Purpose. The purpose of the study is critical reconstruction of gender issues within the framework of modern political philosophy and political anthropology, in-depth reflection of the phenomena of justice, identity, human dignity in the aspect of their gender measurements and the search for the answer to the fundamental question for leading gender discourses: is freedom and justice, in fact, possible only together with stresses, a feeling of one’s sense-rooted belonging to one or another community? Theoretical basis. The supplement of the (...) phenomenological and transcendental methodology by the method of contractualism directs the study of the topic specified in the article’s title into a new direction, and reflects its essential measurements and aspects. Understanding gender as an important philosophical and anthropological problem and a complex "social construct" precisely within the framework of the latest critical and self-critical versions of the theory of social contract reveal fruitful perspectives for political philosophy and anthropology. Originality. The study of the phenomena of "recognition" of "gender justice", "moral sense" outlines the possibilities and sense of filling the principle of social contract with a specific theoretical and practical content, substantiates the need to expand the philosophical and anthropological interpretation space of gender issues. Conclusions. Significance of the gender community for the sociocultural and existential identity of the individual enables his/her security and the ability to adequately orient in difficult life situations. However, the main purpose of human life is the ability to self-identity, even after profound changes in the structure of personality that arise in difficult situations of contempt and injustice. (shrink)

One of the major problems posed by the human rights issue to philosophy is its philosophical foundation. The background of this discussion raises questions such as: how can one philosophically explain / justify the demand for human rights recognition? This paper focuses on the argumentative basis on which Höffe structures his proposal. For him human rights are closely connected to the concept of justice. This concept must be understood primarily as an exchange (Gerechtigkeit als Tausch). Although the concept seems simple, (...) it offers many difficulties regarding its foundation. (shrink)

The subject of my dissertation is "rationality". In this book I undertake a comprehensive, systematic and independent treatment of the problem of rationality. This furthers progress toward a general theory of rationality, one that represents and defends a uniform conception of reason. The structure and general outline are as follows: Part I: General Definition of the Concept; Part II: Rationality in the Theoretical Realm; Part III: Rationality in the Practical Realm (parts II and III are divided respectively into A. Relative (...) Reasons and B. Absolute Reasons); Part IV: Grounds for the Principle of Reason. My aim in this work is to prove that a conception of rationality as justification of our usage of language is more significant than has been classically recognized, without, however, reducing the concept of rationality. After a definition of the term is provided in the first chapter by means of language analysis, the following three questions are dealt with in the subsequent chapters: a) Exhaustion of rationality in relative reasons—i.e., is reasoning exhausted by reference to existing views and goals, or does rationality also exist in a strong sense? The latter would be the case if the views and goals referred to the relative conception must themselves be justified de novo. I argue that such an absolute justification of views and goals cannot be provided. To this end, in the theoretical domain, I discuss a question prominent in the debate over the rationality of worldviews, namely the question of whether the standards of theoretical rationality are merely culturally relative (chapter V.). Here I arrive at the position that standards of theoretical rationality are only transcultural insofar as there are goals which are not themselves culturally-dependent. With regard to practically fundamental goals, the core standards of modern science can be justified. This justification strategy therefore requires that such goals be established. In practical terms, first I address (in Chapter VII) the so-called "final justification" of norms problem. Here I discuss above all the transcendental-pragmatic proposal and the contractualist conception. According to my view, neither succeed in providing a final rational grounding for norms. That grounding pertains instead to the rationale for objectives, and Chapter VIII demonstrates that even a final justification of objectives is impossible. This does not mean, however, that a person's goals cannot be criticized as irrational. But the warrant in this case depends on the rules that govern the genesis of desires being accepted by the subject. b) If substantive rationality does not exist because no absolute grounding for opinions and goals can obtain, then the question of how strong or weak the concept of rationality is acquires further weight. On that basis, relative theoretical and practical rationality is examined in detail. I aim with this analysis of (relative) rationality to apprehend the structural parallelism between rationality in both the practical and the theoretical domain, and therefore to defend a uniform conception of reason or rationality. This is accomplished by identifying a concept that exhibits the same structure in both theoretical and practical domains: the term "rational" is applied to actions and opinions in order to claim, first of all, that they are "well-founded." For example, one must inquire into the precise rational justification for opinions or actions. To determine the individually necessary and jointly sufficient conditions required for an opinion or action to be rational, one must first provide a formal characterization of the rationality of those opinions or actions. What is to count as a rational ground can only be explained by formal procedures and results achievable via those procedures. To be more specific, I claim that the process of opinion formation and practical reflection is subject to rational justification based on internalist rules. The rules governing theoretical rationality can have their content transformed in a further move, if one takes the result of the process of rational opinion-formation as the product of an epistemological determination, that is, as a decision about which opinion to hold that is made on the basis of epistemological or prudential goals. Implicit in this position is the controversial idea that one can actually decide to believe something. The rules of practical reason are the rules that guide the rational selection of objectives and actions. The structural parallelism of theoretical and practical rationality consists, therefore, in the fact that both refer to mental processes that are controlled by rules which one freely accepts and follows. In both cases, these rules are to be understood as governing the rational choice of a mental or physical action. c) Therefore, the question of whether rationality—being rational—can in turn be grounded by reasons can be answered in the following way: The rules of rationality can only be justified with reference to a person’s goals, as the best strategy for achieving those goals. If someone does not desire the optimal realization of his goals, there is no other way of arguing directly for rationality. One can only attempt to demonstrate—if the person is open to argument—that it is typically in the person's own best interest to adhere to the rules of rationality. (shrink)

A common reaction to Hegel’s suggestion that we collapse Kant’s distinction between form and content is that, since such a move would also deprive us of any way of distinguishing the merely logical from the real possibility of our concepts, it is incoherent and ought to be rejected. It is true that these two distinctions are intimately related in Kant, such that if one goes, the other does as well. But it is less obvious that giving them up as Kant (...) conceives them is as incoherent a proposal as many of Hegel’s critics think. It has been the point of a recent account of Hegel’s idealism to demonstrate that his critique of Kant’s dichotomy between form and content or concept and intuition does not commit him to the view that human cognition is materially creative of its content in the manner of a God-like or intuitive intellect—does not, in other words, signify a return to a pre-Critical metaphysics. This is the interpretative stance I adopt here as well, in hope of giving defenders of Kant reasons for taking Hegel more seriously. (shrink)

This major study of Kant provides a detailed examination of the development and function of the doctrine of transcendental illusion in his theoretical philosophy. The author shows that a theory of 'illusion' plays a central role in Kant's arguments about metaphysical speculation and scientific theory. Indeed, she argues that we cannot understand Kant unless we take seriously his claim that the mind inevitably acts in accordance with ideas and principles that are 'illusory'. Taking this claim seriously, we can make (...) much better sense of Kant's arguments and reach a deeper understanding of the role he allots human reason in science. (shrink)

This book is the first detailed study of Kant's method of 'transcendental reflection' and its use in the Critique of Pure Reason to identify our basic human cognitive capacities, and to justify Kant's transcendental proofs of the necessary a priori conditions for the possibility of self-conscious human experience. Kenneth Westphal, in a closely argued internal critique of Kant's analysis, shows that if we take Kant's project seriously in its own terms, the result is not transcendental idealism but (...) realism regarding physical objects. Westphal attends to neglected topics - Kant's analyses of the transcendental affinity of the sensory manifold, the 'lifelessness of matter', fallibilism, the semantics of cognitive reference, four externalist aspects of Kant's views, and the importance of Kant's Metaphysical Foundations for the Critique of Pure Reason - that illuminate Kant's enterprise in new and valuable ways. His book will appeal to all who are interested in Kant's theoretical philosophy. (shrink)

I argue that Hegel is aware of a crucial problem in Kant’s transcendental account of the conditions of human knowledge. Unless the matter of sensation is sufficiently ordered (and sufficiently varied) we could not make any cognitive judgments. In that case we could not distinguish ourselves from objects we know, and so could not be self-conscious. This is a necessary, formal and transcendental condition of possible human experience. However, it is also (as Kant acknowledged) a material – not (...) a conceptual or an intutive – condition. Consequently, Kant’s idealism cannot account for it. This provides one key to Hegel’s internal critique of Kant’s idealism. (shrink)

Explicates and defends closely parallel, genuinely transcendental proofs of mental content externalism developed by Kant and by Wittgenstein. Both their proofs have been widely neglected, to our loss.

European Journal of Philosophy, EarlyView.

European Journal of Philosophy, Volume 30, Issue 3, Page 899-923, September 2022.

El presente estudio intenta identificar el pensamiento filosófico que se esconde en la obra de K. Rahner. La filosofía de Rahner no es algo meramente ocasional, sino algo expresamente buscado y tenido constantemente en cuenta en la teología que desarrolla. El autor intenta hacer una exposición unitaria que la filosofía de Rahner desarrolla de una manera muy dispersa y casi siempre encajada bajo puntos de vista teológicos.

In Part One of Religion within the Bounds of Bare Reason, Kant repeatedly refers to a “proof” that human nature has a necessary and universal “evil propensity,” but he provides only obscure hints at its location. Interpreters have failed to identify such an argument in Part One. After examining relevant passages, summarizing recent attempts to reconstruct the argument, and explaining why these do not meet Kant's stated needs, I argue that the elusive proof must have a transcendental form (called (...) quasi‐transcendental because Kant never uses “transcendental” in Religion). With deceptive simplicity, the section titles of Part One, viewed as components in an architechtonic system of religion, constitute steps in just such a proof. (shrink)

Surprisingly, over the decade or so since its publication, Bhaskar's Dialectic: The Pulse of Freedom has received relatively little in the way of systematic analysis either by critical realists or their critics. There have been, however, a number of critiques that have dealt with some of its themes and developments in a variety of contexts. In the following study, I assess the argument of Alex Callinicos. Callinicos' critique, though in many ways sympathetic, is fundamental to critical realism. Engaging with it (...) provides a means to develop and clarify a number of arguments about aspects of critical realism in general and also provides a useful staging point to set forth a basic and consistent ordering of inquiry for a critique of DPF. The initial purpose of the analysis is not so much a defence of DPF but an assessment of the construction of an argument brought to bear on it. I argue that the form of the argument deployed is problematic in a way that detracts from the substance of the critique of the content of DPF (I make no comment here on its relation to the later spiritual turn). This is not to suggest that DPF is immune to criticism but rather to suggest that a fuller analysis of the DPF argument and its potential remains to be made. The ultimate purpose of the analysis is to use this assessment of a strategy of critique—an argumentation schema or discursive form—to create an alternative approach to critically appraising DPF. Fundamental to Callinicos' argument is the nature of transcendental argument. (shrink)

Kant’s ‘Refutation of Idealism’ plainly has an anti-Cartesian conclusion: ‘inner experience in general is only possible through outer experience in general’ (B278). Due to wide-spread preoccupation with Cartesian skepticism, and to the anti-naturalism of early analytic philosophy, most of Kant’s recent commentators have sought to find a purely conceptual, ‘analytic’ argument in Kant’s Refutation of Idealism – and then have dismissed Kant when no such plausible argument can be reconstructed from his text. Kant’s argument supposedly cannot eliminate all relevant alternatives, (...) and so cannot justify its strong modal claims. Kant based his arguments on an inventory of our basic cognitive capacities to employ our forms of intuition and our forms of judgment. Kant provides a variety of considerations and arguments to determine what our cognitive capacities are. This involves ‘transcendental reflection’, which Kant held is absolutely crucial for judging matters a priori (A263/B319). I argue that there is a level of philosophical reflection on our own cognitive capabilities and their preconditions that is significantly richer than has been noticed by recent commentators, and that is a precondition of Kant’s transcendental reflection proper. I explicate certain thought experiments Kant proposes in order for us to recognize some our basic, characteristic cognitive capabilities, and the limits and requirements they entail for the nature and objects of human knowledge. These thought experiments involve a kind of reflection on who we as cognizant subjects are, on what our basic cognitive capabilities are. Engaging in this kind of reflection reveals that Kant’s transcendental arguments are significantly stronger and more persuasive than has been recognized in recent commentary. (shrink)

Esse artigo investiga a fenomenologia do tempo de Merleau-Ponty e centra seu foco na crítica merleau-pontiana às "Lições sobre a consciência íntima do tempo" de Husserl. A partir dessa crítica e da diferença entre os dois autores, o artigo mostra como Merleau-Ponty se afasta do modelo husserliano de uma fenomenologia da Razão.Merleau-Ponty. Husserl. Tempo. Sujeito. Transcendental. Empírico. Time and Subject The transcendental and the empirical in Merleau-Ponty´s PhenomenologyAbstractThis article investigates Merleau-Ponty´s phenomenology of time and focuses on Merleau-Pontys critique (...) of Husserls Lessons about the intimate consciousness of time. Based on this critique and on the difference between the two authors, the article shows how Merleau-Ponty moves away from the Husserlian model of a phenomenology of Reason.Merleau-Ponty. Husserl. Time. Subject. Transcendental. Empirical. (shrink)

The first phase of Sartre’s philosophical publications is marked by an apparent ambivalence towards Husserl’s transcendental turn. Sartre accepts both major aspects of that turn, the phenomenological reduction and the use of transcendental argumentation. Yet his rejection of the transcendental ego that Husserl derives from this transcendental turn overlooks an obvious transcendental argument in favour of it. His books on emotion and imagination, moreover, make only very brief comments about the transcendental constitution of the (...) world of experience. In each case, these appear at the end of the book and can seem to contradict the book’s central analysis. The problem underlying these features of his works of phenomenological psychology is clarified and resolved, however, when Sartre articulates his own transcendental phenomenology and ontology in Being and Nothingness a decade after he first encountered the work of Husserl. This resolution raises a new problem that animates the next phase of his philosophy. (shrink)

Merleau-Ponty’s radical reflection conceptualizes the transcendental and the empirical as intertwined, emerging only via an écart. I advance this concept of transcendental empirical écart by studying the problem of measurement in science, in both general and quantum mechanical contexts. Section one analyses scientific problems of measurement, focusing on issues of temporality, to show how measurement entails a transcendental that diverges with the empirical. Section two briefly interprets this result via Merleau-Ponty’s concept of depth, to indicate how measurement (...) reveals a temporality that is not an already given ground that would guarantee the transcendental in advance: temporality is instead ‘deep,’ itself engendering a divergence of transcendental and empirical operations that first allows for measurement and sense. (shrink)

This paper explores the significance of Heraclitus’s fragment B45 for Husserl and Merleau-Ponty as it appears in the Crisis of the European Sciences and Merleau-Ponty’s lectures on this text in the late 1950s. I claim that at stake is a revision or mutation of the sense of transcendentality: by naming it psyche, the transcendental is no longer understood as a static set of a priori conditions but what I call, following Jean-Luc Nancy, “outsidedness.” I elaborate this idea in dialogue (...) with Nancy and Derrida in their texts “De l’âme” and On Touching: Jean-Luc Nancy. By identifying the sense of transcendentality with the psyche of Heraclitus, we see a transcendentality in the process of departing, and hence transcendentality is an event for which we always arrive late.Cet article explore la signification du fragment B45 de Héraclite pour Husserl et Merleau-Ponty telle qu’elle apparaît dans la Crise des Sciences Européennes et dans la lecture de ce texte par Merleau-Ponty à la fin des années 1950. Je postule qu’il en va de la révision ou de la mutation du sens de la « transcendantalité » : en l’appelant psyche, le transcendantal n’est plus compris comme un ensemble statique de conditions a priori mais comme ce que je nomme, suivant Jean-Luc Nancy, un « au-delà ». J’élabore cette idée en dialogue avec les textes de Nancy et de Derrida : « De l’âme » et Le Toucher, Jean-Luc Nancy. En identifiant le sens de la « transcendantalité » avec la psyche de Héraclite, nous remarquons une « transcendantalité » sur le départ, et donc la « transcendantalité » est un événement pour lequel nous arrivons toujours en retard. Questo saggio esplora il significato del frammento di Eraclito B45 per Husserl e Merleau-Ponty, per come appare nella Crisi delle scienze europee e nella lettura merleau-pontiana di questo testo verso la fine degli anni Cinquanta. Ci sembra di poter affermare che in gioco vi sia una rivisitazione, una mutazione, del senso del trascendentale: definendolo come psyche, il trascendentale non è più concepito come una serie statica di condizioni a priori, ma come ciò che, con Jean-Luc Nancy, chiamiamo “esteriorità”. Abbiamo elaborato questa idea in dialogo con Nancy e Derrida e i loro testi rispettivi Dell’anima e Toccare, Jean-Luc Nancy. Identificando il senso della trascendentalità con la psyche di Eraclito, possiamo vedere della trascendentalità nel processo del dipartirsi (partance), e quindi, proprio in questo senso, comprendere la trascendentalità come un evento rispetto al quale siamo sempre in ritardo. (shrink)

Recent developments of transcendental arguments reflect the struggle to accommodate Stroud’s devastating objection by giving up on failed expectations in providing proof of what the external-world skeptic calls into question: knowledge of the existence of the outside world. Since Strawson's capitulation in 1984, the truth-direct transcendental arguments have given way to modest belief-direct transcendental arguments that concede that truth-direct transcendental arguments are doomed to fail to establish ambitious conclusions about reality but at the same time hold (...) that they can nonetheless successfully establish modest conceptual connection between the major beliefs within our conceptual scheme. This article seeks the “reactionary” rehabilitation of the old hubris: a new defense of the truth-direct transcendental argument. I set forth a new reconstruction of Kant’s Refutation as a successful truth-directed transcendental argument that meets Stroud’s objection. As with several papers and books about the theme, this article is of a systematic and a historical nature by connecting the contemporary debate about transcendental argument with Kant’s philosophy. (shrink)

Volume 10, Issue 3, September 2019, Page 408-421.

Esse artigo investiga a fenomenologia do tempo de Merleau-Ponty e centra seu foco na crítica merleau-pontiana às "Lições sobre a consciência íntima do tempo" de Husserl. A partir dessa crítica e da diferença entre os dois autores, o artigo mostra como Merleau-Ponty se afasta do modelo husserliano de uma fenomenologia da Razão.Merleau-Ponty. Husserl. Tempo. Sujeito. Transcendental. Empírico. Time and Subject The transcendental and the empirical in Merleau-Ponty´s PhenomenologyAbstractThis article investigates Merleau-Ponty´s phenomenology of time and focuses on Merleau-Pontys critique (...) of Husserls Lessons about the intimate consciousness of time. Based on this critique and on the difference between the two authors, the article shows how Merleau-Ponty moves away from the Husserlian model of a phenomenology of Reason.Merleau-Ponty. Husserl. Time. Subject. Transcendental. Empirical. (shrink)

Scanlonian contractualism rejects the consequentialist assumptions about morality, value, and rationality in virtue of which deontological constraints appear paradoxical. And yet, Jeffrey Brand-Ballard and Robert Shaver have claimed that it cannot succeed in defending the said restrictions. That is because they see Scanlon’s tie-breaking argument as threatening to justify aggregation in paradox of deontology cases. I argue that this claim rests upon a failure to appreciate contractualism’s relational character. Once we take this feature of the view into account, (...) it becomes clear that the tie-breaking argument is ruled out in cases where the only way for us to prevent several killings would be to commit one ourselves. To show this, I provide a contractualist explanation of why our duty not to harm persons is stricter than our duty to help them when they are threatened with harm. I conclude by distinguishing two ways in which this defense of deontological restrictions might bring contractualism objectionably close to absolutism. (shrink)

The aim of this investigation is to discuss the concept of realism and idealism applied to Husserlian phenomenology, distinguishing the ontological and the epistemological dimensions. Therefore, I propose questions that will help to mark this distinction. The answers will be given with reference to Husserl’s texts and commentators.

The general topic of this book is the metaphysics of the subject in Kantian transcendental philosophy. A critical appreciation of Kant's achievements requires that we be able to view Kant's positions as transformations of pre-Kantian philosophy, and that we understand the ways in which contemporary philosophy changes the letter of Kantian thought in order to be true to its spirit in a new philosophical horizon. Descartes is important in two respects. One the one hand, he institutes a philosophical movement (...) which can be said to culminate in Kant; on the other hand, Descartes is one of the major opponents against whom Kant argues in establishing his own position. In either case, the Cartesian cogito is a central concern. Wilfred Sellars restates and transforms Kantian positions in the context of contemporary philosophy after the "linguistic turn", using the Platonic metaphor that thought is similar to discourse. (shrink)

This text explores the problem of transcendental stupidity in Sigmund Freud, Gilles Deleuze and Jacques Derrida’s works, seeking to combine it with (1) the paradoxical figure of Oedipus (the original complex) in psychoanalytical and philosophical tradition and (2) the symptomatic situation of some important animals (wolf and dog, symbols of wild and domestic life [i.e.: Freud’s Wolfs, Freud’s Chow-Chows]) in analyses and therapies. The case of the Man of the Wolves (der Wolfmann), the case of Mr. Sergei K. Pankejeff (...) described in Aus der Geschichte einer infantilen Neurose, a fundamental dream in contemporary culture history, would be the point of departure. (shrink)

This paper argues that Paul Ricoeur’s hermeneutical philosophy attempts to reopen the question of human transcendence in contemporary terms. While his conception of language as self-transcending is deeply Husserlian, Ricoeur also responds to the analytical challenge when he deploys a basic distinction in Fregean logic in order to clarify Heidegger’s phenomenology of world. Ricoeur’s commitment to a transcendental view is evident in his conception of narrative, which enables him to emphasize the role of the performative in literary reading. The (...) meaning of the self in time provides Ricoeur with a discursive basis for distinguishing his own position from that of Kant and other philosophers in the transcendental tradition. (shrink)