A note on Kant's first antinomy

Philosophical Quarterly 42 (169):480-485 (1992)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

An interpretation of Kant's first antinomy is defended whereby both its thesis and its antithesis depend on a common basic principle that Kant endorses, namely that there cannot be an ‘infinite contingency’, by which is meant a contingent fact about how an infinite region of space or time is occupied. The greatest problem with this interpretation is that Kant explicitly declines to apply counterparts of the temporal arguments in the antinomy to the world’s future, even though, if the interpretation is correct, such arguments are clearly there to be applied. This problem, it is argued, is surmountable.

Similar books and articles

The antinomy of designation.Gordon Matheson - 1959 - Philosophy of Science 26 (3):260-269.
Kant’s First Antinomy.M. S. Gram - 1967 - The Monist 51 (4):499-518.
Kant's first antinomy.E. A. Singer - 1909 - Philosophical Review 18 (4):384-395.
The First Antinomy and Spinoza.Omri Boehm - 2011 - British Journal for the History of Philosophy 19 (4):683 - 710.

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-01-28

Downloads
277 (#70,987)

6 months
98 (#42,737)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Citations of this work

Bird on Kant's Mathematical Antinomies.A. W. Moore - 2011 - Kantian Review 16 (2):235-243.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references