Abstract
The nature of Kant's criticism of his pre-Critical 'possibility proof' for the existence of God, implicit in the account of the Transcendental Ideal in the Critique of Pure Reason, is still under dispute. Two issues are at stake: The error in the proof and diagnosis of the reason for committing it. I offer a new way to connect these issues. In contrast with accounts that locate the motivation for the error in reason's interest in an unconditioned causal ground of all contingent existence, I argue that it lies in reason's interest in another kind of unconditioned ground, collective unity. Unlike the conception of the former, that of the latter directly explains the problematic ontological assumption of the possibility proof, the existence of intelligible objects as the ground of possibility. I argue that such Platonic entities are assumed because they are amenable to the kind of unity prescribed by reason. However, since the interest in collective unity has a legitimate regulative use when applied to the systematic unity of nature, the conception of God entailed by the possibility proof is retained as a regulative idea of reason.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 339-363 |
| Number of pages | 25 |
| Journal | Kantian Review |
| Volume | 25 |
| Issue number | 3 |
| DOIs | |
| State | Published - 1 Sep 2020 |
| Externally published | Yes |
Bibliographical note
Publisher Copyright:© 2020 The Author(s). Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of Kantian Review.
Funding
‘Leibniz took the appearances for things in themselves, thus for intelligibilia, i.e. objects of the pure understanding’ (A/B). ‘If, however, I suppose there to be things that are merely objects of the understanding ... then such things would be called noumena (intelligibilia)’ (A). See also Allais : . More in Hoffer . Although OPA uses examples of empirical objects, the ground of the possibility of their fundamental predicates are essences, hence abstract objects. Willaschek (: ) argues that ‘the claim that the structure of reality corresponds to that of rational thought’ is the erroneous tacit assumption Kant identifies in speculative metaphysics in general). I would like to thank Allen Wood and two anonymous referees for Kantian Review for invaluable comments on earlier drafts of this article. I am also grateful to Nick Stang and other participants of the North American Kant Society Midwest study group meeting in which an earlier version was presented. This research was supported by the Israel Science Foundation (grants of Ohad Nachtomy, Hagit Benbaji and Ido Geiger).
| Funders |
|---|
| Israel Science Foundation |
Keywords
- Kant
- Only Possible Argument
- dialectical illusion
- ideal of reason
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'The Dialectical Illusion in Kant's only Possible Argument for the Existence of God'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Cite this
- APA
- Author
- BIBTEX
- Harvard
- Standard
- RIS
- Vancouver