Abstract

Kant’s philosophy is not only one of the most influential in history, but also one of the few that is seen as changing the way of thinking. But was this change a leap, or rather the result of thorough work with the previous philosophical tradition? In Immanuel Kant’s philosophy is not only one of the most influential in history, but also one of the few that is seen as changing the way of thinking. But was this change a leap, or rather the result of thorough work with the previous philosophical tradition? In Kant’s case, this tradition is primarily the metaphysics of the 18th century or, more precisely, the philosophical discourse of the 18th century in the German context, one of the main representatives of which was Christian Wolff. Wolff’s philosophy itself was a reform of the way of thinking and it became so popular that in the second half of the 18th century almost all philosophical departments in German lands were headed by Wolffians. Kant often uses the name «Leibniz-Wolffian philosophy». This, on the one hand, indicates that Kant viewed Wolff’s philosophy in no other way than the systematization and popularization of Leibniz’s philosophy (the assertion that has been repeatedly refuted today), on the other hand, that Kant argues not directly with Wolff’s philosophy, but rather with the general philosophical and conceptual discourse of the 18th century, which he outlined with this name. Therefore, Kant’s philosophy undoubtedly grows on the conceptual and problematic ground of the previous tradition. The paper discusses the influence of Wolff’s philosophy on Kant, in particular, the problem of the term «Leibniz-Wolffian philosophy», Kant’s use of Wolff’s conceptual apparatus, as well as Kant’s assertion that he overcame the dogmatism of Wolff’s philosophy. The crucial point to properly understanding this Kant’s assertion is to understand the difference between dogmatic method and dogmatism. So Kant believes that he overcomes precisely dogmatism, that is, the use of pure reason without prior critique of its own faculty, while the dogmatic method, which is preceded by a critique of pure reason, must necessarily be the basis of a future metaphysics.