Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-fscjk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T20:51:13.419Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Kant on Cognizing Oneself as a Spontaneous Cognizer

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 December 2019

Markus Kohl
Markus Kohl*
Affiliation:
Department of Philosophy, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill
*
Email: mkohl17@email.unc.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

I examine a range of issues concerning Kant's conception of cognitive spontaneity. I consider whether we can cognize or know ourselves as spontaneous cognizers, and why Kant seems to regard the notion of cognitive spontaneity as less problematic than the idea of moral spontaneity. As an organizing theme of my discussion, I use an apparent tension between the A-edition and the B-edition of the first Critique. Against common interpretations, I argue that in the B-edition Kant does not revoke his claim that we can cognize, and (perhaps) even know, that our noumenal selves are absolutely spontaneous cognitive agents.

Keywords

Kantspontaneityfreedom of thoughtfreedom of willapperceptionself-knowledge
Type
Article
Information
Canadian Journal of Philosophy , Volume 50 , Issue 3 , April 2020 , pp. 395 - 412
Copyright
© The Author(s) 2020. Published by Canadian Journal of Philosophy

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Allais, Lucy. 2010. “Transcendental Idealism and Metaphysics: Kant’s Commitment to Things as They Are in Themselves.” In Kant Yearbook 2010: Metaphysics, edited by Heidemann, D. H., 1–33. Berlin: De Gruyter.Google Scholar
Allais, Lucy. 2015. Manifest Reality. Kant’s Idealism and His Realism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Allison, Henry. 1990. Kant’s Theory of Freedom. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Allison, Henry. 1996. Idealism and Freedom. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Allison, Henry. 2004. Kant’s Transcendental Idealism. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ameriks, Karl. 2000. Kant’s Theory of Mind. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ameriks, Karl. 2003. Interpreting Kant’s Critiques. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buroker, Jill Vance. 2017. “Kant on Judging and the Will.” In Kant and the Philosophy of Mind, edited by Gomes, A. and Stephenson, A., 189–203. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Chignell, Andrew. 2007. “Belief in Kant.” Philosophical Review 116: 323–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chignell, Andrew. 2014. “Modal Motivations for Noumenal Ignorance: Knowledge, Cognition and Coherence.” Kant-Studien 105 (4): 573–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chignell, Andrew. 2017. “Can’t Kant Cognize Himself? Or, a Problem for (Almost) Every Interpretation of the Refutation of Idealism.” In Kant and the Philosophy of Mind, edited by Gomes, A. and Stephenson, A., 138–57. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Forster, Michael. 2008. Kant and Skepticism. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Grier, Michelle. 2001. Kant’s Doctrine of Transcendental Illusion. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grüne, Stefanie. 2009. Blinde Anschauung. Frankfurt am Main: Klostermann.Google Scholar
Hanna, Robert. 2009. “Freedom, Teleology, and Rational Causation.” In Kant Yearbook 1/2009 , edited by Heidemann, D. H.. Berlin: De Gruyter.Google Scholar
Heimsoeth, Heinz. 1956. Studien zur Philosophie Immanuel Kants. Köln: Kölner Universitäts-Verlag.Google Scholar
Hogan, Desmond. 2009. “Three Kinds of Rationalism and the Non-Spatiality of Things in Themselves.” Journal of the History of Philosophy 47: 355–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keller, Pierre. 1998. Kant and the Demands of Self-Consciousness. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Kitcher, Patricia. 1984. “Kant’s Real Self.” In Self and Nature in Kant's Philosophy, edited by Wood, Allen, 113–47. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Kitcher, Patricia. 1990. Kant’s Transcendental Psychology. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Kitcher, Patricia. 2011. Kant’s Thinker. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kohl, Markus. 2015. “Kant on Freedom of Empirical Thought.” Journal of the History of Philosophy 53 (2): 301–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kohl, Markus. 2016. “Kant on Freedom, Idealism, and Standpoints.” Archiv für Geschichte der Philosophie 98 (1): 21–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Longuenesse, Beatrice. 1998. Kant and the Capacity to Judge. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Longuenesse, Beatrice. 2017. I, Me, Mine. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marshall, Colin. 2010. “Kant’s Metaphysics of the Self.” Philosophers Imprint 20: 1–21.Google Scholar
Marshall, Colin. 2013. “Kant’s One Self and the Appearance/Thing-in-itself Distinction.” Kant-Studien 104 (4): 421–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Martin, Gottfried. 1969. Immanuel Kant. Berlin: De Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pippin, Robert. 1987. “Kant on the Spontaneity of Mind.” Canadian Journal of Philosophy 17: 449–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Puls, Heiko. 2015. “Kant über die äusserste Grenze aller praktischen Philosophie – Ein Kommentar zur Sektion 5 der Grundlegung.” in Kants Begründung von Freiheit und Moral in Grundlegung III, edited by Schönecker, Dieter, 157–214. Münster, Ger.: Mentis.Google Scholar
Rosefeldt, Tobias. 2000. “Das logische Ich: Kant über den Gehalt des Begriffs von sich selbst.” Hamburg: Philo.Google Scholar
Schafer, Karl. Forthcoming. “Kant’s Conception of Cognition and Our Knowledge of Things-in-Themselves.” In The Sensible and Intelligible Worlds: New Essays on Kant’s Metaphysics and Epistemology, edited by Schafer, K. and Stang, N.. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Schönecker, Dieter. 1999. Kant: Grundlegung III. Die Deduktion des kategorischen Imperativs. Freiburg, Ger.: Alber.Google Scholar
Sellars, Wilfrid. 1970. “… This I or He or It. (The Thing) Which Thinks …” Proceedings of the American Philosophical Association 44: 5–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sgarbi, Marco. 2012. Kant on Spontaneity. London: Continuum Publishing.Google Scholar
Stang, Nicholas. 2016. Kant and the Metaphysics of Modality. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Strawson, Peter. 1966. The Bounds of Sense. London: Methuen.Google Scholar
Van Cleve, James. 1999. Problems from Kant. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Watkins, Eric, and Willaschek, Marcus. 2017. “Kant’s Account of Cognition.” Journal of the History of Philosophy 55 (1): 83–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wood, Allen. 1999. Kant’s Ethical Thought. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wuerth, Julian. 2014. Kant on Mind, Action, and Ethics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar