Kant’s analytic-geometric revolution

Dissertation, University of Texas at Austin (2011)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

In the Critique of Pure Reason, Kant defends the mathematically deterministic world of physics by arguing that its essential features arise necessarily from innate forms of intuition and rules of understanding through combinatory acts of imagination. Knowing is active: it constructs the unity of nature by combining appearances in certain mandatory ways. What is mandated is that sensible awareness provide objects that conform to the structure of ostensive judgment: “This (S) is P.” Sensibility alone provides no such objects, so the imagination compensates by combining passing point-data into “pure” referents for the subject-position, predicate-position, and copula. The result is a cognitive encounter with a generic physical object whose characteristics—magnitude, substance, property, quality, and causality—are abstracted as the Kantian categories. Each characteristic is a product of “sensible synthesis” that has been “determined” by a “function of unity” in judgment. Understanding the possibility of such determination by judgment is the chief difficulty for any rehabilitative reconstruction of Kant’s theory. I will show that Kant conceives of figurative synthesis as an act of line-drawing, and of the functions of unity as rules for attending to this act. The subject-position refers to substance, identified as the objective time-continuum; the predicate-position, to quality, identified as the continuum of property values (constituting the second-order type named by the predicate concept). The upshot is that both positions refer to continuous magnitudes, related so that one (time-value) is the condition of the other (property-value). Kant’s theory of physically constructive grammar is thus equivalent to the analytic-geometric formalism at work in the practice of mathematical physics, which schematizes time and state as lines related by an algebraic formula. Kant theorizes the subject–predicate relation in ostensive judgment as an algebraic time–state function. When aimed towards sensibility, “S is P” functions as the algebraic relation “t → ƒ(t).”

Links

PhilArchive

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Kant and the Art of Schematism.Samantha Matherne - 2014 - Kantian Review 19 (2):181-205.
Causation in Reflective Judgment.Michael Kurak - 2016 - Kant Studies Online (1):12-41.
Kant’s Theory of Self-Consciousness.Lewis Baldacchino - 1980 - Kant Studien 71 (1-4):393-405.
Kant's Concept of Force.Melissa Zinkin - 1999 - Dissertation, Northwestern University
Kant's Theory of Measurement.Cynthia Regas Anderson - 1993 - Dissertation, Georgetown University
Theories of Judgment.Wayne Martin - 2006 - Philosophical Studies 137 (1):121-134.
Schelling’s Criticism of Kant’s Theory of Time.Wong Kwok Kui - 2010 - Idealistic Studies 40 (1-2):83-102.
Kant.Christel Fricke - 2010 - In Stefan Lorenz Sorgner & Oliver Fürbeth (eds.), Music in German philosophy: an introduction. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Analytics

Added to PP
2018-03-01

Downloads
348 (#57,117)

6 months
81 (#58,633)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Scott Heftler
University of Texas at Austin (PhD)

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

Kant.Patricia Kitcher, Philip Kitcher & Ralph C. S. Walker - 1980 - Philosophical Review 89 (2):282.
Kant's 'Critique of Pure Reason': An Introduction.Jill Vance Buroker - 2006 - New York: Cambridge University Press.
Arithmetic and the categories.Charles Parsons - 1984 - Topoi 3 (2):109-121.
Kant's "argument from geometry".Lisa Shabel - 2004 - Journal of the History of Philosophy 42 (2):195-215.

View all 32 references / Add more references