Abstract

In this paper, I shall defend the thesis that the idea of a universal history in Kant’s third Critique is not legitimated from a theoretical and systematic point of view but instead from a practical point of view. In order to sustain this interpretation, I shall reconstruct parts of arguments from the entire Critique of Teleological Judgment. First, I shall argue that in the Analytic as in the Dialectic, the external purposiveness can legitimize only a teleological history of nature but not a universal history. Second, I defend that in the Methodology, the idea of a universal history is grounded in an interest of pure practical reason.