MA Syllabus Lecturer: John J. Callanan Email: john.callanan@kcl.ac.uk Lecture Time: Friday 3-4pm Lecture Location: King s Building, K 2.31-1.22 Seminar Group 1 Time: Friday 4-5 pm Seminar Location: Philosophy Building, 304 Semester 1 Office Hours: Wed 12-1 pm, Friday 10-11am (term time only) Office Location: Room 710, Philosophy Building, Strand Campus Web:http://www.kcl.ac.uk/artshums/depts/philosophy/people/staff/academic/callana n/index.aspx Course Description This course introduces students to the epistemology and metaphysics of Immanuel Kant. Kant s Critique of Pure Reason is examined in detail. Topics include Kant s treatment of the relation between experience and concepts; the nature of space and time; the concepts of substance and causality; knowledge of the external world, and Kant s refutation of scepticism; the self and the unity of the thinking subject; human freedom, and its relation to the thesis of determinism and doctrine of transcendental idealism. Evaluation Formative assessment: one 2000-3000 word essay, due by the end of the semester or as otherwise instructed. Summative assessment: one 4000 word essay, due by Wednesday 18 January 2017, 16:00. Notes There are 10 lectures & 10 seminars in total. Plan your reading for each class ahead of time. This module may be, but need not be, taken in conjunction with 7AAN2040 Kant II: Moral Philosophy/ Prerequisites There are no prerequisites for this course. Plagiarism Policy We re against it. What constitutes plagiarism? See here: http://www.kcl.ac.uk/schools/humanities/depts/philosophy/current/plagiaris m.html Set Text Students must obtain a copy of this for the required reading for every lecture and seminar. The Cambridge edition is my preferred edition of the Critique of Pure Reason: Critique of Pure Reason (ed. and trans. Paul Guyer and Allen Wood) (Cambridge, 1999) Two alternative editions are: 1
Critique of Pure Reason (trans. Norman Kemp Smith) (Palgrave, 2007) Critique of Pure Reason (trans. Werner Pluhar) (Hackett, 1997) Note: the Critique came out in two editions (the A edition in 1781, and the B edition in 1787) and most versions available today are an amalgamation of both (e.g. a page will be marked A94/B127). So long as your copy of the Critique has the correct referencing system on the side of the text, any edition will be usable. However, I strongly recommend one of the three editions mentioned above. Primary Reading Students are expected to read all the primary material assigned for each lecture. Secondary Reading I list an awful lot of secondary sources below for each lecture. Don t try to read all, or even most of it. The list is there is to give students an idea of a range of approaches, and for those who want to look at certain topics in more depth, or for the purposes of their essays. Students are not required to do so, but I d expect you to have familiarised yourself with at least one of the secondary readings listed in preparation for each class (e.g. the relevant section of one of the general introductions listed below). The best places to start are with the Cambridge Companions and the introductory works by Buroker, Gardner and O Shea (see below). Note that among the secondary readings for each meeting, there will always be readings available online on either of KCL s subscriptions to three different Eresources Oxford Scholarship Online (OSO), EBook Library (EBL), and Cambridge Companions Online (CCON) Access through your king s email account search for the resources under the Databases link. There are physical copies available of all the books listed below in the Maughan Library (even those that are also available online). All the other secondary materials listed are either (a) books available in the Maughan Library at KCL or at the Senate House Library, or (b) articles available online through your KCL username or through Senate House Library E- Collections. It is the student s responsibility to acquire access to Senate House Library in time for the beginning of the course. The only internet resource I occasionally note here is the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (http://plato.stanford.edu/). However, it is not an adequate substitute for reading the secondary readings listed. So please use it sparingly. Note also that they have their own very clear citation policy stick to it if you are using it for written work. Each provisional lecture detail (below) includes some suggested readings and general questions and a sample essay title. Below are some sample essay questions (students may compose essays on any Kant-related topic they wish, though they are advised to discuss the topic with the module convenor): 1. Critically evaluate ONE of the following claims: (i) Space is an a priori representation (ii) Space is an intuition. 2. Critically evaluate Kant s claim regarding the synthetic a priori nature of EITHER arithmetic OR geometry. 2
3. Is Transcendental Idealism a metaphysical theory? 4. Does the Second Analogy provide a response to Hume? 5. Does Kant offer a coherent defence of how the antinomy of determinism and freedom might be resolved? 6. Does Kant have a convincing argument against conceiving of the self as a substance? 7. A Critical Evaluation of Kant's Attack on the Ontological Argument. 8. What is the Role of Regulative Principles in Kant's Philosophy of Science? Some General Introductions Burnham, Dand Young, H., Kant s Critique of Pure Reason (Edinburgh, 2007) (EBL) Buroker, J.V., Kant s Critique of Pure Reason: An Introduction (Cambridge, 2006) (EBL) Dicker, G., Kant s Theory of Knowledge (SUNY, 2004) (OSO) Gardner, S., Kant s Critique of Pure Reason (Routledge, 1999) (EBL) Guyer, P., Kant (Routledge, 2006) (EBL) O Shea, Kant s Critique of Pure Reason (Acumen, 2012) Some Collections Bird, G (ed.), A Companion to Kant (Blackwell, 2006) (EBL) Guyer, P. (ed.), The Cambridge Companion to Kant (Cambridge, 1992) (CCON) Guyer P. (ed.), The Cambridge Companion to Kant and Modern Philosophy (Cambridge, 2006).(CCON) Guyer, P. (ed.), The Cambridge Companion to Kant s Critique of Pure Reason (Cambridge, 2010). (CCON) Some Advanced Works Allison, H.E., Kant s Transcendental Idealism (Yale, 2004) Ameriks, K, Interpreting Kant s Critiques (OSO) Guyer, P. Kant and the Claims of Knowledge (Cambridge, 1998) Strawson, P.F., The Bounds of Sense, (Methuen, 1966) (EBL) Kitcher, P., Kant s Transcendental Psychology (OUP, 1990), (EBL) Lecture Schedule (Provisional) Lecture One The Peculiar Fate of Reason: Kant s Critical Project Lecture Two Space and Time: Transcendental Aesthetic I Lecture Three Mathematics and Idealism: Transcendental Aesthetic II Lecture Four Mind and World: The Transcendental Deduction Lecture Five Substance and Causation: The First and Second Analogies Reading Week Lecture Six The External World: The Refutation of Idealism Lecture Seven The Land of Truth: Phenomena and Noumena Lecture Eight The Self: The Paralogisms Lecture Nine Freedom: The Third Antinomy Lecture Ten God: The Ideal of Reason 3
Lecture One The Peculiar Fate of Reason: Kant s Critical Project What was the nature of the influence of Hume s Philosophy upon Kant? Is knowledge primarily an achievement of our rational faculties alone? How are we to distinguish between the a priori and a posteriori? What is the distinction between concept and intuition? Are they both necessary for knowledge? Are intuitions the same things as sensations? What is the difference between analytic and synthetic judgments? Is there a justification for this distinction? Are there any examples of synthetic a priori judgments? Copernican Turn? Does he offer compelling reasons for making such a turn? Required Readings The Preface to the A Edition, Avii-Axxii. The Preface to the B Edition, Bvii-Bxliv. The A Introduction, A1-A16/B30. The B Introduction, B1-A16/B30. Beiser, Frederick: Kant's intellectual development 1746-1781 in The Cambridge Companion to Kant, 26-61. Guyer, Ch. 2. Hogan, Desmond, Kant s Copernican Turn and the Rationalist Tradition in The Cambridge Companion to Kant s Critique of Pure Reason, 21-40. Schönfeld, Martin, Kant's Philosophical Development, The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2008 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.)., http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2008/entries/kant-development/ Burnham and Young, 9-36. Buroker, Chs. 1 & 2. Dicker, Ch. 1. Gardner, Chs. 1&2. Guyer, Ch. 2. Walker, Ralph: Kant (Routledge, 1978), Ch. 1. Van Cleve, James, Ch. 2. Lecture Two Space and Time: Transcendental Aesthetic I What is an exposition? What is the argument of each exposition? Are they convincing? What are Space and Time? 4
Transcendental Aesthetic (Space) A19/B34 A24/B40. (Time) A30/B46 A32/B49. Bennett, J. Kant s Analytic (Cambridge, 1966) ch. 5. Burnham and Young, 36-63. Buroker, Ch 3. Dicker, Ch. 2. Falkenstein, Lorne, Kant s Transcendental Aesthetic in A Companion to Kant, 140-153. Gardner, Ch. 4 Guyer, 51-70. Parsons, C. The Transcendental Aesthetic, in The Cambridge Companion to Kant, 62-100. Shabel, Lisa, The Transcendental Aesthetic in The Cambridge Companion to Kant s Critique of Pure Reason, 93-117. Van Cleve, Ch. 3. Lecture Three Mathematics and Idealism: Transcendental Aesthetic II Why does Kant think that mathematics is a body of synthetic a priori knowledge? What is the meaning of Kant s conclusions drawn from the argument? What does it mean to say that we can have no knowledge of things in themselves? Is Kant s claim that mathematics is a body of synthetic a priori judgments convincing? How is the so-called Argument from Geometry supposed to work? Is it convincing? Transcendental Aesthetic (Space) 3: Transcendental Exposition of Space, B40-1. Conclusions from the above concepts, A26/B42-A30/B45. (Time) 6-7: Conclusions from these concepts, Elucidation, A32/B49-A41/B58. 8: General Remarks on the Transcendental Aesthetic, A41-B59-A49-B73. Allison, Chs. 1, 2 Bennett, J. Kant s Analytic (Cambridge, 1966) Ch. 2. Burnham and Young, 9-36. Buroker, Ch. 3. Dicker, Ch. 2. 5
Friedman, M. (1992). Kant and the Exact Sciences. (Harvard University Press: 1992), Chapter 1. Gardner, Chs. 1&2. Guyer, 51-70. Potter, Michael, Reason's Nearest Kin, (Oxford: 2002) Ch.1. Van Cleve, James, Ch. 2. Transcendental Idealism Matthews, H. 'Strawson on Transcendental Idealism' in.walker (ed.) Kant on Pure Reason (Oxford, 1978) Falkenstein, L. (1989). The Non-Spatiotemporality of Things in Themselves, Kant- Studien Van Cleve, J. Problems From Kant (OUP, 1999). Ch. 10 Collins, A. Possible Experience (University of California, 1999), Chs. 1, 2, 3. Langton, R. Kantian Humility: Our Ignorance of Things in Themselves (OUP, 1998) Chs. 1, 2, 10 Lecture Four Mind and World: Transcendental Deduction What is the Transcendental Deduction attempting to show? What is the meaning of the quid juris/quid facti distinction? What are transcendental arguments? Does one have to be a transcendental idealist to use transcendental arguments? What is transcendental synthesis? Transcendental Analytic 13-14. A84-95/B116-129. The B-Deduction. 15-27. B129-B168. Allison, Ch. 7 Burnham and Young, 63-138. Buroker, Ch. 5. Ameriks, Karl. Kant s Transcendental Argument as a Regressive Argument Kant-Studien 69 (1978): 273 285. Buroker, Cassam, Q. (1987) Transcendental Arguments, Transcendental Synthesis and Transcendental Idealism, Philosophical Quarterly Dicker, Ch. 4. Henrich, D. Kant's Notion of a Deduction and the Methodological Background of the First Critique in E. Förster (ed.) Kant's Transcendental Deductions (Stanford, 1989), Guyer, 70-95. Guyer, Paul, The Deduction of the Categories: The Metaphysical and Transcendental Deductions in Guyer (ed.) The Cambridge Companion to Kant s Critique of Pure Reason, 118-150. Longuenesse, Beatrice, Kant on a priori concepts: The metaphysical deduction of the categories in Guyer (ed.) The Cambridge Companion to Kant and Modern Philosophy, 129-168. 6
Pereboom, Derk, Kant s Metaphysical and Transcendental Deductions in Bird (ed.) A Companion to Kant, 154-168 Strawson, P.F. The Bounds of Sense (Methuen, 1966), 85-117. Van Cleve, Ch. 7. Lecture Five Substance and Causation: The First and Second Analogies What are the Principles of the Understanding? What are the supposed to show? What is an Analogy for Kant? What is the transcendental argument here? Does the argument of the Second Analogy contain a non sequiter? What is the argument of the Second Analogy? The Transcendental Analytic Second Analogy, A189/B232-A211/B256. Allison, H.E. Kant's Transcendental Idealism (Yale, 1983). Chapter 10 Beck, L. 'Once More Into the Breach' and 'A Non-Sequitur of Numbing Grossness?' in Essays on Kant and Hume (Yale, 1978) Bennett, J. Kant s Analytic (Cambridge, 1966), Chs. 11 & 15. Buroker, Ch. 7. Dicker, Ch. 7. Friedman, Michael. Causal Laws and the Foundations of Natural Science in Guyer (ed.) The Cambridge Companion to Kant, 161 199. Guyer, P. Kant and the Claims of Knowledge (CUP, 1987), Ch. 10. Melnick, Arthur. Kant s Analogies of Experience. (University of Chicago, 1973), Ch. 3. Melnick, A. The Second Analogy in Bird (ed.) A Companion to Kant, 169-181. Strawson, P.F. The Bounds of Sense (Methuen, 1966), 133-146 Van Cleve, Ch. 9. Lecture Six The External World: The Refutation of Idealism What is the difference between dogmatic and problematic idealism? Which is the Refutation concerned with? What are the premises of the argument? Does the Refutation represent a change of mind on Kant s behalf regarding Transcendental Idealism? What s the relationship between the Refutation and the Fourth Paralogism? Is the Refutation a promising anti-sceptical argument? 7
Transcendental Analytic Refutation of Idealism, B274-B279. B-Preface, Bxxxix-Bxli note. The Transcendental Dialectic The Fourth Paralogism (A-edition), A366-380. Aquila, R. Personal Identity and Kant's Refutation of Idealism, Kant-Studien 1979 Bennett, J. Kant s Analytic (Cambridge, 1966) Ch. 14. Buroker, Ch. 7. Carl, W., Kant s Refutation of Problematic Idealism: Kantian Arguments and Kant s Arguments against Skepticism in Bird (ed.) A Companion to Kant, 182-191. Cassam, Q. (1993) Inner Sense, Body Sense, and Kant's Refutation of Idealism, European Journal of Philosophy, (1), 111-127. Dicker, Ch. 1. Emundts, Dina, The Refutation of Idealism and the Distinction between Phenomena and Noumena in Guyer (ed.) The Cambridge Companion to Kant s Critique of Pure Reason, 168-189. Guyer, 116-122. Lecture Seven The Land of Truth: Phenomena and Noumena What is the meaning of the distinction between phenomena and noumena? What are the positive and negative senses of the notion of a noumenon? Is Transcendental Idealism a metaphysical theory? What kind of realism is involved with Transcendental Idealism? What is Kant s argumentative strategy in the Phenomena/Noumena section? Is it compelling? Transcendental Analytic On the ground of the distinction of all objects in general into phenomena and noumena, (A edition) A235/B294-A260/B315. (B edition same) A235/B294-A260/B315. Allison, Ch. 11. Dicker, Ch. Emundts, Dina, The Refutation of Idealism and the Distinction between Phenomena and Noumena in Guyer (ed.) The Cambridge Companion to Kant s Critique of Pure Reason, 168-189. Gardner, Chs. 5 & 6. Guyer, Ch. Van Cleve, Ch. 10. 8
Lecture Eight The Self: The Paralogisms What is a paralogism? Is there anything wrong with rationalist metaphysics? What is the nature of the self according to Kant? Could the soul be a substance? Transcendental Dialectic Paralogisms of Pure Reason, A341/B399-A348-B406. B-edition, B406-B432. Bennett, J., Kant s Dialectic (Cambridge, 1974) ch.3-6 Brook, A., Kant and the Mind (Cambridge, 1994) Chs.1, 2, 7, 8. Burnham and Young, 138-169. Buroker, Ch. 8. Gardner, Ch. 7. Guyer, 134-138. Kitcher, P., Kant s Transcendental Psychology (Oxford, 1990), Ch. 7. Strawson, Ch. Thiel, U. The Critique of Rational Psychology in Bird (ed.) A Companion to Kant, 207-221. Van Cleve, Ch. 11. Wuerth, Julian, The Paralogisms of Pure Reason, in Guyer (ed.) The Cambridge Companion to Kant s Critique of Pure Reason, 210-244 Lecture Nine Freedom: The Third Antinomy What is an antinomy? What are the topics of the different Antinomies? Is there a discernible pattern of argument in each case? What is the status of freedom, according to Kant s theory? Are free actions explicable in terms of empirical causal grounds? Does Kant s resolution of the antinomies provide an indirect argument for transcendental idealism? Transcendental Dialectic The antinomy of pure reason, A405/B432-A425/B453. Third Antinomy, A444/B472-A451/B479. On the interests of reason in these conflicts. A462/B490-A497/B525. Allison, H.E. Idealism And Freedom (CUP, 1996) Allison, H.E. Morality and Freedom: Kant s Reciprocity Thesis, in P. Guyer (ed.) Kant s Groundwork Of The Metaphysics Of Morals (Rowman and Littlefield, 1998) 9
Allison, H.E. Kant s Transcendental Idealism : an interpretation and defense (Yale, 1983), ch.11-13 Bennett, Jonathan, Commentary: Kant s Theory of Freedom, in A. Wood, ed., Self and Nature in Kant s Philosophy, 102-112. Burnham and Young, 138-169. Buroker, Ch. 9. Dicker, Ch. 1. Gardner, Ch. 7. Guyer, 138-145. Van Cleve, James, Ch. 2. Walker, R.C.S. Kant (Routledge, 1978) Ch 10, part 3 `Freedom pp. 147-150 Bennett, J. Kant s Dialectic (CUP, 1974). Chapter 10 Strawson, P.F. Freedom and Resentment, in Freedom and Resentment and Other Essays (Methuen, 1974), 1-25. Walker, R.C.S. Kant (Routledge, 1978). Chapter 10, Part 3 `Freedom pp. 147-150 Wood, Allen, Kant s Compatibilism in A. Wood, ed., Self and Nature in Kant s Philosophy, 73-101. Lecture Ten God: The Ideal of Reason What is the relationship between the ontological argument and other proofs of God s existence, according to Kant? What is Kant s criticism of the ontological argument? Is it compelling? What is Kant s account of the origin of the concept of God? Does Kant offer any plausible account of the rationality of religious belief? Is transcendental idealism needed for faith? Transcendental Dialectic The Ideal of Reason, A592/B620-A602/B630 On the final aim of the natural dialectic of human reason, A685/B713-A702/B730 Burnham and Young, 151-162. Buroker, Ch. 10. Walker, Chapter 8. Gardner, Ch. 9. O Shea, Ch. 6 10