The Necessity of the Discipline of Pure Reason for the Systematicity of the Practical Use of Reason in Kant’s Critical Philosophy

• Autores: Farshid Baghai
• Localización: Con-textos Kantianos: International Journal of Philosophy, ISSN-e 2386-7655, Vol. 18, 2023, págs. 51-64
• Idioma: inglés
• DOI: 10.5209/kant.91736
• Enlaces
  • Texto completo (pdf)
• Resumen

  • Kant’s critical philosophy cannot realize its stated purpose to make metaphysics systematic unless it makes all metaphysical uses of reason, including the practical use of reason, systematic. Yet Kant’s account of the systematicity of the practical use of reason is not entirely clear. In particular, none of the variations of his account of the systematicity of the practical use of reason explicitly discusses the role of the discipline of pure reason in making the practical use of reason systematic. The apparent absence of the discipline from Kant’s account is contrary to indications in his writings indirectly suggesting that the discipline plays an indispensable role in the systematicity of the practical use of reason. This discrepancy remains unaddressed in the scholarship. Most interpreters reconstruct Kant’s account of the systematicity of the practical use of reason without attributing any role to the discipline. This article aims to make explicit the role of the discipline in Kant’s account of the systematicity of the practical use of reason. Specifically, it suggests that the discipline of pure reason is the first necessary condition for the systematicity of the practical use of reason: it prepares the ground for a justifiable conception of the ideal of the highest good and for legitimate postulates regarding the immortality of the soul and the existence of God.

• Referencias bibliográficas
  • Baghai, Farshid (2022). “The Principle of Reason’s Self-Preservation in Kant’s Essay on the Pantheism Controversy,” in Journal of the American...
  • Baghai, Farshid (2019). “The Whole of Reason in Kant’s Critical Philosophy,” in Dialogue: Canadian Philosophical Review, 58:2, pp. 251-286.
  • Beck, Lewis White (1966). A Commentary on Kant’s Critique of Practical Reason, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
  • Beiser, Frederick (1987). The Fate of Reason: German Philosophy from Kant to Fichte, Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
  • Buroker, Jill Vance (2006). Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason: An Introduction, New York: Cambridge University Press.
  • Chance, Brian (2015). “Kant and the Discipline of Reason” in European Journal of Philosophy, 23:1, pp. 87-110.
  • Guyer, Paul (2000). Kant on Freedom, Law, and Happiness, New York: Cambridge University Press.
  • Keller, Pierre (2010). “Two Conceptions of Compatibilism in the Critical Elucidation” in Kant’s Critique of Practical Reason: A Critical Guide,...
  • Kleingeld, Pauline (1998). “Kant on the Unity of Theoretical and Practical Reason” in The Review of Metaphysics, 52:2, pp. 311-339.
  • Moore, A. W. (2010). “The Transcendental Doctrine of Method” in The Cambridge Companion to Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, New York: Cambridge...
  • Munzel, G. Felicitas (1991). Kant’s Conception of Moral Character: “The ‘Critical’ Link of Morality, Anthropology, and Reflective Judgment,...
  • Rauscher. Frederick (2010). “The Appendix to the Dialectic and the Canon of Pure Reason: The Positive Role of Reason” in The Cambridge Companion...
  • Reath, Andrews (2015). “Introduction” in Critique of Practical Reason, Revised Edition, New York: Cambridge University Press.
  • Watkins, Eric (2010). “The Antinomy of Practical Reason: reason, the Unconditioned and the Highest Good” in Kant’s Critique of Practical Reason:...
  • Willaschek, Marcus (2010). “The Primacy of Practical Reason and the Idea of a Practical Postulate” in Kant’s Critique of Practical Reason:...
  • Wood, Allen (1970). Kant’s Moral Religion, Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
  • Wood, Allen (2020). Kant and Religion, New York: Cambridge University Press.