Immanuel Kant

Kant redirects here. For other uses, see Kant (disam-biguation).

Immanuel Kant (/knt/;[1] German: [manuel kant];22 April 1724 12 February 1804) was a Germanphilosopher who is widely considered to be a central g-ure of modern philosophy. He argued that fundamentalconcepts structure human experience, and that reason isthe source of morality. His thought continues to have amajor inuence in contemporary thought, especially theelds of metaphysics, epistemology, ethics, political phi-losophy, and aesthetics.[2]

Kants major work, the Critique of Pure Reason (Kritikder reinen Vernunft, 1781),[3] aimed to explain the re-lationship between reason and human experience. Withthis project, he hoped to move beyond what he took to befailures of traditional philosophy and metaphysics. He at-tempted to put an end to what he considered an era of fu-tile and speculative theories of human experience, whileresisting the skepticism of thinkers such as David Hume.Kant argued that our experiences are structured by neces-sary features of our minds. In his view, the mind shapesand structures experience so that, on an abstract level, allhuman experience shares certain essential structural fea-tures. Among other things, Kant believed that the con-cepts of space and time are integral to all human expe-rience, as are our concepts of cause and eect.[4] Oneimportant consequence of this view is that one neverhas direct experience of things, the so-called noumenalworld, and that what we do experience is the phenomenalworld as conveyed by our senses. These claims summa-rize Kants views upon the subjectobject problem. Kantpublished other important works on ethics, religion, law,aesthetics, astronomy, and history. These included theCritique of Practical Reason (Kritik der praktischen Ver-nunft, 1788), the Metaphysics of Morals (Die Metaphysikder Sitten, 1797), which dealt with ethics, and the Critiqueof Judgment (Kritik der Urteilskraft, 1790), which looksat aesthetics and teleology.Kant aimed to resolve disputes between empirical andrationalist approaches. The former asserted that allknowledge comes through experience; the latter main-tained that reason and innate ideas were prior. Kant ar-gued that experience is purely subjective without rst be-ing processed by pure reason. He also said that using rea-son without applying it to experience only leads to theo-retical illusions. The free and proper exercise of reasonby the individual was a theme both of the Age of Enlight-

enment, and of Kants approaches to the various problemsof philosophy. His ideas inuencedmany thinkers in Ger-many during his lifetime, and he moved philosophy be-yond the debate between the rationalists and empiricists.Kant is seen as a major gure in the history and develop-ment of philosophy.

1 Biography

Immanuel Kant was born in 1724 in Knigsberg, Prussia(since 1946 the city of Kaliningrad, Kaliningrad Oblast,Russia). His mother, Anna Regina Reuter (16971737),was born in Nuremberg.[5] His father, Johann GeorgKant (16821746), was a German harnessmaker fromMemel, at the time Prussias most northeastern city (nowKlaipda, Lithuania). Kants paternal grandfather, HansKant,[6] had emigrated from Scotland to East Prussia, andhis father still spelled their family name Cant.[7] Kantwas the fourth of nine children (four of them reachedadulthood). Baptized 'Emanuel', he changed his name to'Immanuel'[8] after learning Hebrew.Young Kant was a solid, albeit unspectacular, student. Hewas brought up in a Pietist household that stressed reli-gious devotion, humility, and a literal interpretation of theBible. His education was strict, punitive and disciplinary,and focused on Latin and religious instruction over math-ematics and science.[9] Despite his religious upbringingand maintaining a belief in God, Kant was skeptical ofreligion in later life; various commentators have labelledhim agnostic.[10][11][12][13][14][15]

Common myths about Kants personal mannerisms arelisted, explained, and refuted in Goldthwaits introduc-tion to his translation of Observations on the Feeling ofthe Beautiful and Sublime.[16] It is often held that Kantlived a very strict and predictable life, leading to an oft-repeated story that neighbors would set their clocks byhis daily walks. He never married, but seemed to havea rewarding social life he was a popular teacher anda modestly successful author even before starting on hismajor philosophical works.A common myth is that Kant never traveled more than10 miles (16 km) from Knigsberg his whole life.[17]In fact, between 1750 and 1754 he worked as a tutor(Hauslehrer) in Judtschen[18] (nowVeselovka, Russia, ap-proximately 20 km) and in Gro-Arnsdorf[19] (now nearElblg, Poland, approximately 105 km).

1

2 1 BIOGRAPHY

1.1 Young scholarKant showed a great aptitude for study at an early age.He rst attended the Collegium Fridericianum. In 1740,aged 16, he enrolled at the University of Knigsberg,where he spent his whole career.[20] He studied the phi-losophy of Gottfried Leibniz and Christian Wol underMartin Knutzen, a rationalist who was also familiar withdevelopments in British philosophy and science and in-troduced Kant to the new mathematical physics of IsaacNewton. Knutzen dissuaded Kant from the theory of pre-established harmony, which he regarded as the pillow forthe lazy mind. He also dissuaded Kant from idealism,the idea that reality is purely mental, which most philoso-phers in the 18th century regarded in a negative light.(The theory of transcendental idealism that Kant devel-oped in the Critique of Pure Reason is not traditional ide-alism and the Critique's second part even argues againsttraditional idealism.)His fathers stroke and subsequent death in 1746 inter-rupted his studies. Kant became a private tutor in thetowns surrounding Knigsberg, but continued his schol-arly research. In 1747, he published his rst philosophicalwork, Thoughts on the True Estimation of Living Forces.

1.2 Early workKant is best known for his work in the philosophy ofethics and metaphysics,[21] but he made signicant con-tributions to other disciplines. He made an important as-tronomical discovery about the nature of Earths rotation,for which he won the Berlin Academy Prize in 1754.According to Lord Kelvin:

Kant pointed out in the middle of lastcentury, what had not previously been dis-covered by mathematicians or physical as-tronomers, that the frictional resistance againsttidal currents on the earths surface must causea diminution of the earths rotational speed.This immense discovery in Natural Philosophyseems to have attracted little attentionindeedto have passed quite unnoticedamong math-ematicians, and astronomers, and naturalists,until about 1840, when the doctrine of energybegan to be taken to heart.

Lord Kelvin, physicist, 1897

According to Thomas Huxley:

The sort of geological speculation towhich I am now referring (geological aetiol-ogy, in short) was created as a science by thatfamous philosopher, Immanuel Kant, when, in1775 [1755], he wrote hisGeneral Natural His-tory and Theory of the Celestial Bodies; or, an

Attempt to Account for the Constitutional andMechanical Origin of the Universe, upon New-tonian Principles."

Thomas H. Huxley, 1869

In the General History of Nature and Theory of the Heav-ens (Allgemeine Naturgeschichte und Theorie des Him-mels) (1755), Kant laid out the Nebular hypothesis, inwhich he deduced that the Solar System formed from alarge cloud of gas, a nebula. Thus he tried to explain theorder of the solar system, which Isaac Newton had ex-plained as imposed from the beginning by God. Kantalso correctly deduced that the Milky Way was a largedisk of stars, which he theorized also formed from a(much larger) spinning cloud of gas. He further suggestedthat other nebulae might also be similarly large and dis-tant disks of stars. These postulations opened new hori-zons for astronomy: for the rst time extending astron-omy beyond the solar system to galactic and extragalacticrealms.[22]

From then on, Kant turned increasingly to philosophi-cal issues, although he continued to write on the sciencesthroughout his life. In the early 1760s, Kant produced aseries of important works in philosophy. The False Sub-tlety of the Four Syllogistic Figures, a work in logic, waspublished in 1762. Two more works appeared the fol-lowing year: Attempt to Introduce the Concept of NegativeMagnitudes into Philosophy and The Only Possible Argu-ment in Support of a Demonstration of the Existence ofGod. In 1764, Kant wrote Observations on the Feeling ofthe Beautiful and Sublime and then was second to MosesMendelssohn in a Berlin Academy prize competition withhis Inquiry Concerning the Distinctness of the Principlesof Natural Theology and Morality (often referred to asThe Prize Essay). In 1770, aged 45, Kant was nallyappointed Professor of Logic andMetaphysics at the Uni-versity of Knigsberg. Kant wrote his inaugural disserta-tion in defense of this appointment. This work saw theemergence of several central themes of his mature work,including the distinction between the faculties of intellec-tual thought and sensible receptivity. To miss this distinc-tion would mean to commit the error of subreption, and,as he says in the last chapter of the dissertation, only inavoiding this error does metaphysics ourish.The issue that vexed Kant was central to what 20th-century scholars called the philosophy of mind". Theowering of the natural sciences had led to an understand-ing of how data reaches the brain. Sunlight falling on anobject is reected from its surface in a way that maps thesurface features (color, texture, etc.). The reected lightreaches the human eye, passes through the cornea, is fo-cused by the lens onto the retina where it forms an imagesimilar to that formed by light passing through a pinholeinto a camera obscura. The retinal cells send impulsesthrough the optic nerve and then they form a mapping inthe brain of the visual features of the object. The interior

1.3 The silent decade 3

mapping is not the exterior object, and our belief thatthere is a meaningful relationship between the object andthe mapping in the brain depends on a chain of reasoningthat is not fully grounded. But the uncertainty aroused bythese considerations, by optical illusions, misperceptions,delusions, etc., are not the end of the problems.Kant saw that the mind could not function as an emptycontainer that simply receives data from outside. Some-thing must be giving order to the incoming data. Imagesof external objects must be kept in the same sequence inwhich they were received. This ordering occurs throughthe minds intuition of time. The same considerations ap-ply to the minds function of constituting space for order-ing mappings of visual and tactile signals arriving via thealready described chains of physical causation.It is often claimed that Kant was a late developer, thathe only became an important philosopher in his mid-50safter rejecting his earlier views. While it is true that Kantwrote his greatest works relatively late in life, there is atendency to underestimate the value of his earlier works.Recent Kant scholarship has devoted more attention tothese pre-critical writings and has recognized a degreeof continuity with his mature work.[23]

1.3 The silent decadeAt age 46, Kant was an established scholar and an in-creasingly inuential philosopher. Much was expectedof him. In correspondence with his ex-student and friendMarkus Herz, Kant admitted that, in the Inaugural Dis-sertation, he had failed to account for the relation be-tween our sensible and intellectual facultieshe neededto explain how we combine sensory knowledge with rea-soned knowledge, these being related but very dierentprocesses. He also credited David Hume with awaken-ing him from dogmatic slumber (circa 1771).[24] Humehad stated that experience consists only of sequences offeelings, images or sounds. Ideas such as cause, good-ness, or objects were not evident in experience, so whydo we believe in the reality of these? Kant felt that rea-son could remove this skepticism, and he set himself tosolving these problems. He did not publish any work inphilosophy for the next 11 years.Although fond of company and conversation with others,Kant isolated himself. He resisted friends attempts tobring him out of his isolation. In 1778, in response toone of these oers by a former pupil, Kant wrote:

Any change makes me apprehensive, even if it oers thegreatest promise of improving my condition, and I ampersuaded by this natural instinct of mine that I must takeheed if I wish that the threads which the Fates spin sothin and weak in my case to be spun to any length. Mygreat thanks, tomywell-wishers and friends, who think so

Immanuel Kant

kindly of me as to undertake my welfare, but at the sametime a most humble request to protect me in my currentcondition from any disturbance.[25]

When Kant emerged from his silence in 1781, the resultwas theCritique of Pure Reason. Although now uniformlyrecognized as one of the greatest works in the historyof philosophy, this Critique was largely ignored upon itsinitial publication. The book was long, over 800 pagesin the original German edition, and written in a convo-luted style. It received few reviews, and these grantedit no signicance. Kants former student, Johann Got-tfried Herder criticized it for placing reason as an entityworthy of criticism instead of considering the process ofreasoning within the context of language and ones en-tire personality.[26] Similar to ChristianGarve and JohannGeorg Heinrich Feder, he rejected Kants position thatspace and time possessed a form which could be ana-lyzed. Additionally, Garve and Feder also faulted KantsCritique for not explaining dierences in perception ofsensations.[27] Its density made it, as Herder said in a let-ter to Johann Georg Hamann, a tough nut to crack,obscured by all this heavy gossamer.[28] Its receptionstood in stark contrast to the praise Kant had received forearlier works, such as his Prize Essay and shorter worksthat preceded the rst Critique. These well-received andreadable tracts include one on the earthquake in Lis-bon that was so popular that it was sold by the page.[29]Prior to the change in course documented in the rst Cri-tique, his books sold well, and by the time he publishedObservations on the Feeling of the Beautiful and Sublime

4 1 BIOGRAPHY

in 1764 he had become a notable popular author.[30] Kantwas disappointed with the rst Critiques reception. Rec-ognizing the need to clarify the original treatise, Kantwrote the Prolegomena to any Future Metaphysics in 1783as a summary of its main views. Shortly thereafter, Kantsfriend Johann Friedrich Schultz (17391805) (professorof mathematics) published Erluterungen ber des HerrnProfessor Kant Critik der reinen Vernunft (Knigsberg,1784), which was a brief but very accurate commentaryon Kants Critique of Pure Reason.Kants reputation gradually rose through the latter portionof the 1780s, sparked by a series of important works: the1784 essay, "Answer to the Question: What is Enlighten-ment?"; 1785sGroundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals(his rst work on moral philosophy); and, from 1786,Metaphysical Foundations of Natural Science. But Kantsfame ultimately arrived from an unexpected source. In1786, Karl Leonhard Reinhold published a series of pub-lic letters on Kantian philosophy. In these letters, Rein-hold framedKants philosophy as a response to the centralintellectual controversy of the era: the Pantheism Dis-pute. Friedrich Jacobi had accused the recently deceasedGotthold Ephraim Lessing (a distinguished dramatist andphilosophical essayist) of Spinozism. Such a charge, tan-tamount to atheism, was vigorously denied by Lessingsfriend Moses Mendelssohn, leading to a bitter public dis-pute among partisans. The controversy gradually esca-lated into a debate about the values of the Enlightenmentand the value of reason. Reinhold maintained in his let-ters that Kants Critique of Pure Reason could settle thisdispute by defending the authority and bounds of reason.Reinholds letters were widely read and made Kant themost famous philosopher of his era.

1.4 Mature workKant published a second edition of the Critique of PureReason (Kritik der reinen Vernunft) in 1787, heavily re-vising the rst parts of the book. Most of his subse-quent work focused on other areas of philosophy. Hecontinued to develop his moral philosophy, notably in1788s Critique of Practical Reason (known as the secondCritique) and 1797s Metaphysics of Morals. The 1790Critique of Judgment (the third Critique) applied the Kan-tian system to aesthetics and teleology.In 1792, Kants attempt to publish the Second of thefour Pieces of Religion within the Bounds of Bare Rea-son, in the journal Berlinische Monatsschrift, met with op-position from the Kings censorship commission, whichhad been established that same year in the context of theFrench Revolution.[31] Kant then arranged to have all fourpieces published as a book, routing it through the philos-ophy department at the University of Jena to avoid theneed for theological censorship.[31] This insubordinationearned him a now famous reprimand from the King.[31]When he nevertheless published a second edition in 1794,the censor was so irate that he arranged for a royal order

that required Kant never to publish or even speak publiclyabout religion.[31] Kant then published his response to theKings reprimand and explained himself, in the preface ofThe Conict of the Faculties.[31]

He also wrote a number of semi-popular essays on his-tory, religion, politics and other topics. These workswere well received by Kants contemporaries and con-rmed his preeminent status in 18th-century philosophy.There were several journals devoted solely to defend-ing and criticizing Kantian philosophy. Despite his suc-cess, philosophical trends were moving in another direc-tion. Many of Kants most important disciples (includingReinhold, Beck and Fichte) transformed the Kantian po-sition into increasingly radical forms of idealism. Theprogressive stages of revision of Kants teachings markedthe emergence of German Idealism. Kant opposed thesedevelopments and publicly denounced Fichte in an openletter in 1799.[32] It was one of his nal acts expoundinga stance on philosophical questions. In 1800, a studentof Kant named Gottlob Benjamin Jsche (17621842)published a manual of logic for teachers called Logik,which he had prepared at Kants request. Jsche pre-pared the Logik using a copy of a textbook in logic byGeorg Freidrich Meier entitled Auszug aus der Vernun-ftlehre, in which Kant had written copious notes and an-notations. The Logik has been considered of fundamentalimportance to Kants philosophy, and the understandingof it. The great 19th-century logician Charles SandersPeirce remarked, in an incomplete review of ThomasKingsmill Abbott's English translation of the introductionto Logik, that Kants whole philosophy turns upon hislogic.[33] Also, Robert Schirokauer Hartman and Wolf-gang Schwarz, wrote in the translators introduction totheir English translation of the Logik, Its importance liesnot only in its signicance for the Critique of Pure Reason,the second part of which is a restatement of fundamentaltenets of the Logic, but in its position within the whole ofKants work.[34]

Kants health, long poor, worsened and he died at Knigs-berg on 12 February 1804, uttering "Es ist gut" (It isgood) before expiring.[35] His unnished nal work waspublished as Opus Postumum.Kant wrote a book discussing his theory of virtue in termsof independence which he believed was a viable modernalternative to more familiar Greek views about virtue.This book is often criticized for its hostile tone and for notarticulating his thoughts about autocracy comprehensibly.In the self-governance model of Aristotelian virtue, thenon-rational part of the soul can be made to listen to rea-son through training. Although Kantian self-governanceappears to involve a rational crackdown on appetitesand emotions with lack of harmony between reason andemotion, Kantian virtue denies requiring self-conquest,self-suppression, or self-silencing. They dispute thatthe self-mastery constitutive of virtue is ultimately mas-tery over our tendency of will to give priority to ap-petite or emotion unregulated by duty, it does not re-

5quire extirpating, suppressing, or silencing sensibility ingeneral.[36]

2 Philosophy

Immanuel Kant by Carle Vernet (1758-1836)

In Kants essay "Answering the Question: What is En-lightenment?", Kant dened the Enlightenment as an ageshaped by the Latin motto Sapere aude (Dare to bewise). Kant maintained that one ought to think au-tonomously, free of the dictates of external authority.His work reconciled many of the dierences between therationalist and empiricist traditions of the 18th century.He had a decisive impact on the Romantic and GermanIdealist philosophies of the 19th century. His work hasalso been a starting point for many 20th century philoso-phers.Kant asserted that, because of the limitations of argumen-tation in the absence of irrefutable evidence, no one couldreally know whether there is a God and an afterlife ornot. For the sake of morality and as a ground for reason,Kant asserted, people are justied in believing in God,even though they could never know Gods presence em-pirically. He explained:

All the preparations of reason, therefore,in what may be called pure philosophy, are inreality directed to those three problems only[God, the soul, and freedom]. However, thesethree elements in themselves still hold indepen-dent, proportional, objective weight individu-ally. Moreover, in a collective relational con-text; namely, to know what ought to be done: if

the will is free, if there is a God, and if thereis a future world. As this concerns our actionswith reference to the highest aims of life, wesee that the ultimate intention of nature in herwise provision was really, in the constitution ofour reason, directed to moral interests only.[37]

The sense of an enlightened approach and the criticalmethod required that If one cannot prove that a thing is,he may try to prove that it is not. If he fails to do neither(as often occurs), he may still ask whether it is in his inter-est to accept one or the other of the alternatives hypothet-ically, from the theoretical or the practical point of view.Hence the question no longer is as to whether perpetualpeace is a real thing or not a real thing, or as to whetherwe may not be deceiving ourselves when we adopt theformer alternative, but we must act on the supposition ofits being real.[38] The presupposition of God, soul, andfreedom was then a practical concern, for Morality, byitself, constitutes a system, but happiness does not, un-less it is distributed in exact proportion to morality. This,however, is possible in an intelligible world only under awise author and ruler. Reason compels us to admit sucha ruler, together with life in such a world, which we mustconsider as future life, or else all moral laws are to beconsidered as idle dreams... .[39]

Kant claimed to have created a "Copernican revolution"in philosophy. This involved two interconnected founda-tions of his "critical philosophy":

the epistemology of transcendental idealism and the moral philosophy of the autonomy of practicalreason.

These teachings placed the active, rational human subjectat the center of the cognitive and moral worlds. Kant ar-gued that the rational order of the world as known by sci-ence was not just the accidental accumulation of senseperceptions.Conceptual unication and integration is carried out bythe mind through concepts or the categories of the un-derstanding operating on the perceptual manifold withinspace and time. The latter are not concepts,[40] but areforms of sensibility that are a priori necessary conditionsfor any possible experience. Thus the objective order ofnature and the causal necessity that operates within it de-pend on the minds processes, the product of the rule-based activity that Kant called, "synthesis. There is muchdiscussion among Kant scholars about the correct inter-pretation of this train of thought.The 'two-world' interpretation regards Kants position asa statement of epistemological limitation, that we are notable to transcend the bounds of our own mind, mean-ing that we cannot access the "thing-in-itself". However,Kant also speaks of the thing in itself or transcendentalobject as a product of the (human) understanding as it

6 2 PHILOSOPHY

attempts to conceive of objects in abstraction from theconditions of sensibility. Following this line of thought,some interpreters have argued that the thing in itself doesnot represent a separate ontological domain but simply away of considering objects by means of the understand-ing alone this is known as the two-aspect view.The notion of the "thing in itself" was much discussedby philosophers after Kant. It was argued that becausethe thing in itself was unknowable, its existence mustnot be assumed. Rather than arbitrarily switching toan account that was ungrounded in anything supposedto be the real, as did the German Idealists, anothergroup arose to ask how our (presumably reliable) ac-counts of a coherent and rule-abiding universe were ac-tually grounded. This new kind of philosophy becameknown as Phenomenology, and its founder was EdmundHusserl.With regard to morality, Kant argued that the sourceof the good lies not in anything outside the human sub-ject, either in nature or given by God, but rather is onlythe good will itself. A good will is one that acts fromduty in accordance with the universal moral law that theautonomous human being freely gives itself. This lawobliges one to treat humanity understood as rationalagency, and represented through oneself as well as oth-ers as an end in itself rather than (merely) as means toother ends the individual might hold. This necessitatespractical self-reection in which we universalize our rea-sons.These ideas have largely framed or inuenced all subse-quent philosophical discussion and analysis. The specicsof Kants account generated immediate and lasting con-troversy. Nevertheless, his theses that the mind it-self necessarily makes a constitutive contribution to itsknowledge, that this contribution is transcendental ratherthan psychological, that philosophy involves self-criticalactivity, that morality is rooted in human freedom, andthat to act autonomously is to act according to rationalmoral principles have all had a lasting eect on subse-quent philosophy.

2.1 Theory of perception

Main article: Critique of Pure Reason

Kant denes his theory of perception in his inuential1781 work the Critique of Pure Reason, which has of-ten been cited as the most signicant volume of meta-physics and epistemology in modern philosophy. Kantmaintains that our understanding of the external worldhad its foundations not merely in experience, but in bothexperience and a priori concepts, thus oering a non-empiricist critique of rationalist philosophy, which iswhat he and others referred to as his "Copernican revo-lution".[41][42][43]

Firstly, Kant distinguishes between analytic and syntheticpropositions:

1. Analytic proposition: a proposition whose predicateconcept is contained in its subject concept; e.g., Allbachelors are unmarried, or, All bodies take upspace.

2. Synthetic proposition: a proposition whose predi-cate concept is not contained in its subject concept;e.g., All bachelors are happy, or, All bodies haveweight.

An analytic proposition is true by nature of the mean-ing of the words in the sentence we require no furtherknowledge than a grasp of the language to understand thisproposition. On the other hand, a synthetic statement isone that tells us something about the world. The truth orfalsehood of synthetic statements derives from somethingoutside their linguistic content. In this instance, weight isnot a necessary predicate of the body; until we are told theheaviness of the body we do not know that it has weight.In this case, experience of the body is required beforeits heaviness becomes clear. Before Kants rst Critique,empiricists (cf. Hume) and rationalists (cf. Leibniz) as-sumed that all synthetic statements required experienceto be known.Kant, however, contests this: he claims that elementarymathematics, like arithmetic, is synthetic a priori, in thatits statements provide new knowledge, but knowledgethat is not derived from experience. This becomes part ofhis over-all argument for transcendental idealism. Thatis, he argues that the possibility of experience dependson certain necessary conditions which he calls a pri-ori forms and that these conditions structure and holdtrue of the world of experience. In so doing, his mainclaims in the "Transcendental Aesthetic" are that math-ematic judgments are synthetic a priori and in addition,that Space and Time are not derived from experience butrather are its preconditions.Once we have grasped the functions of basic arithmetic,we do not need any empirical experience to know that100 + 100 = 200, and so it appears that arithmetic is an-alytic. However, that it is analytic can be disproved byconsidering the calculation 5 + 7 = 12: there is nothingin the numbers 5 and 7 by which the number 12 can beinferred. Thus 5 + 7 and the cube root of 1,728 or12 are not analytic because their reference is the samebut their sense is not the mathematical judgment 5 +7 = 12 tells us something new about the world. It is self-evident, and undeniably a priori, but at the same time itis synthetic. Thus Kant proved that a proposition can besynthetic and known a priori.Kant asserts that experience is based both on the percep-tion of external objects and a priori knowledge.[44] Theexternal world, he writes, provides those things that wesense. But it is our mind that processes this informa-tion and gives it order, allowing us to comprehend it. Our

2.2 Categories of the Faculty of Understanding 7

mind supplies the conditions of space and time to expe-rience objects. According to the transcendental unityof apperception, the concepts of the mind (Understand-ing) and the perceptions or intuitions that garner infor-mation from phenomena (Sensibility) are synthesized bycomprehension. Without the concepts, perceptions arenondescript; without the perceptions, concepts are mean-ingless thus the famous statement, Thoughts withoutcontent are empty, intuitions (perceptions) without con-cepts are blind.[45]

Kant also claims that an external environment is neces-sary for the establishment of the self. Although Kantwould want to argue that there is no empirical way of ob-serving the self, we can see the logical necessity of theself when we observe that we can have dierent percep-tions of the external environment over time. By unitingall of these general representations into one global repre-sentation, we can see how a transcendental self emerges.I am therefore conscious of the identical self in regardto the manifold of the representations that are given tome in an intuition because I call them all together myrepresentations.[46]

2.2 Categories of the Faculty of Under-standing

See also: Category (Kant)Kant deemed it obvious that we have some objective

Kant statue in Belo Horizonte, Brazil

knowledge of the world, such as, say, Newtonian physics.But this knowledge relies on synthetic, a priori laws of na-

ture, like causality and substance. The problem, then, ishow this is possible. Kants solution was to reason that thesubject must supply laws that make experience of objectspossible, and that these laws are the synthetic, a priorilaws of nature that we know apply to all objects beforewe experience them. So, to deduce all these laws, Kantexamined experience in general, dissecting in it what issupplied by the mind from what is supplied by the givenintuitions. What has just been explicated is commonlycalled a transcendental reduction.[47]

To begin with, Kants distinction between the a posteri-ori being contingent and particular knowledge, and the apriori being universal and necessary knowledge, must bekept in mind. For if we merely connect two intuitions to-gether in a perceiving subject, the knowledge is alwayssubjective because it is derived a posteriori, when what isdesired is for the knowledge to be objective, that is, forthe two intuitions to refer to the object and hold good ofit necessarily universally for anyone at anytime, not justthe perceiving subject in its current condition. What elseis equivalent to objective knowledge besides the a priori,that is to say, universal and necessary knowledge? Noth-ing else, and hence before knowledge can be objective,it must be incorporated under an a priori category of theunderstanding.[47][48]

For example, say a subject says, The sun shines on thestone; the stone grows warm, which is all he perceives inperception. His judgment is contingent and holds no ne-cessity. But if he says, The sunshine causes the stoneto warm, he subsumes the perception under the cate-gory of causality, which is not found in the perception,and necessarily synthesizes the concept sunshine with theconcept heat, producing a necessarily universally truejudgment.[47]

To explain the categories in more detail, they are the pre-conditions of the construction of objects in the mind. In-deed, to even think of the sun and stone presupposes thecategory of subsistence, that is, substance. For the cate-gories synthesize the random data of the sensorymanifoldinto intelligible objects. This means that the categoriesare also the most abstract things one can say of any ob-ject whatsoever, and hence one can have an a priori cog-nition of the totality of all objects of experience if onecan list all of them. To do so, Kant formulates anothertranscendental deduction.[47]

Judgments are, for Kant, the preconditions of anythought. Man thinks via judgments, so all possiblejudgments must be listed and the perceptions connectedwithin them put aside, so as to make it possible to exam-ine the moments when the understanding is engaged inconstructing judgments. For the categories are equivalentto thesemoments, in that they are concepts of intuitions ingeneral, so far as they are determined by these momentsuniversally and necessarily. Thus by listing all the mo-ments, one can deduce from them all of the categories.[47]

One may now ask: How many possible judgments are

8 2 PHILOSOPHY

there? Kant believed that all the possible propositionswithin Aristotles syllogistic logic are equivalent to allpossible judgments, and that all the logical operatorswithin the propositions are equivalent to the momentsof the understanding within judgments. Thus he listedAristotles system in four groups of three: quantity (uni-versal, particular, singular), quality (armative, nega-tive, innite), relation (categorical, hypothetical, disjunc-tive) and modality (problematic, assertoric, apodeictic).The parallelism with Kants categories is obvious: quan-tity (unity, plurality, totality), quality (reality, negation,limitation), relation (substance, cause, community) andmodality (possibility, existence, necessity).[47]

The fundamental building blocks of experience, i.e. ob-jective knowledge, are now in place. First there is thesensibility, which supplies the mind with intuitions, andthen there is the understanding, which produces judg-ments of these intuitions and can subsume them undercategories. These categories lift the intuitions up outof the subjects current state of consciousness and placethem within consciousness in general, producing univer-sally necessary knowledge. For the categories are innatein any rational being, so any intuition thought within acategory in one mind is necessarily subsumed and under-stood identically in any mind. In other words we lterwhat we see and hear.[47]

2.3 Transcendental schema doctrine

See also: Schema (Kant)

Kant ran into a problem with his theory that the mindplays a part in producing objective knowledge. Intuitionsand categories are entirely disparate, so how can they in-teract? Kants solution is the (transcendental) schema: apriori principles by which the transcendental imaginationconnects concepts with intuitions through time. All theprinciples are temporally bound, for if a concept is purelya priori, as the categories are, then they must apply for alltimes. Hence there are principles such as substance is thatwhich endures through time, and the cause must always beprior to the eect.[49][50]

2.4 Moral philosophy

Kant developed his moral philosophy in three works:Groundwork of the Metaphysic of Morals (1785),[51]Critique of Practical Reason (1788), and Metaphysics ofMorals (1797).In the Groundwork, Kants method involves trying toconvert our everyday, obvious, rational[52] knowledge ofmorality into philosophical knowledge. The latter twoworks followed a method of using practical reason,which is based only on things about which reason cantell us, and not deriving any principles from experience,

Immanuel Kant

to reach conclusions which can be applied to the worldof experience (in the second part of The Metaphysic ofMorals).Kant is known for his theory that there is a single moralobligation, which he called the "Categorical Imperative",and is derived from the concept of duty. Kant denes thedemands of the moral law as categorical imperatives.Categorical imperatives are principles that are intrinsi-cally valid; they are good in and of themselves; they mustbe obeyed by everyone in all situations and circumstances,if our behavior is to observe the moral law. The Categor-ical Imperative generates all other moral obligations, andthey can be tested against it. Kant also stated that themoral means and ends can be applied to the categoricalimperative, that rational beings can pursue certain endsusing the appropriate means. Ends based on physicalneeds or wants can create merely hypothetical impera-tives. The categorical imperative can only be based onsomething that is an end in itself, that is, an end that isnot a means to some other need, desire, or purpose.[53]Kant believed that the moral law is a principle of reasonitself, and is not based on contingent facts about theworld, such as what would make us happy, but to act onthe moral law which has no other motive than worthinessof being happy.[54] Accordingly, he believed that moralobligation applies only to rational agents.[55]

Unlike a hypothetical imperative, a categorical impera-tive is an unconditional obligation; that is, it has the forceof an obligation regardless of our will or desires[56] InGroundwork of the Metaphysic of Morals (1785) Kantenumerated three formulations of the categorical imper-

2.4 Moral philosophy 9

ative that he believed to be roughly equivalent.[57]

Kant believed that if an action is not done with the motiveof duty, then it is without moral value. He thought thatevery action should have pure intention behind it; oth-erwise it was meaningless. The nal result was not themost important aspect of an action, but how the personfelt while carrying out the action was the time at whichvalue was set to the result.In Groundwork of the Metaphysic of Morals, Kant alsoposited the counter-utilitarian idea that there is a dier-ence between preferences and values, and that considera-tions of individual rights temper calculations of aggregateutility, a concept that is an axiom in economics:[58]

Everything has either a price or a dignity.Whatever has a price can be replaced by some-thing else as its equivalent; on the other hand,whatever is above all price, and therefore ad-mits of no equivalent, has a dignity. But thatwhich constitutes the condition under whichalone something can be an end in itself doesnot have mere relative worth, i.e., price, but anintrinsic worth, i.e., a dignity. (p. 53, italics inoriginal).

A phrase quoted by Kant, which is used to summarize thecounter-utilitarian nature of his moral philosophy, is Fiatjustitia, pereat mundus, (Let justice be done, though theworld perish), which he translates loosely as Let jus-tice reign even if all the rascals in the world should per-ish from it. This appears in his 1795 Perpetual Peace(Zum ewigen Frieden. Ein philosophischer Entwurf.),Appendix 1.[59][60][61]

2.4.1 First formulation

The rst formulation (Formula of Universal Law) of themoral imperative requires that the maxims be chosen asthough they should hold as universal laws of nature" .[57]This formulation in principle has as its supreme law thecreed Always act according to that maxim whose uni-versality as a law you can at the same time will and isthe only condition under which a will can never comeinto conict with itself [....]"[62]

One interpretation of the rst formulation is called theuniversalizability test.[63] An agents maxim, accordingto Kant, is his subjective principle of human actions":that is, what the agent believes is his reason to act.[64] Theuniversalisability test has ve steps:

1. Find the agents maxim (i.e., an action paired withits motivation). Take for example the declaration Iwill lie for personal benet. Lying is the action; themotivation is to fulll some sort of desire. Pairedtogether, they form the maxim.

2. Imagine a possible world in which everyone in a sim-ilar position to the real-world agent followed thatmaxim. With no exception of ones self. This isin order for you to hold people to the same principlerequired of yourself.

3. Decide whether any contradictions or irrationalitiesarise in the possible world as a result of followingthe maxim.

4. If a contradiction or irrationality arises, acting onthat maxim is not allowed in the real world.

5. If there is no contradiction, then acting on thatmaxim is permissible, and is sometimes required.

(For a modern parallel, see John Rawls hypothetical sit-uation, the original position.)

2.4.2 Second formulation

The second formulation (or Formula of the End in Itself)holds that the rational being, as by its nature an end andthus as an end in itself, must serve in every maxim asthe condition restricting all merely relative and arbitraryends.[57] The principle dictates that you "[a]ct with refer-ence to every rational being (whether yourself or another)so that it is an end in itself in your maxim, meaning thatthe rational being is the basis of all maxims of actionand must be treated never as a mere means but as thesupreme limiting condition in the use of all means, i.e.,as an end at the same time.[65]

2.4.3 Third formulation

The third formulation (Formula of Autonomy) is a syn-thesis of the rst two and is the basis for the completedetermination of all maxims. It says that all maximswhich stem from autonomous legislation ought to har-monize with a possible realm of ends as with a realm ofnature.[57] In principle, So act as if your maxims shouldserve at the same time as the universal law (of all rationalbeings)", meaning that we should so act that wemay thinkof ourselves as a member in the universal realm of ends,legislating universal laws through our maxims (that is, acode of conduct), in a possible realm of ends.[66] Nonemay elevate themselves above the universal law, thereforeit is ones duty to follow the maxim(s).

2.4.4 Religion Within the Limits of Reason

Kant articulates his strongest criticisms of the organiza-tion and practices of religious organizations to those thatencourage what he sees as a religion of counterfeit ser-vice to God.[67] Among the major targets of his criticismare external ritual, superstition and a hierarchical churchorder. He sees all of these as eorts to make oneself

10 2 PHILOSOPHY

pleasing to God in ways other than conscientious adher-ence to the principle of moral rightness in choosing onesactions. The severity of Kants criticisms on these mat-ters, along with his rejection of the possibility of theo-retical proofs for the existence of God and his philosoph-ical re-interpretation of some basic Christian doctrines,allow interpretations that see Kant as thoroughly hostileto religion in general and Christianity in particular (e.g.,Walsh 1967). Nevertheless, other interpreters considerthat Kant was trying to mark o a defensible rational coreof Christian belief.[68] Kant sees in Jesus Christ the ar-mation of a puremoral disposition of the heart that canmake man well-pleasing to God.[67]

2.4.5 Idea of freedom

In the Critique of Pure Reason,[69] Kant distinguishes be-tween the transcendental idea of freedom, which as apsychological concept is mainly empirical and refers tothe question whether we must admit a power of sponta-neously beginning a series of successive things or statesas a real ground of necessity in regard to causality,[70]and the practical concept of freedom as the independenceof our will from the coercion or necessitation throughsensuous impulses. Kant nds it a source of dicultythat the practical idea of freedom is founded on the tran-scendental idea of freedom,[71] but for the sake of prac-tical interests uses the practical meaning, taking no ac-count of... its transcendental meaning, which he feelswas properly disposed of in the Third Antinomy, andas an element in the question of the freedom of the willis for philosophy a real stumbling-block that has em-barrassed speculative reason.[70]

Kant calls practical everything that is possible throughfreedom, and the pure practical laws that are never giventhrough sensuous conditions but are held analogously withthe universal law of causality are moral laws. Reason cangive us only the pragmatic laws of free action through thesenses, but pure practical laws given by reason a priori[72]dictate "what ought to be done".[73][74]

2.4.6 Categories of freedom

In the Critique of Practical Reason, at the end of the sec-ond Main Part of the Analytics,[75] Kant introduces thecategories of freedom, in analogy with the categories ofunderstanding their practical counterparts. Kants cate-gories of freedom apparently function primarily as con-ditions for the possibility for actions (i) to be free, (ii) tobe understood as free and (iii) to be morally evaluated.For Kant, although actions as theoretical objects are con-stituted by means of the theoretical categories, actions aspractical objects (objects of practical use of reason, andwhich can be good or bad) are constituted by means ofthe categories of freedom. Only in this way can actions,as phenomena, be a consequence of freedom, and be un-derstood and evaluated as such.[76]

2.5 Aesthetic philosophy

Kant discusses the subjective nature of aesthetic qual-ities and experiences in Observations on the Feeling ofthe Beautiful and Sublime, (1764). Kants contributionto aesthetic theory is developed in the Critique of Judg-ment (1790) where he investigates the possibility and log-ical status of judgments of taste. In the Critique ofAesthetic Judgment, the rst major division of the Cri-tique of Judgment, Kant used the term aesthetic in amanner that, according to Kant scholar W.H. Walsh, dif-fers from its modern sense.[77] Prior to this, in the Cri-tique of Pure Reason, to note essential dierences be-tween judgments of taste, moral judgments, and scien-tic judgments, Kant abandoned the term aesthetic asdesignating the critique of taste, noting that judgmentsof taste could never be directed by laws a priori".[78]After A. G. Baumgarten, who wrote Aesthetica (175058),[79] Kant was one of the rst philosophers to developand integrate aesthetic theory into a unied and compre-hensive philosophical system, utilizing ideas that playedan integral role throughout his philosophy.[80]

In the chapter Analytic of the Beautiful of the Critiqueof Judgment, Kant states that beauty is not a property ofan artwork or natural phenomenon, but is instead a con-sciousness of the pleasure that attends the 'free play' ofthe imagination and the understanding. Even though itappears that we are using reason to decide what is beau-tiful, the judgment is not a cognitive judgment,[81] andis consequently not logical, but aesthetical ( 1). A purejudgement of taste is in fact subjective insofar as it refersto the emotional response of the subject and is based uponnothing but esteem for an object itself: it is a disinter-ested pleasure, and we feel that pure judgements of taste,i.e. judgements of beauty, lay claim to universal valid-ity (2022). It is important to note that this univer-sal validity is not derived from a determinate concept ofbeauty but from common sense (40). Kant also believedthat a judgement of taste shares characteristics engagedin a moral judgement: both are disinterested, and we holdthem to be universal. In the chapter Analytic of the Sub-lime Kant identies the sublime as an aesthetic qualitythat, like beauty, is subjective, but unlike beauty refersto an indeterminate relationship between the faculties ofthe imagination and of reason, and shares the character ofmoral judgments in the use of reason. The feeling of thesublime, itself ocially divided into two distinct modes(the mathematical and the dynamical sublime), describestwo subjective moments, both of which concern the rela-tionship of the faculty of the imagination to reason. Somecommentators,[82] however, argue that Kants critical phi-losophy contains a third kind of the sublime, the moralsublime, which is the aesthetic response to the moral lawor a representation thereof, and a development of the no-ble sublime in Kants theory of 1764. The mathemati-cal sublime is situated in the failure of the imaginationto comprehend natural objects that appear boundless andformless, or appear absolutely great ( 2325). This

11

imaginative failure is then recuperated through the plea-sure taken in reasons assertion of the concept of innity.In this move the faculty of reason proves itself superiorto our fallible sensible self ( 2526). In the dynamicalsublime there is the sense of annihilation of the sensibleself as the imagination tries to comprehend a vast might.This power of nature threatens us but through the resis-tance of reason to such sensible annihilation, the subjectfeels a pleasure and a sense of the human moral vocation.This appreciation of moral feeling through exposure tothe sublime helps to develop moral character.Kant had developed the distinction between an object ofart as a material value subject to the conventions of soci-ety and the transcendental condition of the judgment oftaste as a rened value in the propositions of his Ideaof A Universal History (1784). In the Fourth and FifthTheses of that work he identied all art as the fruits ofunsociableness due to mens antagonism in society,[83]and in the Seventh Thesis asserted that while such ma-terial property is indicative of a civilized state, only theideal of morality and the universalization of rened valuethrough the improvement of the mind of man belongs toculture.[84]

2.6 Political philosophyMain article: Political philosophy of Immanuel Kant

In Perpetual Peace: A Philosophical Sketch,[85] Kant listedseveral conditions that he thought necessary for endingwars and creating a lasting peace. They included a worldof constitutional republics.[86] His classical republicantheory was extended in the Science of Right, the rst partof the Metaphysics of Morals (1797).[87]

Kants political thought can be summarized as republi-can government and international organization. In morecharacteristically Kantian terms, it is doctrine of the statebased upon the law (Rechtsstaat) and of eternal peace.Indeed, in each of these formulations, both terms ex-press the same idea: that of legal constitution or of 'peacethrough law'. Taken simply by itself, Kants political phi-losophy, being essentially a legal doctrine, rejects by def-inition the opposition between moral education and theplay of passions as alternate foundations for social life.The state is dened as the union of men under law. Thestate rightly so called is constituted by laws which are nec-essary a priori because they ow from the very conceptof law. A regime can be judged by no other criteria norbe assigned any other functions, than those proper to thelawful order as such. [88]

He opposed democracy, which at his time meant directdemocracy, believing that majority rule posed a threat toindividual liberty. He stated, "...democracy is, properlyspeaking, necessarily a despotism, because it establishesan executive power in which 'all' decide for or even againstone who does not agree; that is, 'all,' who are not quite

all, decide, and this is a contradiction of the general willwith itself and with freedom.[89] As with most writersat the time, he distinguished three forms of governmenti.e. democracy, aristocracy, and monarchy with mixedgovernment as the most ideal form of it.

3 AnthropologyKant lectured on anthropology for over 25 years. HisAnthropology from a Pragmatic Point of View was pub-lished in 1798. (This was the subject ofMichel Foucault'sdoctoral dissertation.) Kants Lectures on Anthropologywere published for the rst time in 1997 in German.[90]The former was translated into English and published bythe Cambridge Texts in the History of Philosophy seriesin 2006.[91]

Kant was among the rst people of his time to introduceanthropology as an intellectual area of study long beforethe eld gained popularity. As a result, his texts are con-sidered to have advanced the eld. Kants point of viewalso inuenced the works of philosophers after him suchas Martin Heidegger, Paul Ricoeur, and Jean Greisch.Kant viewed anthropology in two broad categories. Onecategory was the physiological approach which he re-ferred to as what nature makes of the human being.The other category was the pragmatic approach whichexplored the things a human can and should make ofhimself.[92]

4 InuenceKants inuence on Western thought has beenprofound.[93] Over and above his inuence on spe-cic thinkers, Kant changed the framework withinwhich philosophical inquiry has been carried out. Heaccomplished a paradigm shift: very little philosophy isnow carried out in the style of pre-Kantian philosophy.This shift consists in several closely related innovationsthat have become axiomatic, in philosophy itself and inthe social sciences and humanities generally:

Kants Copernican revolution, that placed the roleof the human subject or knower at the center of in-quiry into our knowledge, such that it is impossibleto philosophize about things as they are indepen-dently of us or of how they are for us;[94]

His invention of critical philosophy, that is of the no-tion of being able to discover and systematically ex-plore possible inherent limits to our ability to knowthrough philosophical reasoning

His creation of the concept of conditions of pos-sibility, as in his notion of the conditions of pos-sible experience that is that things, knowledge,

12 4 INFLUENCE

and forms of consciousness rest on prior conditionsthat make them possible, so that, to understand orto know them, we must rst understand these con-ditions

His theory that objective experience is actively con-stituted or constructed by the functioning of the hu-man mind

His notion ofmoral autonomy as central to humanity His assertion of the principle that human beingsshould be treated as ends rather than as means

Some or all of these Kantian ideas can be seenin schools of thought as dierent from one an-other as German Idealism, Marxism, positivism,phenomenology, existentialism, critical theory, linguisticphilosophy, structuralism, post-structuralism, anddeconstructionism.[95]

4.1 Historical inuence

Statue of Immanuel Kant in Kaliningrad (Knigsberg), Russia.Replica by Harald Haacke of the original by Christian DanielRauch lost in 1945.

During his own life, there was much critical attentionpaid to his thought. He had an inuence on Reinhold,Fichte, Schelling, Hegel, and Novalis during the 1780sand 1790s. The school of thinking known as German

Idealism developed from his writings. The German Ide-alists Fichte and Schelling, for example, tried to bringtraditional metaphysically laden notions like the Ab-solute, God, and Being into the scope of Kants crit-ical thought.[96] In so doing, the German Idealists tried toreverse Kants view that we cannot know what we cannotobserve.Hegel was one of Kants rst major critics. In response towhat he saw as Kants abstract and formal account, Hegelbrought about an ethic focused on the ethical life ofthe community.[97] But Hegels notion of ethical life ismeant to subsume, rather than replace, Kantian ethics.And Hegel can be seen as trying to defend Kants ideaof freedom as going beyond nite desires, by meansof reason. Thus, in contrast to later critics like Niet-zsche or Russell, Hegel shares some of Kants most basicconcerns.[98]

Kants thinking on religion was used in Britain tochallenge the decline in religious faith in the nine-teenth century. British Catholic writers, notably G. K.Chesterton and Hilaire Belloc, followed this approach.Ronald Engleeld debated this movement, and Kantsuse of language. See Engleelds article,[99] reprinted inEngleeld.[100] Criticisms of Kant were common in therealist views of the new positivism at that time.Arthur Schopenhauer was strongly inuenced by Kantstranscendental idealism. He, like G. E. Schulze, Jacobi,and Fichte before him, was critical of Kants theory ofthe thing in itself. Things in themselves, they argued, areneither the cause of what we observe nor are they com-pletely beyond our access. Ever since the rst Critiqueof Pure Reason philosophers have been critical of Kantstheory of the thing in itself. Many have argued, if such athing exists beyond experience then one cannot posit thatit aects us causally, since that would entail stretchingthe category 'causality' beyond the realm of experience.For a review of this problem and the relevant literaturesee The Thing in Itself and the Problem of Aection inthe revised edition of Henry Allisons Kants Transcen-dental Idealism. For Schopenhauer things in themselvesdo not exist outside the non-rational will. The world, asSchopenhauer would have it, is the striving and largely un-conscious will. Michael Kelly, in the preface to his 1910book Kants Ethics and Schopenhauers Criticism, stated:Of Kant it may be said that what is good and true in hisphilosophy would have been buried with him, were it notfor Schopenhauer....With the success and wide inuence of Hegels writings,Kants inuence began to wane, though there was in Ger-many a movement that hailed a return to Kant in the1860s, beginning with the publication of Kant und dieEpigonen in 1865 by Otto Liebmann. His motto wasBack to Kant, and a re-examination of his ideas began(See Neo-Kantianism). During the turn of the 20th cen-tury there was an important revival of Kants theoreticalphilosophy, known as the Marburg School, represented

13

in the work of Hermann Cohen, Paul Natorp, Ernst Cas-sirer,[101] and anti-Neo-Kantian Nicolai Hartmann.[102]

Kants notion of Critique has been quite inuential. TheEarly German Romantics, especially Friedrich Schlegelin his Athenaeum Fragments, used Kants self-reexiveconception of criticism in their Romantic theory ofpoetry.[103] Also in Aesthetics, Clement Greenberg, inhis classic essay Modernist Painting, uses Kantian crit-icism, what Greenberg refers to as immanent criti-cism, to justify the aims of Abstract painting, a move-ment Greenberg saw as aware of the key limitiatonatnessthat makes up the medium of painting.[104]French philosopher Michel Foucault was also greatly in-uenced by Kants notion of Critique and wrote severalpieces on Kant for a re-thinking of the Enlightenment asa form of critical thought. He went so far as to classifyhis own philosophy as a critical history of modernity,rooted in Kant.[105]

Kant believed that mathematical truths were forms ofsynthetic a priori knowledge, which means they are nec-essary and universal, yet known through intuition.[106]Kants often brief remarks about mathematics inuencedthe mathematical school known as intuitionism, a move-ment in philosophy of mathematics opposed to Hilbertsformalism, and the logicism of Frege and Bertrand Rus-sell.[107]

4.2 Inuence on modern thinkers

West German postage stamp, 1974, commemorating the 250thanniversary of Kants birth

With his Perpetual Peace, Kant is considered to have fore-shadowed many of the ideas that have come to form the

democratic peace theory, one of the main controversiesin political science.[108]

Prominent recent Kantians include the British philoso-pher P. F. Strawson,[109] the American philosophersWilfrid Sellars[110] and Christine Korsgaard.[111] Due tothe inuence of Strawson and Sellars, among others, therehas been a renewed interest in Kants view of the mind.Central to many debates in philosophy of psychology andcognitive science is Kants conception of the unity ofconsciousness.[112]

Jrgen Habermas and John Rawls are two signicant po-litical and moral philosophers whose work is stronglyinuenced by Kants moral philosophy.[113] They haveeach argued against relativism,[114] supporting the Kan-tian view that universality is essential to any viable moralphilosophy.Kants inuence also has extended to the social, behav-ioral, and physical sciences, as in the sociology of MaxWeber, the psychology of Jean Piaget, and the linguis-tics of Noam Chomsky. Kants work on mathematics andsynthetic a priori knowledge is also cited by theoreticalphysicist Albert Einstein as an early inuence on his in-tellectual development.[115] Because of the thoroughnessof the Kantian paradigm shift, his inuence extends tothinkers who neither specically refer to his work nor usehis terminology.Scholars have shown that Kants critical ethos has also in-spired nonwestern political thinkers, including the Mus-lim political reformer Tariq Ramadan.[116]

5 Tomb and statueKants tomb is today in a mausoleum adjoining the north-east corner of Knigsberg Cathedral in what is nowknown as Kaliningrad, Russia. The mausoleum was con-structed by the architect Friedrich Lahrs and was nishedin 1924 in time for the bicentenary of Kants birth. Orig-inally, Kant was buried inside the cathedral, but in 1880his remains were moved outside and placed in a neo-Gothic chapel adjoining the northeast corner of the cathe-dral. Over the years, the chapel became dilapidated be-fore it was demolished to make way for the mausoleum,which was built on the same spot, where it is today.The tomb and its mausoleum are among the few artifactsof German times preserved by the Soviets after they con-quered and annexed the city. Today, many newlywedsbring owers to the mausoleum.Artifacts previously owned by Kant, known as Kantiana,were included in the Knigsberg CityMuseum. However,the museum was destroyed during World War II.A replica of the statue of Kant that stood in German timesin front of the main University of Knigsberg buildingwas donated by a German entity in the early 1990s andplaced in the same grounds.

14 7 LIST OF MAJOR WORKS

Kants tomb in Kaliningrad, 2007

5 DM 1974 D silver coin commemorating the 250th birthday ofImmanuel Kant in Knigsberg

After the expulsion of Knigsbergs German populationat the end of World War II, the University of Knigsbergwhere Kant taught was replaced by the Russian-languageKaliningrad State University, which took up the campusand surviving buildings of the historic German univer-sity. In 2005, the university was renamed Immanuel KantState University of Russia. The change of name was an-nounced at a ceremony attended by President VladimirPutin of Russia and Chancellor Gerhard Schrder of Ger-many, and the university formed a Kant Society, dedi-cated to the study of Kantianism.

6 Criticism

Johann Georg Hamann

Schopenhauers criticism of the Kantian philosophy

Schopenhauers criticism of Kants Groundwork ofthe Metaphysic of Morals

7 List of major works (1746, but published in 1749) Thoughts on the

True Estimation of Vital Forces (Gedanken von derwahren Schtzung der lebendigen Krfte)

(1755) A New Elucidation of the First Principlesof Metaphysical Cognition (Principiorum primorumcognitionis metaphysicae nova dilucidatio (DoctoralThesis))

(1755) Universal Natural History and Theory ofHeaven (Allgemeine Naturgeschichte und Theorie desHimmels)

(1756) Monadologia Physica (1762) The False Subtlety of the Four Syllogistic Fig-

ures (Die falsche Spitzndigkeit der vier syllogistis-chen Figuren)

(1763) The Only Possible Argument in Support of aDemonstration of the Existence of God (Der einzigmgliche Beweisgrund zu einer Demonstration desDaseins Gottes)

(1763) Attempt to Introduce the Concept of NegativeMagnitudes into Philosophy (Versuch den Begri dernegativen Gren in die Weltweisheit einzufhren)

(1764) Observations on the Feeling of the Beautifuland Sublime (Beobachtungen ber das Gefhl desSchnen und Erhabenen)

(1764) Essay on the Illness of the Head (ber dieKrankheit des Kopfes)

(1764) Inquiry Concerning the Distinctness of thePrinciples of Natural Theology and Morality (thePrize Essay) (Untersuchungen ber die Deutlichkeitder Grundstze der natrlichen Theologie und derMoral)

(1766) Dreams of a Spirit Seer (Trume eines Geis-tersehers)

(1770)Dissertation on the Form and Principles of theSensible and the Intelligible World (De mundi sensi-bilis atque intelligibilis forma et principiis (InauguralDissertation))

(1775) On the Dierent Races of Man (ber die ver-schiedenen Rassen der Menschen)

(1781) First edition of the Critique of Pure Rea-son[117] (Kritik der reinen Vernunft)[118]

(1783) Prolegomena to any Future Metaphysics[119](Prolegomena zu einer jeden knftigen Metaphysik)

15

(1784) "An Answer to the Question: What Is En-lightenment?" (Beantwortung der Frage: Was istAufklrung?)[120]

(1784) "Idea for a Universal History with a Cos-mopolitan Purpose" (Idee zu einer allgemeinenGeschichte in weltbrgerlicher Absicht)

(1785) Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals(Grundlegung zur Metaphysik der Sitten)

(1786) Metaphysical Foundations of Natural Sci-ence (Metaphysische Anfangsgrnde der Naturwis-senschaft)

(1786) Conjectural Beginning of Human History (1787) Second edition of the Critique of Pure Rea-

son[121] (Kritik der reinen Vernunft)[122]

(1788) Critique of Practical Reason[123] (Kritik derpraktischen Vernunft)[124]

(1790) Critique of Judgement (Kritik der Urteil-skraft)[125]

(1793) Religion within the Limits of Reason Alone(Die Religion innerhalb der Grenzen der bloen Ver-nunft)[126]

(1793) On the Old Saw: That may be right in the-ory, but it won't work in practice (ber den Gemein-spruch: Das mag in der Theorie richtig sein, taugtaber nicht fr die Praxis)

(1795) Perpetual Peace[127] (Zum ewigenFrieden)[128]

(1797) Metaphysics of Morals (Metaphysik der Sit-ten). First part is The Doctrine of Right, which hasoften been published separately as The Science ofRight.

(1798) Anthropology from a Pragmatic Point ofView (Anthropologie in pragmatischer Hinsicht)

(1798) The Contest of Faculties[129] (Der Streit derFakultten)[130]

(1800) Logic (Logik) (1803) On Pedagogy (ber Pdagogik)[131]

(1804) Opus Postumum (1817) Lectures on Philosophical Theology (Im-

manuel Kants Vorlesungen ber die philosophischeReligionslehre edited by K. H. L. Plitz) [The En-glish edition of A. W. Wood & G. M. Clark (Cor-nell, 1978) is based on Plitz' second edition, 1830,of these lectures][132]

8 See also

16 9 TEXT AND IMAGE SOURCES, CONTRIBUTORS, AND LICENSES

9 Text and image sources, contributors, and licenses9.1 Text

Immanuel Kant Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immanuel%20Kant?oldid=656189421 Contributors: Derek Ross, LC, ArchibaldFitzchestereld, Mav, Bryan Derksen, The Anome, Larry Sanger, Andre Engels, Scipius, Danny, XJaM, Fredbauder, Christian List, Pier-reAbbat, Little guru, Roadrunner, Space Cadet, Ben-Zin, Hephaestos, Octothorn, Leandrod, Jayt, Edward, Michael Hardy, Owl, Kaijan,Jahsonic, BoNoMoJo (old), Gabbe, Damnedkingdom, Menchi, Ixfd64, Delirium, Paul A, Shimmin, Jleybov, Ahoerstemeier, Docu, Snoyes,Sir Paul, Uri, Ravy, Poor Yorick, Rossami, Evercat, Sethmahoney, Justin walsh, TonyClarke, EdH, Lancevortex, Smack, Adam Conover,Hashar, Charles Matthews, Johnwhite79, Radgeek, Roepers, Jogloran, Zoicon5, Markhurd, Patrick0Moran, Tpbradbury, Jjshapiro, Buri-dan, Kkawohl, J D, Rbellin, Catharine, Wetman, Banno, Gakmo, Dimadick, Robert2957, Nufy8, Robbot, Fredrik, Chris 73, Goethean,Romanm, Naddy, Lowellian, Chris Roy, Tim Ivorson, Academic Challenger, Markewilliams, Blainster, Halibutt, Sunray, Doidimais Brasil,Hadal, UtherSRG, Unkamunka, Aetheling, Snobot, Stirling Newberry, Exploding Boy, Giftlite, Urmas, ShaneCavanaugh, Meursault2004,Fastssion, Wilfried Derksen, Cool Hand Luke, Peruvianllama, Everyking, Jacob1207, Gamaliel, Frencheigh, DO'Neil, Maarten van Vliet,St3vo, Matthead, Neilc, Gubbubu, Utcursch, Pgan002, Joaotg, Sca, Alexf, Doug Burn, Popefauvexxiii, SURIV, Zeimusu, Jen savage,FePe, Antandrus, Tom the Goober, Starbane, MarkSweep, Piotrus, Savant1984, Phil Sandifer, Rdsmith4, JimWae, Tothebarricades.tk,Borameer, Pmanderson, DanielDemaret, Karl-Henner, Yossarian, Gscshoyru, ArcticFrog, Ezekiel Cheever, Ukexpat, M1ss1ontomars2k4,Trevor MacInnis, JamesTeterenko, Leonbloy, Canterbury Tail, Esperant, Lucidish, PZFUN, R, Spiy sperry, DanielCD, EugeneZelenko,Buyg, Varada, Discospinster, Herzen, Rich Farmbrough, Guanabot, FranksValli, Nina Gerlach, Inkypaws, Vsmith, Ardonik, Smyth, Noti-nasnaid, Michael Zimmermann, Mani1, Paul August, Bender235, ESkog, STGM, Guety, Zscout370, El C, Pjrich, Edwinstearns, Carlon,Kwamikagami, Aude, Nile, Causa sui, Cretog8, Icut4you, NetBot, Whosyourjudas, Hurricane111, Evolauxia, Ygfperson, Arcadian, Gi-raedata, La goutte de pluie, Jojit fb, Nk, Kapil, Rajah, Thewayforward, Li3crmp, Tresoldi, Obradovic Goran, (aeropagitica), AppleJuggler,Jonathunder, Amerindianarts, Knucmo2, Jumbuck, Schissel, Alansohn, ChristopherWillis, Atlant, Keenan Pepper, Andrew Gray, Arve-dui, D prime, Lectonar, Goldom, SlimVirgin, Ciceronl, Hoary, WhiteC, Spinoza1111, Mac Davis, Weft, YDZ, Redfarmer, Feb30th1712,MattWade, B12, Akratic, Andrew Norman, Garzo, RJII, Gpvos, Sciurin, Pethr, Dominic, Pwqn, Alai, Ghirlandajo, Hackajar, Ultrama-rine, Mahanga, Bastin, JALockhart, Angr, Velho, Woohookitty, Henrik, FeanorStar7, RHaworth, Deeahbz, Kzollman, Kam Solusar, Bartel,Ruud Koot, MONGO, Sdgjake, Tabletop, Pdn, Steinbach, GregorB, Gyrae, Aarnepolkusin, N9bauer, Marudubshinki, SqueakBox, Gra-ham87, Shae, BD2412, FreplySpang, Zoz, Mendaliv, Kane5187, Ketiltrout, Sj, Sjakkalle, Rjwilmsi, Koavf, SpNeo, Plotinus, Dudegalea,Bhadani, Olessi, MarnetteD, Reinis, Nandesuka, FlaBot, Old Moonraker, Doc glasgow, Nihiltres, MacRusgail, RexNL, Sergio1, PresidentRhapsody, TeaDrinker, Terrx, Boyscoutberlin, Nicholasink, Md7t, Chobot, Korg, Bgwhite, HallMonitor, Roboto de Ajvol, Satanael, Yurik-Bot, Kinneyboy90, Hairy Dude, Cyferx, Pip2andahalf, RussBot, Red Slash, Pigman, Sophroniscus, Ansell, Chensiyuan, Gaius Cornelius,Vincej, Anomalocaris, Rick Norwood, Theglockner, Wiki alf, DJ Bungi, Cognition, Stallions2010, Bayle Shanks, Evan Gould, JTBurman,BirgitteSB, Robdurbar, LeaNder, Raven4x4x, Kikl, Inselpeter, Nick C, EEMIV, Lockesdonkey, Bota47, Jpeob, Wjwma, Nlu, Tonywalton,Homagetocatalonia, Lt-wiki-bot, Nikkimaria, Errabee, Modify, JuJube, Tevildo, GraemeL, JoanneB, LeonardoRob0t, Palthrow, Scouter-sig, Kevin, Caco de vidro, Whouk, Greatal386, Zephirus, DVD R W, Tom Morris, NickelShoe, Nicholas Jackson, Sardanaphalus, Attil-ios, Crystallina, Mohsens, SmackBot, Iwpoe, Cetblue, Fi99ig, Lestrade, CarbonCopy, InverseHypercube, KnowledgeOfSelf, MichaelSH,Mirra21, Zyxw, Eskimbot, Frymaster, GreggW, Sebesta, Eiler7, Gilliam, Portillo, Ohnoitsjamie, Hmains, Skizzik, Exlibris, David Lud-wig, Chris the speller, TheDarkArchon, Keegan, Shaggorama, pa, MalafayaBot, Saint Midge, Deli nk, Neo-Jay, Watsonalgas, Nbarth, Gofor it!, CMacMillan, DHN-bot, Nedlum, Cantabe, Mikker, John Reaves, WikiPedant, Dethme0w, Neutralika, Can't sleep, clown will eatme, Arnomd, Gmotamedi, Signature103, Liontooth, Chlewbot, Onorem, Shadow sih, The Fading Light, Grishalevit, Jachapo, Answerthis,Jsavit, Flyguy649, Cka3n, EPM, TedE, Millipede, Pgoricha, RolandR, Dreadstar, Richard001, Salt Yeung, DMacks, Kotjze, Aaker, Pi-lotguy, Ohconfucius, GoldenTorc, Byelf2007, SashatoBot, John, UberCryxic, Mrmanhattanproject, Lapaz, Paladinwannabe2, Tim bates,Tim.thelion, Glynhughes, IronGargoyle, PseudoSudo, Voceditenore, Mr. Vernon, Timmeh, Tyrrell McAllister, Kranak, GilbertoSilvaFan,Macellarius, Johnmc, Epiphyllumlover, Tuspm, AdultSwim, Halaqah, Eastfrisian, Phuzion, N0osphR, Quaeler, K, JMK, Tamino, HarryStoteles, Shoeofdeath, LadyofShalott, Themanofnines, Adambiswanger1, Jestix, Tawkerbot2, NorthExtemp, Randroide, CmdrObot, Alejrb, David s gra, Mr. Science, Mcginnly, GHe, AshLin, Liberal Freemason, SEJohnston, Sdorrance, Andkore, Gregbard, Icarus ofold, Musicalantonio, Shanoman, Sopoforic, Cydebot, Kantiandream, Entamer, Krishnaji, Peterdjones, Vanished user vjhsduheuiui4t5hjri,Andrewsandberg, Yeanold Viskersenn, Joegasper, Chrislk02, DBaba, Pdemecz, Ward3001, Omicronpersei8, Universitytruth, JodyB,AVIosad, UberScienceNerd, Satori Son, Letranova, Epbr123, Hernlund, Bot-maru, Eenauk, MynameisRoB, 271828182, Mime, Hap-pyInGeneral, Figureground, Calamus, Headbomb, Marek69, Pauldodge, Cuevon, Martinoalbino, Woody, James086, Top.Squark, TXiKi,Bedlamhotel, Nirvana77, Bsender, Nick Number, Goldavius, Escarbot, Oreo Priest, Cyclonenim, AntiVandalBot, RobotG, Arthur Laisis,Uvaphdman, QuiteUnusual, Bigtimepeace, Antique Rose, Dontsave, Dr who1975, Mackan79, D. Webb, Modernist, Danny lost, Mer-cury543210, JAnDbot, Leuko, Johndowning, Pipedreamergrey, Skomorokh, Dsp13, Matthew Fennell, Evrenosogullari, Robina Fox, Ed-wardspec TalkBot, Anthony Krupp, Xeno, Hut 8.5, Ilunga Shibinda, Srota7, Rothorpe, Michaelxu96, CrazySpas, Yahel Guhan, Achero,Hurmata, Magioladitis, Kikadue, Gdvwhite, Bongwarrior, VoABot II, Professor marginalia, JNW, Robby, Doug Coldwell, Chrisdel,Figsyrup, Naragon, Steven Walling, Ethreshingoor, Baccyak4H, Sf67, Arielgodwin, Jmartinsson, Gottg135, WhatamIdoing, Animum,Shield2, Xmarquez, Exiledone, DerHexer, JaGa, CCS81, Normanfrench, Lord Pheasant, Mge091, MartinBot, Vigyani, Gkklein, Anar-chia, Tvoz, B33R, Rettetast, Jerry teps, Mschel, R'n'B, CommonsDelinker, PrestonH, Artaxiad, AlphaEta, J.delanoy, Pharaoh of the Wiz-ards, Trusilver, Numbo3, Spell man28, Uncle Dick, Maurice Carbonaro, Tlacuilopilo, Toghrul Talibzadeh, Glump, When Muns Attack,Tarotcards, Robertson-Glasgow, Another Philosopher, Al B. Free, Jay ryann, K04raraj, Madhava 1947, EyebrowOnVacation, BrettAllen,Juliancolton, Cometstyles, SirBob42, Natl1, David Lauder, MerleDavid, Inwind, H1voltage, Specter01010, Steel1943, ChloeTheCave-man, Idioma-bot, Wikieditor06, Lights, Deor, VolkovBot, J Goodland, Je G., Jmrowland, J153000, Philip Trueman, Intery, TXiKi-BoT, J110, Steve Newport, MeStevo, Gwib, Rhunter67, Mmuller23, Aymatth2, Lvivske, IPSOS, Qxz, Ontoraul, Ehmhel, Martin451, Lu-end, Nicol Roeg, LeaveSleaves, Figureskatingfan, Zsalamander, Siamesedream, Eldredo, Sic transit gloria, BobTheTomato, Justin2007,Synthebot, Falcon8765, Turgan, MCTales, Alcmaeonid, Life, Liberty, Property, AlleborgoBot, Kehrbykid, Symane, Logan, Daw923,Runewiki777, EmxBot, Elbow2332, Banjo Fraser, Demmy, MrsBowman, EJF, Gessa, Xett, SieBot, Fixer1234, Scarian, Luminos, thel-wold, Winchelsea, Geek Writer, Jdcaneld, Caltas, New England, Triwbe, Cjsfelipe, 9ofzeven, Rjw9459, Soler97, Breawycker, Perma-cultura, Oda Mari, Elakhna, RawEgg1, Monegasque, Veddharta, Massive99, Monkination, OsamaBinLogin, Wizziwiks, Oxymoron83,Vanished user oij8h435jweih3, Verticalslope, Manway, Saz127, BenoniBot, Philosop, Vojvodaen, CharlesGillingham, Uranium Commit-tee, Le vin blanc, Nwjerseyliz, Consecutive e, Pinkadelica, Ahuitzotl, GirlyPanache, Michael Amberwolf Elliott, RS1900, Leranedo,WikipedianMarlith, Faithlessthewonderboy, Martarius, ClueBot, SummerWithMorons, Snigbrook, Yegorius, The Thing That Should NotBe, Rodhullandemu, Mardetanha, Steplin19, TheOldJacobite, Maximilian2010, Hafspajen, Cwellmon, Rmallott1, CounterVandalismBot,Ledinlaind, CptCutLess, P. S. Burton, M^A^L, Neverquick, Arunsingh16, Passargea, Twotu, Corebaby, Excirial, Alexbot, Jusdafax, Ran-

9.2 Images 17

dom user iooi23ialdjkjk4, V Verweij, Jbdns, Brews ohare, Spirals31, Dfsghjkgfhdg, Jotterbot, Elitejcx, Iohannes Animosus, Deniz22,ANOMALY-117, Kakofonous, DanielPharos, Anoopan, Warren oO, Burner0718, Johnuniq, Ninetyoneschool, IheartBum, Egmontaz,Leoneuler, JKeck, BarretB, XLinkBot, Georges999, RogDel, Caleb004, Dawillia, Rror, Badinnity, Ostracon, NobbiP, HerkusMonte,Noctibus, AllTheThings, Adrian Scholl, DannyHuttonFerris, Konekundo, Cpu22, Addbot, Thedarkfourth, Lamento, Willking1979, Somejerk on the Internet, Sergey new, Riyuky, Landon1980, Johann Heinrich Lambert, Atethnekos, LightSpectra, Fieldday-sunday, Samitton,Nico1470, With goodness in mind, Cst17, Glane23, ChenzwBot, Mimosa.cb, Cdg123, LinkFA-Bot, Woland1234, Numbo3-bot, Ener-gicko, Peridon, Tide rolls, Lightbot, Wikkidd, Andrevruas, Gail, Jarble, Arbitrarily0, Sid321, Angrysockhop, Markvo, Legobot, Ptmohr,Luckas-bot, Yobot, Philglenny, Pavao Zornija, VengeancePrime, Themfromspace, Ptbotgourou, Senator Palpatine, Naudefjbot, Pectore,Albrodax, MarteniqueEphrom, WhatIsOptics?, Theornamentalist, ElkeK, AnomieBOT, Torricelli01, Anne McDermott, AmritasyaPutra,Palpher, Hairhorn, Mauro Lanari, Jim1138, Soyuz113, , Captain hoek, Law, Lizardcry, Ulric1313, Berlin-George, WanderingCourier, Citation bot, ArthurBot, DirlBot, Gopherusagassizii, Xqbot, TheAMmollusc, Pamskiii, Ekwos, JimVC3, Capricorn42, Untwirl,IHelpWhenICan, A455bcd9, Ikant, , Glubbdrubb, Killthemusic, Srich32977, AV3000, Buggsye, GrouchoBot, Ute in DC, Eo-suchian, Omnipaedista, Mark Schierbecker, RibotBOT, Holli13, Sewblon, MerlLinkBot, CodeMaster123, Albertocristof, Vdjj1960, GreenCardamom, FreeKnowledgeCreator, FrescoBot, RetardFaceLoserHead, Paine Ellsworth, Steven AvrahamRosten, Adam9389, MLKLewis,Sawomir Biay, Veret, Stpasta, Delphinus1997, Vishnu2011, Trust Is All You Need, GianfrancoD, BenzolBot, Ysyoon, A little insignif-icant, Xenfreak, Winterst, Mizanthrop, Gautier lebon, Kladderadatsch, Byotch69, Mam4eeee, Dasfe45, 10metreh, LinDrug, Chris09j,Asdfjkl;jkl;, Ratio101, RedBot, Wikiain, VenomousConcept, Robo Cop, Dwight.lindley, Edsu, Ninja Auditor, Dantesqueman, FoxBot, Al-ibinmustafa, ItsZippy, Jonkerz, Lotje, DragonofFire, MightymanTB, Mijelliott, Weedwhacker128, EvanHarper, Peacedance, J plumpton,Lord of the Pit, JBB1020, MarlinMr, Aniten21, Jfmantis, TjBot, Bhawani Gautam, Beyond My Ken, Becritical, WildBot, EmausBot, Im-provingWiki, John of Reading, Acather96, WikitanvirBot, Maggot432, Andros4629, Poppy132435, David7453, Rarevogel, Tommy2010,TeleComNasSprVen, Caiman6crocodilus, Thecheesykid, AvicBot, Kkm010, Daonguyen95, Ida Shaw, MoniqueGoense, Tabithapadilla,Aronlee90, PureConcept, Joeisme30, Jonpatterns, Conichikawa, Elanycohen, SporkBot, QEDK, Beyondspace, 11614soup, Brandmeister,Rostz, Richard Tuckwell, Donner60, Polisher of Cobwebs, Jerryfrancis, Orthographicus, Tobiasmattei, Atwardow, Kiesewetter, Pierpietro,Da hewad ratlunke, Matkatamiba, DASHBotAV, Mjbmrbot, Cgt, Helpsome, ClueBot NG, Y2k2020, Goose friend, Flash Fiction, Ncuth-bert1, Snotbot, Yarkmoung1, ZhugeJustin, Marcusmash1234, Future777,Widr, Antiqueight, Cognate247, Gelehrter11, Anupmehra, Ucb1,Pawanjeph85, Helpful Pixie Bot, Edisonqv, Kirchlichedogmatik, Sourcist, Anagramology, BG19bot, CityOfSilver, Archivingcontext, Da-nEnright, Ugly tim dot com, Rm1271, Fart1234567890, Yerevantsi, Afrogindahood, Supremeaim, Ashes2dust13, Benrmerrill99, Johnva15,Nathanael 00, Tampio, Pattimcletchie, Flosfa, Hyperfunnel, Chomsky, Sprutt, Pufendorf2, Gibbja, Klilidiplomus, Pethume, Dogthreezero,Bill.D Nguyen, Blingting, Anthrophilos, DanielC007, Ninmacer20, SD5bot, Eb7473, RMack1, Himynameis12345678910, DA - DP,Pirhayati, Dexbot, Belisariusgroup, Charles Essie, Mogism, The Vintage Feminist, Lugia2453, Isarra (HG), Frosty, Jamesx12345, JochenBurghardt, Epicgenius, DangerouslyPersuasiveWriter, CochranAC, BreakfastJr, Immanuel handsum, Julian Felsenburgh, FrigidNinja,Sonanto, Ketxus, Trenturrs, New worl, Andy Kuvitz, Finnusertop, Aubreybardo, TCMemoire, Liz, Kreuzberger, Philoler, GreyWin-terOwl, ChristopherBaras, Loni91, Aostachuk, FelixRosch, H4zzardnimmo124, LawrencePrincipe, AstroMichael, Scarlettail, Trackteur,Good afternoon, Lovercash2, Adamlovoni, Osman-s34, SSoheilHosseini, Hanzo090600, Victoriamcnamera, Kxrader, F W Egglestone,Jordanjlatimer, Jordaq, Tetra quark, Kylesutton20, Anxiousboomerang, Povertydave, Wallsy1319, Sabot Noh, K23823 and Anonymous:1402

9.2 Images File:Autograph-ImmanuelKant.png Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/17/Autograph-ImmanuelKant.png Li-

cense: Public domain Contributors: ? Original artist: ? File:Commons-logo.svg Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/4/4a/Commons-logo.svg License: ? Contributors: ? Original

artist: ? File:DBP_-_250_Jahre_Immanuel_Kant_-_90_Pfennig_-_1974.jpg Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/8d/

DBP_-_250_Jahre_Immanuel_Kant_-_90_Pfennig_-_1974.jpg License: Public domain Contributors: scanned by NobbiP Original artist:scanned by NobbiP

File:Folder_Hexagonal_Icon.svg Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/4/48/Folder_Hexagonal_Icon.svg License: Cc-by-sa-3.0 Contributors: ? Original artist: ?

File:German_5_DM_1974_D_Silver_Coin_Immanuel_Kant.jpg Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/44/German_5_DM_1974_D_Silver_Coin_Immanuel_Kant.jpg License: CC BY-SA 3.0 Contributors: Own work Original artist:Berlin-George

File:Immanuel_Kant.jpg Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/78/Immanuel_Kant.jpg License: Public domainContributors: ? Original artist: ?

File:Immanuel_Kant_3.jpg Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/3/3f/Immanuel_Kant_3.jpg License: PD-US Contribu-tors:Masters of Achievement textOriginal artist: ?

File:Immanuel_Kant_Tomb.jpg Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/2c/Immanuel_Kant_Tomb.jpg License:Public domain Contributors: Own work Original artist: J110

File:Immanuelkant.JPG Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/77/Immanuelkant.JPG License: CC BY 3.0 Con-tributors: Own work Original artist: Andrevruas

File:Kant017.jpg Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/8c/Kant017.jpg License: Public domain Contributors: http://www.kant.uni-mainz.de/ikonographie/miniatur.html Original artist: Carle Vernet

File:Kant_Kaliningrad.jpg Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/8a/Kant_Kaliningrad.jpg License: CC BY-SA2.5 Contributors: Self-photographed Original artist: photo taken by myself

File:People_icon.svg Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/37/People_icon.svg License: CC0 Contributors: Open-Clipart Original artist: OpenClipart

18 9 TEXT AND IMAGE SOURCES, CONTRIBUTORS, AND LICENSES

File:Portal-puzzle.svg Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/f/fd/Portal-puzzle.svg License: Public domain Contributors: ?Original artist: ?

File:Socrates.png Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/cd/Socrates.png License: Public domain Contributors:Transferred from en.wikipedia to Commons. Original artist: The original uploader wasMagnusManske at EnglishWikipedia Later versionswere uploaded by Optimager at en.wikipedia.

File:Speaker_Icon.svg Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/21/Speaker_Icon.svg License: Public domain Con-tributors: ? Original artist: ?

File:Wikiquote-logo.svg Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/fa/Wikiquote-logo.svg License: Public domainContributors: ? Original artist: ?

File:Wikisource-logo.svg Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/4c/Wikisource-logo.svg License: CC BY-SA 3.0Contributors: Rei-artur Original artist: Nicholas Moreau

9.3 Content license Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0

BiographyYoung scholarEarly workThe silent decadeMature work

PhilosophyTheory of perceptionCategories of the Faculty of UnderstandingTranscendental schema doctrineMoral philosophyFirst formulationSecond formulationThird formulationReligion Within the Limits of ReasonIdea of freedomCategories of freedom

Aesthetic philosophyPolitical philosophy

AnthropologyInfluenceHistorical influenceInfluence on modern thinkers

Tomb and statueCriticismList of major worksSee alsoText and image sources, contributors, and licensesTextImagesContent license