Real possibility and relation to an object. Remarks on Kant's Modal Metaphysics
Real possibility and relation to an object. Remarks on Kant's Modal Metaphysics
复制标题
真实可能性及其与对象的关系康德模态形而上学评述
DOI：
10.1111/ejop.12358
复制
发表时间：
2018
影响因子：
0.9
通讯作者：
Tobias
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Rosefeldt;Tobias
让我以赞美开始。这是一本很棒的书。它提出了一个非常重要的整体主题——康德对真实形态的看法——并且充满了有趣的细节。它是高度原创的，但它也很好地位于现有的二手文献。这本书的分析非常严谨，但另一方面，它又基于对康德历史背景的全面学术研究。这本书读起来也很有趣：装饰很少，哲学实质无处不在。我甚至喜欢阅读那些我完全不同意的段落，因为作者非常清楚地表达了他的主张和他这样做的原因。康德的《模态形而上学》也是一本好书和一本杰出作品的区别所在。它让我们以新的视角看到我们以前从未见过的东西。在这种情况下，这是通过两个主要成就实现的。第一种是将康德关于情态的观点置于其应有的位置，即置于其哲学体系的中心。鉴于模态概念如必然性或因果关系对康德的批判工程的重要性，令人惊讶的是，过去对这一主题的关注相对较少。斯坦将康德的批判哲学作为一种对世俗或真实形态的描述，试图以一种我们对它们的认知途径变得可理解的方式来理解这些形态。这使得康德的思想对当代关于形而上学形态的激烈辩论和我们对其知识的神秘感兴趣，但它也表明，从当代的角度来看，康德自己的解决方案（即先验唯心主义）的理论成本是多么不合时宜。第二，在我看来更重要的是，这本书的成就是指出了迄今为止完全被忽视的康德思想发展的连续性，从他最早的作品到成熟的批判哲学。人们发现，在各种情况下，把康德的后期哲学解释为批判性地与他早期的作品相结合，是很有帮助的。如果你想了解CPR的先验分析是关于什么的，读一下就职论文肯定是很有启发性的。通过将康德对数学知识的批判观点与获奖论文中提出的观点进行比较，来研究康德对数学知识的批判观点的发展是很有趣的。要理解康德的《自然科学的形而上学基础》，认识物理一元论是十分重要的。斯坦提出了康德批判计划的一个新的前批判来源，即康德在1763年发表的《证明上帝存在的唯一可能依据》。当然，人们总是意识到，对本体论论证的批判在《苏美尔的先验辩证法》中保留了下来，康德关于“先验理想”的论述可以被理解为是对他自己早先对上帝存在的肯定证明的一种参与。然而，斯坦认为，在他早期的著作中，有两个进一步的中心见解塑造了他后来的哲学的核心，即：(a)可能性不能被简化为逻辑或概念的可能性，但它有一个进一步的限制，使其成为真正的可能性（即，与世界有关，而不仅仅是与我们的思维有关）；(b)真正的可能性是基于一些实际存在的存在。在Beweisgrund中，进一步的限制是康德所说的可能性的物质要素必须被给予才能产生其他可能性
Let me begin with praise. This is a terrific book. It addresses an immensely important overall topic—Kant's views on real modalities—and it abounds with interesting details. It is highly original, but it is also well situated in the existing secondary literature. It is written with great analytical rigor, but on the other hand rests on a thorough scholarly engagement with Kant's historical background. The book is also a lot of fun to read: Ornament is sparse and philosophical substance is ubiquitous. I loved to read even those passages with which I substantially disagree because the author makes so wonderfully clear what he claims and why he does so. Kant's Modal Metaphysics also has what makes the difference between a very good book and an outstanding one. It lets us see something in new light what we have not seen before. In this case, this happens through two main achievement. The first one is to place Kant's views on modality at the place where it belongs, namely, at the center of his philosophical system. Given the importance of modal notions such as necessity or causality for Kant's critical project, it is surprising how relatively little attention has been paid to this topic in the past. Stang presents Kant's critical philosophy as an account of worldly, or real, modalities that tries to conceive of these modalities in a way that our cognitive access to them is made intelligible. This makes Kant's ideas interesting for the thriving contemporary debate about metaphysical modality and the mystery of our knowledge of it, but it also shows how unfashionable the theoretical cost of Kant's own solution (ie, transcendental idealism) appears from a contemporary perspective. The second—and in my opinion even more important—achievement of the book is to point to a hitherto completely ignored continuity in the development of Kant's thinking from his earliest writings until the mature critical philosophy. People have found it helpful to interpret Kant's later philosophy as critically engaging with his earlier works in various cases. It is certainly very illuminating to read the Inaugural Dissertation if you want to understand what the Transcendental Analytic of the CPR is about. It is interesting to investigate the development of Kant's critical views on mathematical knowledge by comparing them to those put forward in the Prize Essay. And it is certainly important to know the Physical Monadology in order to understand Kant's Metaphysical Foundations of Natural Science. Stang suggests a new precritical source of Kant's critical project, namely, Kant's The Only Possible Ground of Proof for a Demonstration of the Existence of God from 1763. Of course, people always were aware that the criticism of the ontological argument presented there survived in the Transcendental Dialectic of the CPR and that Kant's account of the “transcendental ideal” can be understood as an engagement with his own earlier positive proof of God's existence. However, Stang argues, there are two further central insight in this early writing that shape the kernel of his later philosophy, namely,(a) that possibility cannot be reduced to logical or conceptual possibility but that there is a further constraint on it to be real possibility (ie, to have to do with the world and not only with our thinking) and (b) that real possibility is grounded in some actually existing being. In Beweisgrund, the further constraint is what Kant calls the material elements of possibility that have to be given in order for there to be other possibilities that arise from the
康德的模态形而上学
DOI：
--
发表时间：
2016
期刊：
影响因子：
--
作者：
Nicholas F. Stang
通讯作者：
Nicholas F. Stang