Week III: Metaphysical Deduction |
|
| General Secondary Reading (optional): Allison pp. 133-56; Heidegger pp. 36-41, Strawson pp. 72-85. | |
| Question 1) What does the Metaphysical Deduction actually
deduce? What is its conclusion? What are its premises? What is the structure
of the argument? Is the argument sound?
Secondary literature: Reich, xiii-xx, 1-14; van Cleve 87-90, Young in CCK (Guyer 1992): 101-22; Guyer (in CCK) 1992: 125-6; Allison 133-5, 146-56. |
|
| Question 2) Explicate: "Now we can reduce all
acts of the understanding to judgments, and the understanding may therefore
be represented as a faculty of judgment." (A69=B94) What does Kant
mean by "judgment" (consider here, also, A131-6=B170-5), and why
does he tie it to the understanding? Secondary literature: Smith, xxxvi-ix, 176-9; Wolff, 61-77; Pippin, 96-100; Allison, 82-9, 133-5, 146-56; Heidegger 1967: 148-53, 167-75; Reich, 41-6; Longuenesse, 26-9. |
|
|
Question 3) Is it legitimate to base the categories for judgment of experience (the transcendental categories) on the categories for logical judgment? Secondary literature: Wilkerson, 45-47; Wolff, 61-71; Smith, 176-86, 196; Strawson, 74-82; Walker, 26-7; Ellington, "The Unity of Kant's Thought…," in Ellington, 148-65; Allison, 133-5, 146-56; Pippin, 88-96 |
|
|
Question 4) How seriously should we take the details of Kant's "Table of Categories" - the claim to "completeness," the insistence on trichotomies, and the "odd" categories that seem designed just to fill out the trichotomies? Secondary literature: Smith, 176-94; Wolff, 61-7; Strawson, 78-9; Bennett, 76-83, 88-95; Walker, 26-7; Ellington, "The Unity of Kant's Thought…," in Ellington, 148-65; Lovejoy in Gram 1967: 269-83; Allison 133-46. |
|
|
Question 5) What does Kant mean by 'synthesis'? Secondary literature: Young in CCK (Guyer 1992): 101-22; van Cleve 84-8; find at least two further secondary sources of your own. |
|