakob. 1767. Historia critica philosophiae: A mundi incunabulis ad nostrum usque aetatem deducta. 5 vols. 2nd ed. Leipzig: Weidemann & Reich.Google Scholar
Buickerood, James. 1985. “The Natural History of the Understanding: Locke and the Rise of Facultative Logic.” History and Philosophy of Logic 6, 157–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burnyeat, M. F. 1980. “Aristotle on Learning to be Good.” Essays on Aristotle’s Ethics, edited by Rorty, A. O., 69–92. Berkeley: University of California Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burnyeat, M. F. 2008. “Kinesis vs. Energeia: A Much-Read Passage in (but not of) Aristotle’s Metaphysics.” Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy 34, 219–91.Google Scholar
Carlisle, Clare. 2014. On Habit. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chaplin, Rosalind. n.d. “Is Kant’s Supreme Principle of Pure Reason the Principle of Sufficient Reason?” Unpublished manuscript.Google Scholar
Chignell, Andrew. 2007a. “Belief in Kant.” Philosophical Review 116 (3), 323–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chignell, Andrew. 2007b. “Kant’s Concepts of Justification.” Noûs 41 (1), 33–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chignell, Andrew. 2012. “Kant, Real Possibility, and the Threat of Spinoza.” Mind 121 (483), 635–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chignell, Andrew. 2014. “Modal Motivations for Noumenal Ignorance: Knowledge, Cognition, and Coherence.” Kant-Studien 105 (4), 573–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cicero, . 1927. Tusculan Disputations. Translated by J. E. King. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Cicero, . 1942. De Oratore (III), De Fato, Paradoxa Stoicorum, De Partitione Oratoria. Translated by H. Rackham. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Cicero, . 1998. De Finibus Bonorum et Malorum. Oxford: Clarendon Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cicero, . 2001. On Moral Ends. Edited by Annas, J., translated by R. Woolf. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cicovacki, Predrag. 2006. “Kant’s Debt to Leibniz.” A Companion to Kant, edited by Bird, Graham, 79–92. Malden: Wiley-Blackwell.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clauberg, Johannes. 1658. Logica vetus et nova. 2nd ed. Amsterdam: Officina Elzeviriana.Google Scholar
Conant, James. 2016. “Why Kant Is Not a Kantian.” Philosophical Topics 44 (1), 75–125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coope, Ursula. Time for Aristotle: Physics IV 10–14. Oxford: Clarendon Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Correia, Fabrice, and Schnieder, Benjamin. 2012. Metaphysical Grounding: Understanding the Structure of Reality. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crusius, Christian August. (1743) 2019. Dissertatio philosophica de usu et limitibus principii rationis determinantis vulgo sufficientis. Translated in Early Modern German Philosophy (1690–1750). Edited by Dyck, Corey W., 197–225. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Crusius, Christian August. 1745. Entwurf der nothwendigen Vernunft-Wahrheiten, wiefern sie den zufälligen entgegen gesetzet werden. Leipzig: Gleditsch.Google Scholar
Crusius, Christian August. 1747. Weg zur Gewissheit und Zuverlässigkeit der menschlichen Erkenntnis. Leipzig: Gleditsch.Google Scholar
Cummiskey, David. 1996. Kantian Consequentialism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Curzer, H. J. 2002. “Aristotle’s Painful Path to Virtue.” Journal of the History of Philosophy 40, 141–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Deleuze, Gilles. 1994. Difference and Repetition. Translated by P. Patton. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Denis, Lara. 2000. “Kant’s Cold Sage and the Sublimity of Apathy.” Kantian Review 4, 48–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Laertius, Diogenes. 1925. Lives of the Eminent Philosophers. Translated by R. D. Hicks. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Driver, Julia. 2001. Uneasy Virtue. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dyck, Corey W. 2014. Kant and Rational Psychology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dyck, Corey W. 2016a. “Spontaneity before the Critical Turn: Crusius, the Pre-Critical Kant, and Tetens on the Spontaneity of the Mind.” Journal of the History of Philosophy 54 (4), 625–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dyck, Corey W. 2016b. “The Priority of Judging: Kant on Wolff’s General Logic.” Estudos Kantianos 4 (2), 99–118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dyck, Corey W. ed. 2019a. Early Modern German Philosophy (1690–1750). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Dyck, Corey W. 2019b. “Imagination and Association in Kant’s Theory of Cognition.” Konzepte der Einbildungskraft in der Philosophie, den Wissenschaften und den Künsten des 18. Jahrhunderts, edited by Meer, R., Motta, G., Stiening, G., 351–70. Berlin: De Gruyter.Google Scholar
Echeñique, Javier. 2012. Aristotle’s Ethics and Moral Responsibility. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Elizondo, Sonny. 2013. “Reason in Its Practical Application.” Philosophers’ Imprint 13, 1–17.Google Scholar
Engstrom, Stephen. 2002a. “Introduction.” In Kant, Immanuel, Critique of Practical Reason, translated by Pluhar, Werner S., xv–liv. Indianapolis: Hackett.Google Scholar
Engstrom, Stephen. 2002b. “Kant’s Distinction Between Theoretical and Practical Knowledge.” The Harvard Review of Philosophy 10 (1), 49–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Engstrom, Stephen. 2002c. “The Inner Freedom of Virtue.” Kant’s Metaphysics of Morals: Interpretive Essays, edited by Timmons, M., 289–315. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Engstrom, Stephen. 2006. “Understanding and Sensibility.” Inquiry 49 (1), 2–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Engstrom, Stephen. 2009. The Form of Practical Knowledge. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Engstrom, Stephen. 2013. “Unity of Apperception.” Studi Kantiani 26, 37–54.Google Scholar
Engstrom, Stephen. 2017. “Knowledge and Its Object.” Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason: A Critical Guide, edited by O’Shea, J. R., 28–45. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Engstrom, Stephen. 2018. “Virtue and Vice in Aristotle and Kant.” Evil in Aristotle, edited by Kontos, P., 222–39. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Engstrom, Stephen. 2024. “Idealism, Absolute and Formal.” Reading Rödl on Self-Consciousness and Objectivity, edited by Conant, James and Mulder, Jesse, 91–105. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Engstrom, Stephen. 2025. “Truth in Knowledge and Truth in Action.” Practical Truth, edited by Christopher Frey and Jennifer Frey. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Engstrom, Stephen, and Whiting, Jennifer. 1996. Aristotle, Kant, and the Stoics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Epictetus, . 1925. The Discourses. Translated by W. Oldfather. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Esser, Andrea. 2013. “The Inner Court of Conscience, Moral Self-Knowledge, and the Proper Object of Duty.” Kant’s “Tugdendlehre,” edited by Trampota, Andreas, Timmerman, Jens, and Sensen, Oliver, 139–59. Berlin: De Gruyter.Google Scholar
Formey, Jean Henri Samuel. 1763. Kurzgefasste Historie der Philosophie. Berlin: Pauli.Google Scholar
Formosa, Paul. 2011. “A Life without Affects and Passions: Kant on the Duty of Apathy.” Parrhesia 15, 96–111.Google Scholar
Forschler, Scott. 2013. “Kantian and Consequentialist Ethics: The Gap Can Be Bridged.” Metaphilosophy 44 (1/2), 88–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Franks, Paul W. 2005. All or Nothing: Systematicity, Transcendental Arguments and Skepticism in German Idealism. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Frede, Michael. 1999. “On the Stoic Conception of the Good.” Topics in Stoic Philosophy, edited by Ierodiakonou, K., 71–94. Oxford: Clarendon Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Freyenhagen, Fabian. 2011. “Empty, Useless, and Dangerous? Recent Kantian Replies to the Empty Formalism Objection.” Bulletin of the Hegel Society of Great Britain 63, 163–86.Google Scholar
Fugate, Courtney, and Hymers, John. 2020. Baumgarten’s Elements of First Practical Philosophy [Initia philosophiae practicae primae acroamatice = Initia]: A Critical Translation with Kant’s Reflections on Moral Philosophy. London: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar
Fugate, Courtney. 2014. The Teleology of Reason: A Study of the Structure of Kant’s Critical Philosophy. Berlin: De Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Garber, Daniel. 2009. Leibniz: Body, Substance, Monad. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gardner, Sebastian. 1999. Routledge Philosophy Guidebook to Kant and the Critique of Pure Reason. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Garrett, Don. 1999. “Teleology in Spinoza and Early Modern Rationalism.” New Essays on the Rationalists, edited by Gennaro, Rocco J. and Huenemann, Charles, 310–35. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Gerhardt, Gerd. (1930) 1990. Immanuel Kant. Eine Vorlesung über Ethik. Translated by L. Infield. London: Methuen.Google Scholar
Ginsborg, Hannah. 2014. The Normativity of Nature: Essays on Kant’s Critique of Judgment. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gobsch, Wolfram. 2016. “The Idea of an Ethical Community: Kant and Hegel on the Necessity of Human Evil and the Love to Overcome It.” Philosophical Topics 42(1), 177–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gobsch, Wolfram. 2017. “Der Mensch als Widerspruch und absolutes Wissen: Eine Hegelianische Kritik der transformativen Theorie des Geistes.” Selbstbewusstes Leben, edited by Kern, Andrea und Kietzmann, Christian, 120–69. Berlin: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar
Gobsch, Wolfram. 2019. “Autonomy and Radical evil: A Kantian Challenge to Constitutivism.” Philosophical Explorations 22 (2), 194–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gobsch, Wolfram. 2024. “Absolute Idealism? A Hegelian Critique of Sebastian Rödl’s Self-Consciousness and Objectivity.” Reading Rödl on Self-Consciousness and Objectivity, edited by Conant, James und Mulder, Jesse, 224–47. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Graubner, Hans. 1972. Form und Wesen: Ein Beitrag zur Deutung des Formbegriffs in Kants Kritik der reinen Vernunft. Bonn: Bouvier.Google Scholar
Graver, Margaret. 2007. Stoicism and Emotion. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gressis, Rob. 2010a. “Recent Work on Kantian Maxims I.” Philosophy Compass 5, 216–27.Google Scholar
Gressis, Rob. 2010b. “Recent Work on Kantian Maxims II.” Philosophy Compass 5, 228–39.Google Scholar
Grier, Michelle. 2001. Kant’s Doctrine of Transcendental Illusion. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Groß, Felix, ed. 1912. Immanuel Kant: Sein Leben in Darstellungen von Zeitgenossen; die Biographien von L. E. Borowski, R. B. Jachmann und A. Ch. Wasianski. Berlin: Deutsche Bibliothek.Google Scholar
Guyer, Paul. 1987. Kant and the Claims of Knowledge. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guyer, Paul. 2010. “The Deduction of the Categories: The Metaphysical and Transcendental Deductions.” The Cambridge Companion to Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, edited by Guyer, Paul, 118–50. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guyer, Paul. 2019. Kant on the Rationality of Morality. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Hahmann, Andree. 2021. “Crusius on the Fundamental Powers of the Soul.” Christian August Crusius (1715–1775): Philosophy between Reason and Revelation, edited by Grunert, Frank, Hahmann, Andree, and Stiening, Gideon, 89–113. Berlin: De Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hare, R. M. 1981. Moral Thinking: Its Levels, Method, and Point. Oxford: Clarendon Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hegel, Georg Wilhelm Friedrich. (1821) 1967. Elements of the Philosophy of Right. Translated with notes by T. M. Knox. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Hegel, Georg Wilhelm Friedrich. (1830) 2007. Philosophy of Mind. Translated by W. Wallace and A. V. Miller. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Hegel, Georg Wilhelm Friedrich. (1830) 2010. Encyclopedia of the Philosophical Sciences in Basic Outline, Part I: Science of Logic. Translated and edited by Brinkmann, Klaus and Dahlstrom, Daniel. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Heidegger, Martin. 1973. Kant und das Problem der Metaphysik. 4th ed. Frankfurt: Klostermann.Google Scholar
Henrich, Dieter. 1976. Identität und Objektivität. Eine Untersuchung über Kants transzendentale Deduktion. Heidelberg: Winter. (Translated in Dieter Henrich. 1994. The Unity of Reason: Essays on Kant’s Philosophy. Cambridge, MA and London: Harvard University Press, 123–210.)Google Scholar
Henrich, Dieter. 1989. “Kant’s Notion of a Deduction and the Methodological Background of the First Critique.” Kant’s Transcendental Deductions, edited by Förster, E., 27–46. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Herman, Barbara. 1993a. “Leaving Deontology Behind.” The Practice of Moral Judgment, 208–43. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Herman, Barbara. 1993b. The Practice of Moral Judgment. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Herman, Barbara. 2021. The Moral Habitat. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heßbrüggen-Walter, Stefan. 2004. Die Seele und ihre Vermögen. Kants Metaphysik des Mentalen in der “Kritik der reinen Vernunft”. Paderborn: Mentis.Google Scholar
Hill, Thomas E. Jr. 1994. “Kant on Responsibility for Consequences.” Jahrbuch für Recht und Ethik 2, 159–76.Google Scholar
Hills, Alison. 2014. “Gesinnung: Responsibility, Moral Worth, and Character.” Kant’s Religion within the Boundaries of Mere Reason: A Critical Guide, ed. by Michalson, Gordon, 79–97. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Höffe, Otfried. 1994. Immanuel Kant. Albany: SUNY Press.Google Scholar
Hogan, Desmond. 2009. “Three Kinds of Rationalism and the Non-spatiality of Things in Themselves.” Journal of the History of Philosophy 47 (3), 355–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hogan, Desmond. 2013. “Metaphysical Motives of Kant’s Analytic–Synthetic Distinction.” Journal of the History of Philosophy 51 (2), 267–307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hoppe, Hansgeorg. 1983. Synthesis bei Kant. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Horace, . 1926. Satires, Epistles, The Art of Poetry. Translated by H. R. Fairclough. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Hume, David. (1739) 2000. A Treatise of Human Nature. Edited by Norton, D. F. and Norton, M. J.. Oxford: Oxford University Press. [=Treatise]Google Scholar
Hume, David. (1748) 2007. An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding. Edited by Beauchamp, Tom. Oxford: Oxford University Press. [= Enquiry]Google Scholar
Inwood, Brad. 1985. Ethics and Human Action in Early Stoicism. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Jauernig, Anja. 2021. The World According to Kant: Appearances and Things in Themselves in Critical Idealism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jenisch, Daniel. 1791. Die Ethik des Aristoteles in zehn Büchern. Danzig: Troschel.Google Scholar
Jolley, Nicholas. 2005. Leibniz. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Kain, Patrick. 2010. “Practical Cognition, Intuition, and the Fact of Reason.” Kant’s Moral Metaphysics: God, Freedom and Immortality, edited by Lipscomb, Benjamin and Krueger, James, 210–30. Berlin: De Gruyter.Google Scholar
Kawamura, Katsutoshi. 1996. Spontaneität und Willkür: Der Freiheitsbegriff in Kant’s Antimomienlehre und seine historischen Wurzeln. Bad Cannstatt: Frommann-Holzboog.Google Scholar
Keller, Pierre. 1998. Kant and the Demands of Self-Consciousness. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Kelsey, Sean. 2010. “Hylomorphism in Aristotle’s Physics.” Ancient Philosophy 30, 107–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kemp Smith, Norman. 1918. A Commentary to Kant’s “Critique of Pure Reason”. London: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Kern, Andrea. 2006. “Spontaneity and Receptivity in Kant’s Theory of Knowledge.” Philosophical Topics 34, 145–62CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kern, Andrea. 2017. Sources of Knowledge: On the Concept of a Rational Capacity for Knowledge. Translated by Daniel Smyth. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kern, Andrea. 2020. “Life and Mind: Varieties of Neo-Aristotelianism – Naive, Sophisticated, Hegelian.” Hegel Bulletin 41 (1), 40–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Khurana, Thomas. 2017. Das Leben der Freiheit: Form und Wirklichkeit der Autonomie. Berlin: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar
Khurana, Thomas. 2019. “‘I Do Not Cognize Myself Through Being Conscious of Myself as Thinking’: Self-knowledge and the Irreducibility of Self-objectification in Kant.” Canadian Journal of Philosophy 49 (7), 956–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kidd, I. G. 1971. “Stoic Intermediaries and the End for Man.” Problems in Stoicism, edited by Long, A. A., 150–72. London: Athlone.Google Scholar
Kierkegaard, Søren. 1983. Fear and Trembling; Repetition. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Kitcher, Patricia. 2011. Kant’s Thinker. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Klein, Jacob. 2016. “The Stoic Argument from Oikeiōsis.” Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy 50, 143–200.Google Scholar
Kleingeld, Pauline. 2010. “Moral Consciousness and the Fact of Reason.” Kant’s Critique of Practical Reason: A Critical Guide, edited by Reath, Andrews and Timmermann, Jens. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Knutzen, Martin. 1747. Elementa philosophiae rationalis seu logicae. Königsberg and Leipzig: Hartung.Google Scholar
Kohl, Markus. 2020. “Kant on Cognizing Oneself as a Spontaneous Cognizer.” Canadian Journal of Philosophy 50 (3), 395–412.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Korsgaard, Christine. 1996. “The Right to Lie: Kant on Dealing with Evil.” Creating the Kingdom of Ends, 133–58. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Korsgaard, Christine. 2008a. The Constitution of Agency: Essays on Practical Reason and Moral Psychology. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Korsgaard, Christine. 2008b. “Aristotle on Function and Virtue.” The Constitution of Agency: Essays on Practical Reason and Moral Psychology, 151–73. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Korsgaard, Christine. 2008c. “From Duty and for the Sake of the Noble: Kant and Aristotle on Morally Good Action.” The Constitution of Agency: Essays on Practical Reason and Moral Psychology, 174–206. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Korsgaard, Christine. 2009. Self-Constitution: Agency, Identity, and Integrity. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Korsgaard, Christine. 2011. “Natural Goodness, Rightness, and the Intersubjectivity of Reason: Reply to Arroyo, Cummiskey, Moland, and Bird-Pollan.” Metaphilosophy 42 (4), 387–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Korsgaard, Christine. 2019. “Constitutivism and the Virtues.” Philosophical Explorations 22 (2), 98–116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kosman, L. A. 1984. “Substance, Being, and Energeia.” Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy 2, 121–49.Google Scholar
Kosman, L. A. 1994. “The Activity of Being in Aristotle’s Metaphysics.” Unity, Identity, and Explanation in Aristotle’s Metaphysics, edited by Scaltas, T., Charles, D., and Gill, M. L., 195–213. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kraus, Katharina. 2020. Kant on Self-Knowledge and Self-Formation: The Nature of Inner Experience. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kreines, James. 2008. “Metaphysics Without Pre-Critical Monism: Hegel on Lower-Level Natural Kinds and the Structure of Reality.” Bulletin of the Hegel Society of Great Britain 57, 48–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kreines, James. 2009. “Kant on the Laws of Nature: Laws, Necessitation, and the Limitation of Our Knowledge.” European Journal of Philosophy 17 (4), 527–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kreines, James. 2015. Reason in the World: Hegel’s Metaphysics and Its Philosophical Appeal. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kreines, James. 2022. “For a Dialectic-First Approach to Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason.” Open Philosophy 5 (1), 490–509.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kuehn, Manfred. 2001. Kant: A Biography. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Laitinen, Arto, and Sandis, Constantine. 2010. “Introduction: Hegel and Contemporary Philosophy of Action.” Hegel on Action, edited by Latinen, A. and Sandis, C., 1–21. New York: Palgrave-Macmillan.Google Scholar
Laitinen, Arto, and Sandis, Constantine. 2019. “Hegel on Purpose.” Hegel Bulletin 40 (3), 444–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Laitinen, Arto, Sandis, Constantine, and Mayr, Erasmus. 2019. “Kant and Hegel on Purposive Action.” Philosophical Explorations 21 (1), 90–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Land, Thomas. 2021. “Epistemic Agency and the Self-Knowledge of Reason: On the Contemporary Relevance of Kant’s Method of Faculty Analysis.” Synthese 198, 3137–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Langton, Rae. 1998. Kantian Humility: Our Ignorance of Things in Themselves. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Lawrence, Gavin. 2020. “Operating under the Idea of the Ideal: Aristotle’s Naturalism.” Aristotelian Naturalism, edited by Hähnel, Martin, 11–34. Cham: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leibniz, G. W. 1952. Theodicy. Edited by Farrer, A. and translated by E. M. Huggard. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Leibniz, G. W. 1969. Philosophical Papers and Letters. Edited and translated by Loemker, Leroy. 2nd ed. Dordrecht: Reidel.Google Scholar
Leibniz, G. W. 1989. Philosophical Essays. Translated by Roger Ariew and Daniel Garber. Indianapolis: Hackett.Google Scholar
Leibniz, G. W. 1996. New Essays on Human Understanding. Translated and edited by Remnant, Peter and Bennett, Jonathan. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Long, A. A. 1996. “Hierocles on Oikeiōsis and Self-perception.” Stoic Studies, 250–63.Google Scholar
Longuenesse, Béatrice. 1998. Kant and the Capacity to Judge. Translated by Charles T. Wolfe. Princeton: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Longuenesse, Béatrice. 2005. Kant on the Human Standpoint. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Longuenesse, Béatrice. 2017. I, Me, Mine: Back to Kant, and Back Again. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lu-Adler, Huaping. 2021. “Kant and the Principle of Sufficient Reason.” Review of Metaphysics 74 (3), 301–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mansfeld, Jaap. 1999. “Sources.” The Cambridge History of Hellenistic Philosophy, edited by Algra, K., Barnes, J., Mansfeld, J., and Schofield, M., 3–30. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Marshall, Colin. 2010. “Kant’s Metaphysics of the Self.” Philosophers’ Imprint 10, 1–21.Google Scholar
Matherne, Samantha. 2015. “Images and Kant’s Theory of Perception.” Ergo 2 (29), 737–77.Google Scholar
McDonough, Jeffrey. 2011. “The Heyday of Teleology and Early Modern Philosophy.” Midwest Studies in Philosophy 35 (1), 179–204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McDowell, John. 1979. “Virtue and Reason.” The Monist 62 (3), 331–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McDowell, John. 1994. Mind and World. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
McDowell, John. 2009. “Hegel’s Idealism as Radicalization of Kant.” Having the World in View: Essays on Kant, Hegel, and Sellars, 69–89. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
McDowell, John. 2011. Perception as a Capacity for Knowledge. Milwaukee: Marquette University Press.Google Scholar
McLear, Colin. 2020a. “‘I am the Original of All Objects’: Apperception and the Substantial Subject.” Philosophers’ Imprint 20 (26), 1–38.Google Scholar
McLear, Colin. 2020b. “Rationality: What Difference Does It Make?” Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 107 (1), 99–124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meier, Georg Friedrich. 1752. Auszug aus der Vernunftlehre. Halle: Gebauer.Google Scholar
Melnick, Arthur. 2010. Kant’s Theory of the Self. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Menn, Stephen. 2002. “Aristotle’s Definition of Soul and the Programme of the De Anima.” Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy 22, 83–139.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mercer, Christia. 1991. “The Seventeenth-Century Debate Between the Moderns and Aristotelians: Leibniz and Philosophia Reformata.” Studia Leibnitiana, Supplement 27, 18–29. Stuttgart: Franz Steiner Verlag.Google Scholar
Mercer, Christia. 2001. Leibniz’s Metaphysics: Its Origins and Development. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Merritt, Melissa. 2018. Kant on Reflection and Virtue. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Merritt, Melissa. 2021. “Nature, Corruption, and Freedom: Stoic Ethics in Kant’s Religion.” European Journal of Philosophy 29, 3–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Merritt, Melissa. Forthcoming. “Kant and Psychological Monism: The Case of Inclination.” The Palgrave Handbook of German Idealism and Analytic Philosophy, edited by Conant, J. and Held, J.. London: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Messina, James. 2014. “Kant on the Unity of Space and the Synthetic Unity of Apperception.” Kant-Studien 105 (1), 5–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Millgram, Elijah. 2003. “Does the Categorical Imperative Give Rise to a Contradiction in the Will?” Philosophical Review 112 (4), 525–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mohr, Georg. 1991. Das sinnliche Ich. Würzburg: Königshausen and Neumann.Google Scholar
Mudd, Sasha. 2017. “The Demand for Systematicity and the Authority of Theoretical Reason in Kant.” Kantian Review 22 (1), 81–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Müller, Jozef. 2019. “Aristotle on Virtue of Character and the Authority of Reason.” Phronesis 64, 10–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Murphy, James G. 1970. Kant: The Philosophy of Right. London: Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Neiman, Susan. 1994. The Unity of Reason: Rereading Kant. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Newton, Alexandra. 2012. “Kant on the Logical Origin of Concepts.” European Journal of Philosophy 23 (3), 456–84.Google Scholar
Nisenbaum, Karin. 2018. For the Love of Metaphysics: Nihilism and the Conflict of Reason from Kant to Rosenzweig. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nisenbaum, Karin. Forthcoming. “Realizing Our Capacity to Know the Good: Kant on the Dialectic of Pure Practical Reason.”Google Scholar
Nunez, Tyke. 2019. “Logical Mistakes, Logical Aliens, and the Laws of Kant’s Pure General Logic.” Mind 128 (512), 1149–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
O’Neill, Onora. 1989. Constructions of Reason: Explorations of Kant’s Practical Philosophy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
O’Neill, Onora. 2018. From Principles to Practice: Normativity and Judgment in Ethics and Politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
O’Shea, James R. 2012. Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason: An Introduction and Interpretation. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Pembroke, S. G. (1971) 1996. “Oikeiōsis.” Problems in Stoicism, edited by Long, A. A., 114–49. London: Athlone.Google Scholar
Pendlebury, T. A. 2022. “The Shape of the Kantian Mind.” Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 104, 364–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pendlebury, Gary. 2006. Action and Ethics in Aristotle and Hegel: Escaping the Malign Influence of Kant. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Petersen, Peter. 1913. “Die Philosophie Friedrich Adolf Trendelenburgs.” Ein Beitrag zur Geschichte des Aristoteles im 19. Jahrhundert. Hamburg: Boysen.Google Scholar
Pippin, Robert. 1982. Kant’s Theory of Form. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Pollok, Konstantin. 2017. Kant’s Theory of Normativity: Exploring the Space of Reason. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Prauss, Gerold. 1969. “Zum Wahrheitsproblem bei Kant.” Kant-Studien 60, 166–82. Berlin: De Gruyter.Google Scholar
Prauss, Gerold. 1971. Erscheinung bei Kant. Berlin: de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Prichard, H. A. (1912) 2002. “Does Moral Philosophy Rest on a Mistake?” Moral Writings, edited by McAdam, Jim. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Proops, Ian. 2014. “Kant on the Cosmological Argument.” Philosophers’ Imprint 14, 1–21.Google Scholar
Proops, Ian. 2021. The Fiery Test of Critique: A Reading of Kant’s Dialectic. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ravaisson, Felix. 2008. Of Habit. Translated by C. Carlisle and M. Sinclair. London: Continuum.Google Scholar
Rawls, John. 1980. “Kantian Constructivism in Moral Theory.” Journal of Philosophy 77 (9), 515–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rawls, John. 1999. “Themes in Kant’s Moral Philosophy.” Collected Papers, edited by Freeman, Samuel, 497–528. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Rawls, John. 2000. Lectures on the History of Moral Philosophy, edited by Herman, Barbara. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Reath, Andrews, and Timmerman, Jens, eds. 2010. Kant’s Critique of Practical Reason: A Critical Guide. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reath, Andrews. 1994. “Agency and the Imputation of Consequences in Kant’s Ethics.” Jahrbuch für Recht und Ethik, 2, 259–81.Google Scholar
Reath, Andrews. 2006. Agency and Autonomy in Kant’s Moral Theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reath, Andrews. 2010. “Formal Principles and the Form of a Law.” Kant’s Critique of Practical Reason: A Critical Guide, edited by Reath, Andrews and Timmermann, Jens, 31–54. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reath, Andrews. 2012. “A High Plains Drifter: Remarks on Engstrom’s The Form of Practical Knowledge.” Analytic Philosophy 53 (1), 79–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reath, Andrews. 2013. “Formal Approaches to Kant’s Formula of Humanity.” Kant on Practical Justification, edited by Timmons, Mark and Baiasu, Sorin, 201–28. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Reath, Andrews. 2019a. “What Emerged: Autonomy and Heteronomy in the Groundwork and Second Critique.” The Emergence of Autonomy in Kant’s Moral Philosophy, edited by Bacin, Stefano and Sensen, Oliver. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Reath, Andrews. 2019b. “Autonomy and the Idea of Freedom: Some Reflections on Groundwork III.” Kantian Review 24 (2), 223–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reath, Andrews. 2023. “The Analytic of the Critique of Practical Reason.” The Kantian Mind, edited by Baiasu, Sorin and Timmons, Mark, 167–77. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Renz, Ursula. 2015. “Becoming Aware of One’s Thoughts: Kant on Self-Knowledge and Reflective Experience.” Mind, Language and Action, edited by Moyal-Sharrock, Daniele et al., 581–99. New York: De Gruyter.Google Scholar
Reusch, Johann Peter. 1734. Systema logicum antiquiorum atque recentiorum item propria praecepta exhibens. Jena: Cröker.Google Scholar
Ridge, Michael. 2009. “Consequentialist Kantianism.” Philosophical Perspectives, 23 (1), 421–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rödl, Sebastian. 2005. Kategorien des Zeitlichen. Frankfurt: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar
Rödl, Sebastian. 2007. Self-Consciousness. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Rödl, Sebastian. 2010. “The Form of the Will.” Desire, Practical Reason, and the Good, edited by Tenenbaum, Sergio, 138–57. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Rödl, Sebastian. 2018. Self-Consciousness and Objectivity. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rohs, Peter. 1995. “Warum Kant kein Utilitarist war.” Zum moralischen Denken, vol. 2, edited by Fehige, C. and Meggle, G., 35–41. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar
Rosefeldt, Tobias. 2000. Das Logische Ich: Kant über den Gehalt des Begriffes von sich selbst. Berlin: Philo.Google Scholar
Rosefeldt, Tobias. 2016. “Closing the Gap: A New Answer to an Old Objection against Kant’s Argument for Transcendental Idealism.” Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 116 (2), 181–203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rosefeldt, Tobias. 2022. “Being Realistic about Kant’s Idealism.” The Sensible and the Intelligible Worlds, edited by Schafer, K. and Stang, N., 16–44. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sanchez Borboa, Santiago. 2018. “On Kant’s Derivation of the Categories.” Kant-Studien 109 (3), 511–36.Google Scholar
Schafer, Karl. 2019a. “Kant: Constitutivism as Capacities-First Philosophy.” Philosophical Explorations 22 (2), 177–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schafer, Karl. 2019b. “Rationality as the Capacity for Understanding.” Noûs 53 (3), 639–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schafer, Karl. 2021a. “A System of Rational Faculties: Additive or Transformative?” European Journal of Philosophy 29 (4), 918–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schafer, Karl. 2021b. “Transcendental Philosophy as Capacities-First Philosophy.” Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 103 (3), 661–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schafer, Karl. 2022a. “Kant’s Conception of Cognition and Knowledge of Things in Themselves.” The Sensible and the Intelligible Worlds, edited by Schafer, K. and Stang, N., 248–78. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schafer, Karl. 2022b. “Reason as the Capacity for Comprehension in Kant.” Australasian Journal of Philosophy 101 (4), 844–62.Google Scholar
Schafer, Karl. 2023a. Kant’s Reason: The Unity of Reason and the Limits of Comprehension in Kant’s Philosophy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schafer, Karl. 2023b. “Practical Cognition and Knowledge of Things-in-Themselves.” The Idea of Freedom, edited by Tiffany, Evan and Heide, Dai. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Schelling, F. W. J. 2000. The Ages of the World. Translated by J. M. Wirth. Albany: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
Schneewind, Jerome. (1996) 2010. “Kant and Stoic Ethics.” Essays on the History of Moral Philosophy, 277–95. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Schönecker, Dieter. 2013. “Kant’s Moral Intuitionism: The Fact of Reason and Moral Predispositions.” Kant Studies Online 2013, 1–38.Google Scholar
Seneca, . 1917, 1920, and 1925. Epistulae Morales. Translated by R. M. Gummere. 3 vols. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Seneca, . 1928. Moral Essays. Translated by J. W. Basore. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Seneca, . 2007. Selected Philosophical Letters. Translated by B. Inwood. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Sensen, Oliver. 2022. “Universal Law and Poverty Relief.” Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 26 (2), 177–90.Google Scholar
Sethi, Janum. 2020. “‘For Me, In My Present State’: Kant on Judgments of Perception and Mere Subjective Validity.” Journal of Modern Philosophy 2 (9), 1–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sethi, Janum. 2021. “Kant on Empirical Self-Consciousness.” Australasian Journal of Philosophy 102 (1), 79–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sethi, Janum. 2022. “Is It the Understanding or the Imagination that Synthesizes?” Kant-Studien. 113 (3), 535–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sgarbi, Marco. 2016. Kant and Aristotle: Epistemology, Logic, and Method. Albany: State University of New York Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sherman, Nancy. 1997. Making a Necessity of Virtue: Aristotle and Kant on Virtue. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smit, Houston. 1999. “The Role of Reflection in the Critique of Pure Reason.” Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 80, 203–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smit, Houston. 2000. “Kant on Marks and the Immediacy of Intuition.” Philosophical Review 109 (2), 235–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smit, Houston. 2009. “Kant on Apriority and the Spontaneity of Cognition.” Metaphysics and the Good: Themes from the Philosophy of Robert Merrihew Adams, edited by Newlands, S. and Jorgensen, L. M., 188–251. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smit, Houston. 2010. “Apriority, Reason, and Induction in Hume.” Journal of the History of Philosophy 48 (3), 313–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smit, Houston. 2019. “Kant’s ‘I think’ and the Agential Approach to Self-knowledge.” Canadian Journal of Philosophy 49 (7), 980–1011.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smit, Houston. 2020. “Essence, Nature, and the Possibility of Metaphysics.” Metametaphysics and the Sciences: Historical and Philosophical Perspectives, edited by Kjosavik, Frode and Serck-Hanssen, Camilla, 38–64. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Smit, Houston. 2022. “Kant on Our Notion of Representation.” Re-Thinking Kant, Volume 6, edited by Valdez, Edgar, 14–44. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Smit, Houston. unpublished ms. “Kant’s Transcendental Theory of Cognition.”Google Scholar
Smyth, Daniel. 2024. Intuition in Kant: The Boundlessness of Sense. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stang, Nicholas. 2016. Kant’s Modal Metaphysics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stang, Nicholas. 2019. “A Guide to Ground in Kant’s Lectures on Metaphysics.” Kant’s Lectures on Metaphysics: A Critical Guide, edited by Fugate, Courtney, 74–101. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stern, Robert. 2011. Understanding Moral Obligation: Kant, Hegel, Kierkegaard. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stratmann, Joe. 2023. “The End of Explanation: Kant on the Unconditioned.” Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 105 (3), 507–32.Google Scholar
Strawson, Peter. 1970. “Imagination and Perception.” Experience and Theory, edited by Foster, L. and Swanson, J. W., 31–54. Amherst: University of Massachusetts Press.Google Scholar
Sturm, Thomas, and Wunderlich, Falk. 2010. “Kant and the Scientific Study of Consciousness.” History of the Human Sciences 23 (3), 48–71.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sussman, David. 2005. “Kantian Forgiveness.” Kant-Studien 96, 85–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sussman, David. 2008. “From Deduction to Deed: Kant’s Grounding of the Moral Law.” Kantian Review 13 (1), 52–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thomasius, Christian. 1703. Introductio ad philosophiam aulicam. Halle: Renger.Google Scholar
Thümmig, Ludwig Philipp. 1724. Institutiones philosophiae Wolfianae. Frankfurt: Renger.Google Scholar
Timmermann, Jens. 2000. “Kant’s Puzzling Ethics of Maxims.” The Harvard Review of Philosophy 8 (1), 39–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Timmermann, Jens. 2014. “Kantian Ethics and Utilitarianism.” The Cambridge Companion to Utilitarianism, edited by Eggleston, B. and Miller, D., 239–57. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Timmermann, Jens. 2015. “What’s Wrong with Deontology?” Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 115 (1), 75–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Timmons, Mark. 2017. Significance and System: Essays on Kant’s Ethics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tizzard, Jessica. 2018. “Kant on Space, Time, and Respect for the Moral Law as Analogous Formal Elements of Sensibility.” European Journal of Philosophy 26 (1): 630–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tolley, Clinton. 2014. “Kant on the Content of Cognition.” European Journal of Philosophy 22 (2), 200–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tolley, Clinton. 2017. “Kant on the Place of Cognition in the Progression of Our Representations.” Synthese 197 (3), 215–44.Google Scholar
Van Cleve, James. 2002. “Receptivity and Our Knowledge of Intrinsic Properties.” Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 65, 218–37.Google Scholar
Van der Zande, Johan. 2021. “Goodbye to Aristotle: Christian Garve between Late and Neohumanism.” Christian Garve (1742–1798): Philosoph und Philologe der Aufklärung, edited by Roth, Udo and Stiening, Gideon, 143–70. Berlin: De Gruyter.Google Scholar
Vanzo, Alberto. 2018. “Kant’s False Subtlety of the Four Syllogistic Figures in Its Intellectual Context.” The Aftermath of Syllogism: Aristotelian Logical Argument from Avicenna to Hegel, edited by Sgarbi, Marco and Cosci, Matteo, 157–90. London: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar
Vogt, Katja. 2008. “Duties to Others: Demands and Limits.” Kant’s Ethics of Virtue, edited by Betzler, M., 219–43. Berlin and New York: De Gruyter.Google Scholar
Voigt, Michael Wenzel. 1794. Aristoteles über die Seele. Aus dem Griechischen übersetzt und mit Anmerkungen begleitet. Frankfurt: Magazin für Literatur.Google Scholar
Von Tschirnhaus, Ehrenfried Walther. 1695. Medicina mentis et corporis. 2nd ed. Leipzig: Fritsch.Google Scholar
Walden, Kenneth. 2012. “Laws of Nature, Laws of Freedom, and the Social Construction of Normativity.” Oxford Studies in Metaethics 7, 37–79.Google Scholar
Walden, Kenneth. 2018. “Practical Reason Not as Such.” Journal of Ethics and Social Philosophy 13 (2), 125–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Walden, Kenneth. 2019. “Reason Unbound: Kant’s Theory of Regulative Principles.” European Journal of Philosophy 27 (3), 575–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Walschots, Michael H. 2021. “Kant and Consequentialism in Context: The Second Critique’s Response to Pistorius.” Archiv für Geschichte der Philosophie 103 (2), 313–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Warda, Arthur. 1922. Immanuel Kants Bücher. Berlin: Martin Breslauer.Google Scholar
Ware, Owen. 2014. “Rethinking Kant’s Fact of Reason.” Philosopher’s Imprint 14 (32), 1–21.Google Scholar
Warren, Daniel. 2001. “Kant’s Dynamics.” Kant and the Sciences, edited by Watkins, Eric, 93–116. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Watkins, Eric. 2005. Kant and the Metaphysics of Causality. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Watkins, Eric. 2010. “The Antinomy of Practical Reason: Reason, the Unconditioned and the Highest Good.” Kant’s Critique of Practical Reason: A Critical Guide, edited by Reath, Andrews and Timmermann, Jens, 145–67. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Watkins, Eric. 2016. “The Unconditioned and the Absolute in Kant and Early German Romanticism.” Kant Yearbook 8 (1), 117–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Watkins, Eric. 2017. “The Unconditioned Goodness of the Good Will.” Kant on Persons and Agency, edited by Watkins, Eric, 11–28. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Watkins, Eric. 2019. Kant on Laws. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Watkins, Eric. Forthcoming a. “Kant on the Pretensions of Metaphysics.”Google Scholar
Watkins, Eric. Forthcoming b. “Kant on the Unconditioned.”Google Scholar
Watkins, Eric, and Stratmann, Joe. Forthcoming. “Kant on the Principle of Sufficient Reason.” The Principle of Sufficient Reason: A History, edited by Amijee, Fatema and Rocca, Michael Della. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Watkins, Eric, and Willaschek, Marcus. 2017. “Kant’s Account of Cognition.” Journal of the History of Philosophy 55 (1), 83–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Willaschek, Marcus. 2018. Kant on the Sources of Metaphysics: The Dialectic of Pure Reason. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Willaschek, Markus. 1991. “Die Tat der Vernunft: Zur Bedeutung der Kantischen These vom ‘Faktum der Vernunft’.” Akten des Siebten Internationalen Kant-Kongresses, edited by Funke, Gerhardt, 455–66. Bonn: Bouvier.Google Scholar
Wilson, Eric E. 2016. “Habitual Desire: On Kant’s Concept of Inclination.” Kantian Review 21 (2), 211–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wittgenstein, Ludwig. 1922. Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
Wolff, Christian. 1728. Philosophia rationalis sive Logica, methodo scientifica pertractata. Frankfurt and Leipzig: Renger.Google Scholar
Wolff, Christian. 1733. Ausführliche Nachricht von seinen eigenen Schrifften, die er in deutscher Sprache von den verschiedenen Theilen der Welt-Weißheit heraus gegeben. Frankfurt: Andreä. Repr. Hildesheim: Olms, 1973.Google Scholar
Wolff, Christian. 1740. Der vernünfftigen Gedancken von Gott, der Welt und der Seele des Menschen, auch allen Dingen überhaupt, Anderer Theil, bestehend in ausführlichen Anmerckungen. Frankfurt: Andreä und Hort. Repr. Hildesheim: Olms, 1983.Google Scholar
Wolff, Christian. 1751. Vernünfftige Gedancken von Gott, der Welt und der Seele des Menschen, auch allen Dingen überhaupt. Halle: Renger. Repr. Hildesheim: Olms, 1983.Google Scholar
Wolff, Christian. 1754. Vernünftige Gedancken von den Kräfften des menschlichen Verstandes und ihrem richtigen Gebrauche in Erkenntniß der Wahrheit. Halle: Renger. Repr. Hildesheim: Olms, 1965.Google Scholar
Wolff, Michael. 1995. Die Vollständigkeit der kantischen Urteilstafel. Frankfurt: Klostermann.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wood, Allen. 2011. “Kant and Agent-Oriented Ethics.” Perfecting Virtue: New Essays on Kantian Ethics and Virtue Ethics, edited by Jost, L. and Wuerth, J., 58–91. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wood, Allen. 2014. “Hegel on Responsibility for Actions and Consequences.” The Free Development of Each, 229–51. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wood, Allen. 2015. “Kant’s History of Ethics.” Kant’s Lectures on Ethics: A Critical Guide, edited by Denis, L. and Sensen, O., 120–37. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Wood, Allen. 2018a. “Virtue: Aristotle and Kant.” Virtue, Happiness, Knowledge: Themes from the Work of Gail Fine and Terence Irwin, edited by Brink, D. O., Meyer, S. S., and Shields, C., 234–51. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Wood, Allen. 2018b. “Feeling and Desire in the Human Animal.” Kant and the Faculty of Feeling, edited by Sorensen, K. and Williamson, D., 88–106. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wuerth, Julian. 2014. Kant on Mind, Action, and Ethics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wundt, Wilhelm. 1916. Leibniz. Zu seinem zweihundertjährigen Todestag. Leipzig: Kröner.Google Scholar

Accessibility standard: WCAG 2.2 AAA

Why this information is here

This section outlines the accessibility features of this content - including support for screen readers, full keyboard navigation and high-contrast display options. This may not be relevant for you.

Accessibility Information

The HTML of this chapter complies with version 2.2 of the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG), offering more comprehensive accessibility measures for a broad range of users and attains the highest (AAA) level of WCAG compliance, optimising the user experience by meeting the most extensive accessibility guidelines.

Content Navigation

Table of contents navigation
Allows you to navigate directly to chapters, sections, or non‐text items through a linked table of contents, reducing the need for extensive scrolling.
Index navigation
Provides an interactive index, letting you go straight to where a term or subject appears in the text without manual searching.

Reading Order & Textual Equivalents

Single logical reading order
You will encounter all content (including footnotes, captions, etc.) in a clear, sequential flow, making it easier to follow with assistive tools like screen readers.
Short alternative textual descriptions
You get concise descriptions (for images, charts, or media clips), ensuring you do not miss crucial information when visual or audio elements are not accessible.
Visualised data also available as non-graphical data
You can access graphs or charts in a text or tabular format, so you are not excluded if you cannot process visual displays.

Visual Accessibility

Use of colour is not sole means of conveying information
You will still understand key ideas or prompts without relying solely on colour, which is especially helpful if you have colour vision deficiencies.
Use of high contrast between text and background colour
You benefit from high‐contrast text, which improves legibility if you have low vision or if you are reading in less‐than‐ideal lighting conditions.

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

  • References
  • Edited by Wolfram Gobsch, Universität Zürich, Thomas Land, University of Victoria, British Columbia
  • Book: The Aristotelian Kant
  • Online publication: 15 December 2025
  • Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009530453.012
Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

  • References
  • Edited by Wolfram Gobsch, Universität Zürich, Thomas Land, University of Victoria, British Columbia
  • Book: The Aristotelian Kant
  • Online publication: 15 December 2025
  • Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009530453.012
Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

  • References
  • Edited by Wolfram Gobsch, Universität Zürich, Thomas Land, University of Victoria, British Columbia
  • Book: The Aristotelian Kant
  • Online publication: 15 December 2025
  • Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009530453.012
Available formats
×