Sei sulla pagina 1di 4

PHIL 703 Foundations in Modern European Philosophy S1 2016

The Critique of Pure Reason

Instructor: Michael Olson (michael.olson@mq.edu.au). I’m available to meet with students basically any time. Send me an email to arrange something.

Overview: This course is devoted to a close reading of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason (1781/1787). Our

reading will focus particularly on situating Kant’s ‘critical turn’ within the context of eighteenth century philosophical traditions and debates. To this end, we will begin my considering how the Critique relates both

to Kant’s pre-critical writings and to a series of eighteenth century German figures (including Wolff,

Baumgarten, Knutzen, Crusius, and others). Our concern with the historical context of the Critique cannot ultimately be isolated from the questions and concerns of contemporary Kant scholarship, and so the course will also familiarize students with some of the major debates and concern in the recent literature. The

ultimate goal of the course, then, is to provide students with a thorough, historically grounded understanding

of the Critique of Pure Reason that can be brought to bear on the current scholarly conversation.

Requirements: In addition to regular and active participation in discussion (25% of the final mark), students will be occasionally required to lead discussion of the seminar’s reading for that week (15% of the final mark).

A term paper is due at the end of the semester (60% of the final mark). Students should identify a topic for

this paper in consultation with the instructor.

Texts:

These volumes are required for the course:

Immanuel Kant, Critique of Pure Reason, trans. Paul Guyer and Allen Wood (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999).

Eric Watkins (ed.), Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason: Background Source Materials (Cambridge:

Cambridge University Press, 2009).

I will make additional readings available in electronic form via ilearn.

Reading Schedule:

WEEK ONE: PRELIMINARIES AND CORRESPONDENCE

Kant, Correspondence, ed. and trans. Arnolf Zweig (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1999), To Lambert, Sept. 2, 1770 (107-109), From Lambert, Oct. 13, 1770 (113-120), From Mendelssohn, Dec. 25, 1770 (122-125), To Herz, Feb. 21, 1772 (132-138).

Garnett, Christopher, “Kant’s Theory of Intuitus Intellectualis in the Inaugural Dissertation of 1770,” Philosophical Revue, 49 (1937), 424-431.

WEEK TWO: THE INAUGURAL DISSERTATION

Kant, “Inaugural Dissertation,” in Theoretical Philosophy: 1755-1770, ed. and trans. by D. Walford and R. Meerbote (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007), 373-416.

Carl, Wolfgang, “Kant’s First Drafts of the Deductions of the Categories,” in Kant's Transcendental Deductions: The Three Critiques and the Opus Postumum, ed. Eckart Förster (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1989), 3-20.

WEEK THREE: BEGINNING THE CRITIQUE AND THE TRANSCENDENTAL AESTHETIC

Kant, CPR Aviii-B73.

Christian Wolff, Rational Thoughts on God, the World, and Things in General (1720), in Watkins, Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 15.

Christian August Crusius, Sketch of the Necessary Truths of Reason (1745), in Watkins, Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 145-150.

Gary Hatfield, “Kant on the Perception of space [and time]” in Paul Guyer, ed. The Cambridge Companion to Kant and Modern Philosophy (Cambridge University Press, 2006), 61-93.

Henry Allison, Kant’s Transcendental Idealism: An Interpretation and Defense, 2 nd ed. (Newhaven: Yale University Press, 2004) “The Thing in Itself and the Problem of Affection,” 237-254.

WEEK FOUR: TRANSCENDENTAL LOGIC

Kant, CPR A50/B74-A94/B129.

Eckart Förster, “How Are Transcendental Arguments Possible?” in Reading Kant: New Perspectives on transcendental arguments and Critical Philosophy, ed. Eva Schaper (Oxford: Blackwell, 1989), 3-20.

Béatrice Longuenesse, “Kant on a priori concepts: the metaphysical deduction of the categories,” in Kant on the Human Standpoint (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2009), 81-116.

Kant, CPR A95-A130.

WEEK FIVE: THE A DEDUCTION

Dieter Henrich, “Kant’s Notion of a Deduction and the Methodological Background of the First Critique,” in Eckart Förster, ed., Kant's Transcendental Deductions: the Three Critiques and the Opus Postumum (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1989), 29-46.

Béatrice Longuenesse, Kant and the Capacity to Judge, tr. C.T. Wolfe (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1998), 35-58.

Allison, Kant’s Transcendental Idealism, “Objective Validity and Objective Reality: The Transcendental Deduction of the Categories,” 133-172.

Kant, CPR B129-B169.

WEEK SIX: THE B DEDUCTION

Feder-Garve Review, in Brigitte Sassen (ed. and trans.), Kant’s Early Critics: The Empiricist Critique of the Theoretical Philosophy (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000), 53-58.

Ulrich Review, in Sassen, Kant’s Early Critics, 210-214.

Kant, Metaphysical Foundations of Natural Science, ed. and trans. Michael Friedman (Cambridge University Press, 2004), 10-12. (Just the long footnote).

Longuenesse, Kant and the Capacity to Judge, 211-242.

WEEK SEVEN: THE PRINCIPLES OF PURE REASON

Kant, CPR A131/B170-A218/B265.

Wolff, Rational Thoughts, in Watkins, Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 9-10.

Allison, Kant’s Transcendental Idealism, 229-74.

WEEK EIGHT: IDEALISM AND THE POSTULATES OF PURE REASON

Kant, Prolegomena to Any Future Metaphysics, ed. and trans. Gary Hatfield (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2011), §§6-13.

Kant, CPR A218/B266-B294.

Johann Nicolaus Tetens, Philosophical Essays on Human Nature (1777), in Watkins, Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 369-373.

Henry Allison, “Kant’s Critique of Berkeley,” Journal of the History of Philosophy 11 (1973), 43-63.

Jennifer Mensch, “Kant and the Problem of Idealism: On the Significance of the Göttingen Review,” The Southern Journal of Philosophy 44: 2 (2006), 297-317.

WEEK NINE: PHENOMENA AND NOUMENA

Kant, CPR A235/B295-A260/B315.

Tetens, Philosophical Essays on Human Nature, in Watkins, Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 377-382.

Henry Allison, “Things in Themselves, Noumena, and the Transcendental Object,” Dialectica 32 (1978): 41-76.

WEEK TEN: TRANSITION TO THE DIALECTIC

Kant, CPR A260/B316-A338/B396.

GHR Parkinson, “Kant as a Critic of Leibniz. The Amphiboly of Concepts of Reflection,” Revue Internationale de Philosophie, vols. 136-137 (1981), 302-314.

WEEK ELEVEN: THE PARALOGISMS OF PURE REASON

Kant, CPR A338/B396-B432.

Martin Knutzen, Philosophical Treatise on the Immaterial Nature of the Soul (1744), in Watkins, Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 75-83.

Wolff, Rational Thoughts, in Watkins, Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 7-9, 46-49.

Karl Ameriks, Kant’s Theory of Mind (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000), 84-127.

WEEK TWELVE: THE ANTINOMIES

Kant, CPR A476/B504-A567/B595.

Leonhard Euler, Letters to a German Princess (1760-1762), in Watkins, Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason,

213-226.

Alexander Baumgarten, Metaphysics (1739), in Watkins, Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 101-114, 119-

120.

Allison, Kant’s Transcendental Idealism, “The Antinomy of Pure Reason,” 35-61.

WEEK THIRTEEN: THE IDEAL OF PURE REASON AND THE CRITIQUE OF THEOLOGY

Kant, CPR A568/B595-A642/B670.

Crusius, Sketch of the Necessary Truths of Reason, in Watkins, Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 165-169.

Michelle Grier, “The Ideal of Pure Reason,” in The Cambridge Companion to Kant, ed. Paul Guyer (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992), 266-289.