This book, first published in 2000, offers translations of the initial critical reactions to Kant's philosophy. Also included is a selection of writings by Kant's contemporaries who took on the task of defending the critical philosophy against early attacks. The first aim of this collection is to show in detail how Kant was understood and misunderstood by his contemporaries. The second aim is to reveal the sorts of arguments that Kant and his first disciples mounted in their defense of the (...) theoretical philosophy. The third aim of the book is to contribute to an understanding of the development of Kant's critical philosophy after its initial formulation in the Critique of Pure Reason, and in particular why Kant made the changes he did in the second edition of the work in 1787. This collection, which includes a glossary of key terms and biographical sketches of the critics on both sides of the debate, is a major addition to Kant scholarship and should be seen as a companion volume to the Cambridge Edition of the Works of Immanuel Kant. (shrink)

Critical Idealism in the Eyes of Kant's Contemporaries BRIGITTE SASSEN THE IDEALISM DEBATES between Kant and his contemporaries were protracted and vehement. Interestingly, all parties in the debates -- Kant's critics, defend- ers, and Kant himself -- began with basically the same conception of idealism as a position that is either skeptical with regard to the inde- pendent existence of the external world , or that denies the existence of ma- terial substance outright .' Positions quickly diverge, however, when it (...) comes to transcendental idealism. Kant's crit- ics argued consistently that transcendental idealism reduces to material idealism. Kant rejected these arguments, insisting, in turn, that transcendental idealism is the only escape from material idealism. 2 Nonetheless, he was influenced by these criticisms. He repeatedly returns to the differentiation between transcendental and material idealism in the years following 17 81,3 and he casts these differences ' This is a paraphrase of the definition that appears in the introductory paragraph of the B- Refutation . Kant's contemporaries might not have bothered to make the differentiation between skeptical and dogmatic idealism, but they certainly agreed with the general terms in which Kant describes idealism. His definition is closely echoed by.. (shrink)

The aim of this dissertation is twofold: first, to provide an account of the notion of creativity, and second, to consider some aspects of the scope of the concept of creativity, in particular whether it makes sense to speak of creativity in science. ;With regard to the first issue, I argue that creativity consists in the production of a radically new intelligibility and that for this production special, creative processes are required. The latter point is established through an analysis of (...) non-creative processes, which in turn is provided in terms of Kant's notion of schemata, interpreted as patterns of cognition. My claim is that these processes are not sufficient to bring about the radically new intelligibility that characterizes creative outcomes. The creative process is properly to be analysed through a consideration of Kant's conception of artistic genius and reference to some recent work in psychology. ;The final chapter treats the second issue, the topic of creativity in the sciences. I question whether it makes sense to speak of creativity in science. I argue that since the sciences provide radically novel, yet intelligible, ways of understanding the world, creativity is required here as well. (shrink)