康德《第三批判》的系统性

IF 0.3 3区 哲学 0 PHILOSOPHY
Andrew Cooper
{"title":"康德《第三批判》的系统性","authors":"Andrew Cooper","doi":"10.5840/IDSTUDIES201911483","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Kant’s Critique of the Power of Judgment is often interpreted in light of its initial reception. Conventionally, this reception is examined in the work of Fichte, Schelling and Hegel, who found in Kant’s third Critique a new task for philosophy: the construction of an absolute, self-grounding system. This paper identifies an alternative line of reception in the work of physiologists and medical practitioners during the 1790s and early 1800s, including Kielmeyer, Reil, Girtanner and Oken. It argues that these naturalists called on Kant’s third Critique to solidify an experimental natural history that classifies organic form within a system of laws. Kant held both kinds of system in tension, which is why the third Critique remains a singular and provocative text.","PeriodicalId":41879,"journal":{"name":"IDEALISTIC STUDIES","volume":"48 1","pages":"25-46"},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2018-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Systematicity in Kant’s Third Critique\",\"authors\":\"Andrew Cooper\",\"doi\":\"10.5840/IDSTUDIES201911483\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Kant’s Critique of the Power of Judgment is often interpreted in light of its initial reception. Conventionally, this reception is examined in the work of Fichte, Schelling and Hegel, who found in Kant’s third Critique a new task for philosophy: the construction of an absolute, self-grounding system. This paper identifies an alternative line of reception in the work of physiologists and medical practitioners during the 1790s and early 1800s, including Kielmeyer, Reil, Girtanner and Oken. It argues that these naturalists called on Kant’s third Critique to solidify an experimental natural history that classifies organic form within a system of laws. Kant held both kinds of system in tension, which is why the third Critique remains a singular and provocative text.\",\"PeriodicalId\":41879,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"IDEALISTIC STUDIES\",\"volume\":\"48 1\",\"pages\":\"25-46\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2018-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"IDEALISTIC STUDIES\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5840/IDSTUDIES201911483\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"PHILOSOPHY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"IDEALISTIC STUDIES","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5840/IDSTUDIES201911483","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"PHILOSOPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

康德的《判断力批判》通常是根据其最初的接受来解释的。按照惯例,这种接受在费希特、谢林和黑格尔的著作中得到了检验,他们在康德的《第三批判》中发现了哲学的新任务:构建一个绝对的、自我基础的体系。本文确定了在18世纪90年代和19世纪初,包括Kielmeyer, Reil, Girtanner和Oken在内的生理学家和医疗从业人员的工作中的另一种接收方式。它认为,这些自然主义者呼吁康德的第三批判来巩固实验的自然历史,将有机形式分类在一个法律体系中。康德认为这两种体系都是紧张的,这就是为什么《第三批判》仍然是一个独特的、具有挑衅性的文本。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Systematicity in Kant’s Third Critique
Kant’s Critique of the Power of Judgment is often interpreted in light of its initial reception. Conventionally, this reception is examined in the work of Fichte, Schelling and Hegel, who found in Kant’s third Critique a new task for philosophy: the construction of an absolute, self-grounding system. This paper identifies an alternative line of reception in the work of physiologists and medical practitioners during the 1790s and early 1800s, including Kielmeyer, Reil, Girtanner and Oken. It argues that these naturalists called on Kant’s third Critique to solidify an experimental natural history that classifies organic form within a system of laws. Kant held both kinds of system in tension, which is why the third Critique remains a singular and provocative text.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
IDEALISTIC STUDIES
IDEALISTIC STUDIES PHILOSOPHY-
CiteScore
0.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
11
期刊介绍: Idealistic Studies provides a peer-reviewed forum for the discussion of themes and topics that relate to the tradition and legacy of philosophical Idealism. Established in 1971 as a vehicle for American Personalism and post-Kantian Idealism, the journal"s purview now includes historically earlier expressions, as well as the inheritance of that past in the developments of late 19th to mid-20th century philosophy. The journal has also become a venue for a number of philosophical movements that share Idealism in their genealogies, including Phenomenology, Neo-Kantianism, Historicism, Hermeneutics, Life Philosophy, Existentialism, and Pragmatism.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信