Aristotle rejected the idea of a single, overarching super-science or “theory of everything”, and he presented a powerful and influential critique of scientific unity. In theory, each science observes the facts unique to its domain, and explains these by means of its own proper principles. But even as he elaborates his prohibition on kind-crossing explanations (Posterior Analytics 1.6-13), Aristotle points out that there are important exceptions—that some sciences are “under” others in that they depend for their explanations on (...) the principles of a superior (more architectonic) science. In this paper, I explore how subordination relations and architectonic structures apply to Aristotle’s scientific practice—including not only the works of theoretical philosophy, which have already been discussed in this connection, but also in and between these and the practical and productive sciences. (shrink)

I argue that Kant has developed a broad systematic account of the architectonic functionality of pure reason that can be used and advanced in contemporary contexts. Reason, in the narrow sense, is responsible for the picture of a well-ordered universe of science consisting of architectonic ideas of science, sciences and parts of sciences. In the first section (I), I show what Kant means by the architectonic ideas by explaining and interrelating the concepts of (a) the (...) faculty of reason, (b) ideas (as principles), (c) method, and (d) sciences of reason. Thereafter (II), I think through his holistic understanding of science and scientific progress and suggest differentiating between four levels of use of architectonic ideas, drawing on the metaphor of a well-structured universe as imagined by Kant in his work on the Universal Natural History and Theory of the Heavens. I also claim that each possible idea of reason can be (apart from its primary function) additionally regarded as a fourth-level architectonic concept when explicitly conceived as an object of (e. g. philosophical) studies, i. e. from a mere methodological perspective. In the final section (III), I unveil the potential of Kant’s theory by pointing out how this architectonic methodological function of pure reason is tacitly used in Karl-Otto Apel’s contemporary philosophical research programme. You can get the official version of the paper and the whole issue (open access) by clicking on the attached link. (shrink)

This book has grown out of eight years of close collaboration among its authors. From the very beginning we decided that its content should come out as the result of a truly common effort. That is, we did not "distribute" parts of the text planned to each one of us. On the contrary, we made a point that each single paragraph be the product of a common reflection. Genuine team-work is not as usual in philosophy as it is in other (...) academic disciplines. We think, however, that this is more due to the idiosyncrasy of philosophers than to the nature of their subject. Close collaboration with positive results is as rewarding as anything can be, but it may also prove to be quite difficult to implement. In our case, part of the difficulties came from purely geographic separation. This caused unsuspected delays in coordinating the work. But more than this, as time passed, the accumulation of particular results and ideas outran our ability to fit them into an organic unity. Different styles of exposition, different ways of formalization, different levels of complexity were simultaneously present in a voluminous manuscript that had become completely unmanageable. In particular, a portion of the text had been conceived in the language of category theory and employed ideas of a rather abstract nature, while another part was expounded in the more conventional set-theoretic style, stressing intui tivity and concreteness. (shrink)

I. Science, myth, magic: three components of knowledge, in other words three types of activity in man who, in interaction with his surrounding environment seeks to accomodate himself to the constraints which this environment imposes on him while at the same time seeing to his own immediate or far-reaching needs.

Thorough comparison of Immanuel Kant’s and Christian Wolff’s divergent appraisals of the science of psychology reveals various ways in which Kant fundamentally altered the Wolffian philosophical apparatus that he inherited. Wolff conceived of a thoroughgoing interplay between empirical and rational psychology, of combining different sorts of cognition in psychology, and of a mathematical science of the soul, or psychometrics. Kant however rejected each of these particular theses and deemed psychology to be no natural science, “properly so-called.” This (...) chapter details these departures from Wolff, explains their basis, and concretizes an underlying contrast in Kant’s and Wolff’s respective philosophical approaches. Namely, whereas Wolff’s philosophical system is malleable, allowing for the combination of various kinds of cognition and methods, in Kant’s Critical philosophy, everything has its proper, preordained niche. At bottom, it is the unyielding rigor of Kant’s system that results in his pessimistic evaluation of the prospects for psychology. (shrink)

Name der Zeitschrift: Kant-Studien Jahrgang: 105 Heft: 3 Seiten: 372-393.

The article treats as significant the formal coincidence between Kant’s presentation of the science of metaphysics in the “Architectonic of Pure Reason” chapter of the first Critique and Alexander Baumgarten’s presentation of the same in the Metaphysica. From his comments on Baumgarten in the metaphysics lectures, the article shows that for Kant metaphysics in its traditional form lacked completeness and systematic order. Kant fits completeness into his architectonic plan of a scientific metaphysics by converting Baumgartian ontology into (...) an “analytic of the understanding”; Kant achieves the systematicity by modeling a rational “idea of the form of the whole” after Baumgarten’s tree-like ordering of the special sciences of metaphysics. Thus, Kant realizes the completeness and systematicity in a theoretical presentation of the science of metaphysics that he finds lacking in Baumgarten precisely by borrowing from the latter his scheme for metaphysics. (shrink)

8-9 January 2013 at the Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, a seminar took place bringing together people from various parts of the world, various disciplines, and various academic and non-academic professions — philosophers, economists, theologians, historians, social scientists as well as bankers, businessmen, investors and others — to analyze and discuss the economic crisis as it developed in the aftermath ofthe American financial crisis of 2008. An explicit goal was as well to bring together people from various generations, to facilitate and promote (...) a true ‘intergenerational dialogue’. The title of the seminar was ‘Economics, Christianity & the Crisis: Towards a New Architectonic Critique’. More specifically, the aim of the seminar was to develop Christianly inspired reflections on the crisis. An insight that was foundational for the seminar was that the 2008 credit crisis not only was a crisis in the economy, but implied also a crisis in the basic concepts and assumptions that underlie our contemporary thinking about economics, economics as a science as well as economics as a social domain. The crisis, as it erupted and evolved, simultaneously raised urgent questions at the macro- or system-level, at the intermediate level of behavior of banks and corporations, and at the level of personal morality, the vices and virtues involved in business transactions. (shrink)

This essay explores the undervalued methodological elements underpinning Kant’s Transition from Metaphysical Foundations of Natural Science to Physics in Opus postumum. I do this by drawing...

We have many histories of social theory-what different authors attempted to do as they responded to previous theories. But we know precious little about how they did this in structural terms-what scaffolding they adopted and adapted to make their claims. Yet today's social thoughts largely employ structures passed down from previous generations, structures that were developed to solve problems that are no longer ours. In The True, the Good, and the Beautiful, John Levi Martin explores these structures, the resulting tensions, (...) and their broader significance for sociological thought. By examining how thinkers mapped interpersonal to intrapersonal structures, he traces the development of the underlying architectonics of theory, focusing on one that was inherited from eighteenth-century philosophy and brought into social science in the nineteenth century. He shows that the structural tensions inherent in these theories paralleled those being worked out in practical terms by constitutional theorists as thinkers attempted to return to their most fundamental understandings of the nature of the human, the social, and the political to recraft their societies. A magisterial new interpretation of the foundations of sociological thought, The True, the Good, and the Beautiful is as ambitious a work of social theory as we have seen in generations. (shrink)

The key work of the early Johann Gottlieb Fichte is the Grundlage ser gesammten Wissenschaftslehre [Foundation of the Entire Doctrine of Science] of 1794-95. The very circumstances of its publication ensure that it is a rather terse and disjointed statement of Fichtean philosophy. It consists of a very short preface, a “famous” section devoted to first principles, the so-called “basic propositions of the entire doctrine of science,” and eight discourses of widely diverging length. The first discourse, devoted to (...) the “theoretical” Wissenschaftslehre is one and a half times the length of the other seven. The third, fourth, fifth, sixth and eighth are barely a few pages long. It is an extremely peculiar work and not merely due to the circumstances of its publication. Its very argumentative structure threatens to trap the reader in forming hasty and preliminary judgements on the exact nature of the philosophical claims being made, and, quite specifically, those philosophical claims which might be ascribed to the author himself. The following contends that lack of attention to the structure of a work that, admittedly, exhibits very little in an overt fashion has led to wholesale confusion about the early system and its philosophical intent. Specifically, that too much attention has been paid to the famous section on grounding principles, and, furthermore, that attention only to these sections will lead to fundamental confusion and misunderstanding. This paper will attempt to examine this peculiar Fichtean text via the readings made by Dieter Henrich and Frederick Neuhouser, respectively. (shrink)

Dieser Band versammelt originäre Beiträge am Schnittpunkt von Philosophie, Wissenschaftsgeschichte, Kultur- und Theaterwissenschaft. Auf der Grundlage von Falluntersuchungen zum 17. Jahrhundert trägt er zum Verständnis der Rolle bei, die Instrumente im Schnittfeld von Wissenschaft und Kunst spielen. Die Beiträge verfolgen dabei die Hypothese, dass die Entwicklung und Gestaltung von Instrumenten wesentlich zur Eröffnung neuer Felder des Wissens, zur Entstehung neuer kultureller Praktiken, aber auch zur Abgrenzung bestimmter Genres, Methoden und Disziplinen beiträgt. Diese Perspektive führt die Beiträge dieses Bandes dazu, auf (...) neue Weise das, was ein Instrument überhaupt ausmacht, zu durchdenken und eine Reihe von Grundfragen zur Bestimmung des Instrumentes zu erarbeiten: Welche Handlungen verkörpert das Instrument? Welche Handlungen werden durch das Instrument ermöglicht? Wann werden Untersuchungsobjekte ihrerseits Instrumente? Welche Fähigkeiten setzt der Instrumentengebrauch voraus, welche produziert er? Durch die Kombination neuer theoretischer Modelle und historischer Fallstudien, durch den detailgenauen Nachweis des gegenseitigen Einflusses von Kunst und Wissenschaft am Schnittpunkt des Instrumentes betritt dieser Band Neuland. Er ist von großem Wert für alle, die sich für die Vorgeschichte unsere instrumentengeleiteten Wahrnehmung interessieren. Zu den Autoren des Bandes zählen neben den Herausgebern Jörg Jochen Berns, Olaf Breidbach, Georges Didi-Huberman, Peter Galison, Sybille Krämer, Dieter Mersch, Hans-Jörg Rheinberger, Wilhelm Schmidt-Biggemann und Otto Sibum. (shrink)

In The Sources of Normativity Korsgaard introduces her conception of practical identities understood as the source of moral obligations. This conception forms a point of transition from Korsgaard’s theory of action to her solution to the problem of the authority of moral norms. In order to describe how universal categorical reasoning is compatible with the moral content of particular practical decisions, Korsgaard needs to show how our contingent practical identities can be reconciled with what she defines as the universally shared (...) identity that expresses our humanity. To make this reconciliation work, she devises an argument for the public shareability of reasons amended by her reinterpretation of the Kantian as if principle. I suggest that, in doing so, Korsgaard steps too far away from Kant’s architectonic approach to the question of why moral norms bind us, and that, consequently, the Korsgaardian reconciliation between the two kinds of identities, as it stands, cannot be accomplished. (shrink)

What role should the Kuyperian idea of creational ordinances play in a Reformational understanding and evaluation of the contemporary social order? This essay attempts a critical retrieval of that idea for an architectonic critique of Western society. After describing several problems with the idea of creational ordinances, the essay maps three societal macrostructures that organize much of contemporary social life—civil society, proprietary economy, and administrative state. Then it discusses solidarity, resourcefulness, and justice as societal principles that can sustain a (...) critique of societal macrostructures. Next, it identifies normative deficiencies within and between these macrostructures. On the basis of this architectonic critique, the essay concludes by calling for a normative and emancipatory transformation of Western society as a whole. (shrink)

The aim of this work is to investigate and conceptualize the ‘temporality regime’ as a socio-cultural phenomenon, primarily analyzing its impact on social processes and social transformations. This study characterizes the concept of ‘temporality regime’ by employing heuristic resources of sociological theorization, particularly the socio-cultural approach, discourse theory, P.Bourdieu’s principle of double structuration of reality, and specific provisions of practice theory. Two levels of inter connection in the architectonic soft he temporality regime are established: static and dynamic. It is (...) determined that the static level includes the inter connection of the objective background (culture) and the subjective plane (interpretative activity of subjects). The objective background is defined by cultural postulates that have imperative power, where as the subjective plane includes the activities of actors who interact with the products of cultural production. It is noted that the dynamic level of the temporality regime concerns the inter connection of social changes and the discursive field of the temporality regime through the pragmatic dimension. Social changes act as factors of transformation of the temporality regime, and conversely, temporality regimes influence social dynamics. It is found that this double interconnection forms a new level of discursive production, where social practices transform into discursive practices and vice versa, affecting the formation and development of social changes. The theoretical significance of the study lies in a deeper understanding of the temporality regime as a socio-cultural phenomenon, enabling the analysis of the interaction between culture and social practices in the context to social changes. The practical significance of the studies that understanding these inter connections will allow form or effective management of social changes and prediction of their consequences. The scientific novelty of the research is associated with the identification of static and dynamic levels of interconnection in the architectonics of the temporality regime, allowing for a concrete analysis of the impact of culture on the activities of actors and social changes, and vice versa. Limitations of the study include the need for additional empirical data to confirm theoretical conclusions. Therefore, future research prospects involve the collection of additional empirical data. (shrink)

Designed to provide scientific personnel, policymakers, and the public with a succinct summary of the public aspects of scientific issues, this book focuses on how values and science intersect and how social values can be brought to bear on complex technical enterprises. Themes examined include: (1) relation of science and technology to human values (citing ways science and technology influence social philosophies); (2) changing sociotechnical milieu (describing recent trends toward politicization in technical endeavors); (3) complexion of (...) class='Hi'>science and social sciences (surveying the attributes of the social sciences); (4) professionalism and responsibility (exploring the need for stewardship); (5) architectonics of technical trust (examining the interlocking elements of technical trust and focusing on the recombinant DNA controversy); (6) societal guidance of inquiry and application (discussing the possibilities and limits of scientific freedom); (7) systematic assessment for decision making (offering suggestions for dealing with fact/value distinctions); (8) social values and ethics (examining the role of values in decision making); (9) science and technology in the polis (reviewing ways of managing and reducing undue polarization in sociotechnical disputes); and (10) stewardship (suggesting needs and opportunities for exercising technical responsibility). An extensive bibliography is provided. (ML). (shrink)

In this chapter, I investigate a problem for Kant’s claim that metaphysics can reach the status of science. The problem arises when one considers Kant’s account of the “architectonic unity” of metaphysics in the Architectonic of Pure Reason. Attaining architectonic unity is a condition for becoming a science for any body of cognitions that purports to be such. This is achieved when the cognitions belonging to a science are systematically organized according to the “idea (...) of reason” which lies at the basis of that science. However, Kant suggests that nobody can ever legitimately claim to have matched the idea of the philosopher, where this appears to imply that nobody can justifiably claim that she has fully grasped the idea of metaphysics. This generates a problem. I suggest that when Kant claims that the idea of the philosopher must remain an ideal or an archetype, he has a particular conception of philosophy in mind, that is, philosophy as a doctrine of wisdom. According to this understanding, philosophy must provide an example of how one can become virtuous. However, this is only a partial solution to our problem, for reasons that will be illustrated. (shrink)

L’œuvre philosophique de Lambert a souvent été traitée comme un moment de l’histoire de la formation de la pensée kantienne et des antécédents de la Critique de la raison pure. C’est en méconnaître l’originalité. Les deux ouvrages à cet égard les plus importants, le Nouvel Organon (1764) et l’Architectonique (1771) ont été conçus originellement comme les parties complémentaires d’un même projet qui s’inscrit dans la longue histoire de l’union entre logique et métaphysique. L’architectonique est une doctrine des catégories : le (...) recensement des notions ou concepts simples permettant de penser un objet quelconque réalise, en en déplaçant le champ d’application, la visée d’universalité qui définissait la métaphysique générale ou philosophie première dans les ontologies wolffiennes. Ce n’est plus une doctrine de l’étant comme tel, mais une anatomie de l’entendement inspirée par Locke. Cependant le traitement des concepts simples ainsi obtenus revient à la méthode mathématique suivant l’exemple de Wolff, corrigé par un retour au modèle euclidien : il s’agit, somme toute, de procéder pour chaque concept simple comme Euclide l’a fait pour l’un d’entre eux, celui de l’espace. L’architectonique peut ainsi, par l’établissement des combinaisons et dérivations de ces concepts, livrer le plan systématique du tout de la connaissance. Ainsi, la singularité de Lambert trouve mieux sa place dans la lignée qui va de la Science Générale leibnizienne à la Doctrine de la science (Wissenschaftslehre) de Bolzano ; et on peut y voir aussi, comme Cassirer l’a proposé, une préfiguration de la théorie de l’objet (Gegenstandstheorie) de Meinong. (shrink)

The article presents the key problems relevant to the issue of “transcendent Action,” as Peirce calls it. The author focuses on the relation between “belief” and the “transcendentals:” unity, truth, goodness, and beauty, in their peculiar Peirceian context. He considers firstly “belief” in the sense of “an original impulse to act consistently, to have a definite intention” and, secondly, “Normative Science, which investigates the universal and necessary laws of the relation of Phenomena to Ends, that is, perhaps, to Truth, (...) Right, and Beauty.” Finally, he considers Peirce's defense again two popular accusations: one on the part of the logicians which “confounds psychical truths with psychological truths,” and the second one regarding hedonism. (shrink)

Émile Meyerson (1859–1933) is an epistemologist, in the French meaning of the term: he himself introduced the word in French as a synonymous for “philo- sophy of science” in his major book of 1908 Identity and Reality. First educated as a chemist, Meyerson discovered philosophy while reading Auguste Comte’s Cours de philosophie positive. However, he strongly rejected Comte’s positivism: metaphysics, he said, penetrates science and even common sense; men, whether they are scien- tists or not, are interested in (...) finding a cause behind the stream of phenomena. This anti-positivism is justified in so far as Meyerson used the same method and pursued the same goal as Comte: the philosopher must practice an “a posteriori analysis of the products of thought”, so as to determine the laws of human mind. Consequently, Meyerson’s work is not a mere philosophy of science, it is more than an “épistémolo- gie” in the French sense. Its ambition is to reach the intellectual basis of all thought. The philosopher can resort to the resources of metaphysics to reach the psychologi- cal foundations of humanity, when he reflects on the historical products of thought. He establishes the transcendent or metaphysical logic involved in the process of thought. Meyerson’s work consequently deserves the name its author eventually gave to it in his posthumous Essais: a “philosophy of intellect”. But is such a philoso- phy wide enough to embrace the meaning of all the products of human thought? It seems that Meyerson was embarrassed and limited by his very starting point, namely Comte’s system. I argue that scientific or common conceptions may need more than the anti-positivist claim of the preservation of one substance behind phenomena. Truth to tell, men generally tend to identify a large and rich configuration of causes or substances. Only such architectonics can give an idea of what people mean by invoking their “vision of the world”. (shrink)

The humanist face of Hobbes's mathematics, part 1 -- Constraints that enable the imitation of God -- King of the children of pride : the imitation of God in context -- Architectonic ambitions : mathematics and the demotion of physics -- Eloquence and the audience thesis -- All other doctrines exploded : Hobbes, history, and the struggle over teaching -- The humanist face of Hobbes's mathematics, part 2 : Leviathan and the making of a masque-text -- Appendix. Who is (...) a geometer?. (shrink)

This essay shows that Peirce's (more or less) final classification of the sciences arises from the systematic application of his Categories of Firstness, Secondness and Thirdness to the classification of the sciences themselves and that he does not do so until his 1903's "An Outline Classification of the Sciences." The essay proceeds by: First, making some preliminary comments regarding Peirce's notion of an architectonic, or classification of the sciences; Second, briefly explaining Peirce's Categories of Firstness, Secondness and Thirdness; Third, (...) examining how Peirce classifies the sciences in 1902 and 1903—and specifically how the 1903 classification utilizes the Categories; Fourth and finally, showing that he is only led to classify the sciences in this fashion as result of his philosophical inquiries during those intervening months—especially as a result of his Harvard Lectures on Pragmatism. (shrink)

The article treats as significant the formal coincidence between Kant’s presentation of the science of metaphysics in the “Architectonic of Pure Reason” chapter of the first Critique and Alexander Baumgarten’s presentation of the same in the Metaphysica. From his comments on Baumgarten in the metaphysics lectures, the article shows that for Kant metaphysics in its traditional form lacked completeness and systematic order. Kant fits completeness into his architectonic plan of a scientific metaphysics by Converting Baumgartian ontology into (...) an “analytic of the understanding”; Kant achieves the systematicity by modeling a rational “idea of the form of the whole” after Baumgarten’s tree-like ordering of the special sciences of metaphysics. Thus, Kant realizes the completeness and systematicity in a theoretical presentation of the science of metaphysics that he finds lacking in Baumgarten precisely by borrowing from the latter his scheme for metaphysics. (shrink)

At the beginning of the 16th century in Germany, religious ends and human art joined forces to produce a sacred rhetoric: a rhetoric that could transform human nature, and explain at the same time how such transformation was possible according to both science and scripture. No longer was it enough to ask in Scholastic fashion ‘What is man?’ - his essence and unique faculties, his special place in God’s world. A new question took on urgency in the wake of (...) religious reformation, namely ‘What could man become?’ But theology alone could not provide a practical response to this question. Rhetoric, in its various adopted forms, could. Consequently rhetoric emerged as architectonic of the human sciences in Reformation Germany, shaping pedagogy as a practical art. Whereas scholars have paid a good deal of attention to the way in which the exact sciences such as mathematics influenced Enlightenment human science, the history of human science as practical art has received little attention. This article contributes to such a history by showing how rhetoric as a practical protreptic art structured human scientific initiatives in the wake of Philipp Melanchthon’s Reformation pedagogy. (shrink)

Although Charles S. Peirce, strictly speaking, never formulated a ‘full-blown’ normative theory—a single over-all architectonic system—we believe that there lies within his work a valuable sketch of the ideal for feeling, action, and thought, and how this ideal should be followed, and in connection to this, Peirce offered a model for rational behaviour, including self-control. In the following essay we will try, modestly, to draw a rough outline of this sketch. Firstly, we will focus on the three normative sciences, (...) their relationship and their task of finding out how feeling, action and thought ought to be controlled. Then, we will take a look at the sign-universe. The very universe is a sign-universe and within this evolutionary universe feeling, matter and thought incessantly melt together into ‘concrete reasonableness’; according to Peirce, rendering the world more reasonable. This is the Summum Bonum that man can and indeed should pursue. Hence it makes absolutely no sense to speak of the three normative sciences out of this metaphysical or cosmological context. Finally, we will try to see in what way rationality can be said to fall within the spheres of self-control, bearing in mind that self-control is directly related to conditional purpose. (shrink)

There is a fundamental subsets–partitions duality that runs through the exact sciences. In more concrete terms, it is the duality between elements of a subset and the distinctions of a partition. In more abstract terms, it is the reverse-the-arrows of category theory that provides a major architectonic of mathematics. The paper first develops the duality between the Boolean logic of subsets and the logic of partitions. Then, probability theory and information theory (as based on logical entropy) are shown to (...) start with the quantitative versions of subsets and partitions. Some basic universal mapping properties in the category of Sets are developed that precede the abstract duality of category theory. But by far the main application is to the clarification and interpretation of quantum mechanics. Since classical mechanics illustrates the Boolean worldview of full distinctness, it is natural that quantum mechanics would be based on the indefiniteness of its characteristic superposition states, which is modeled at the set level by partitions (or equivalence relations). This approach to interpreting quantum mechanics is not a jury-rigged or ad hoc attempt at the interpretation of quantum mechanics but is a natural application of the fundamental duality running throughout the exact sciences. (shrink)

At what is arguably the most significant turning point in the Critique of Pure Reason, where Immanuel Kant has just completed his exploration of the safe ground of possible experience and is about to embark on the Transcendental Dialectic’s exploration of the stormy sea of metaphysics, he introduces one of the greatest curiosities in the Kantian corpus: a “table … of the concept of nothing” (A290/B346-A292/B349). The brief passage, which is tacked on to the end of a “Remark” that supplements (...) an Appendix to a weighty chapter exploring “the Ground of the Distinction of all Objects [Gegenstände] in General into Phenomena and Noumena” (A235/B294), appears as an afterthought to an afterthought to an afterthought and is thus easily overlooked by interpreters. Indeed, the passage may seem to be little more than an amusing distraction, perhaps intended as light entertainment before Kant undertakes the real work of demolishing traditional metaphysics; or at best, it might be one of those annoying sections whose only reason for existing is to fill a perceived (but artificial) gap in the completeness of Kant’s systematic conception of reason’s architectonic unity. This chapter takes the argument seriously, notwithstanding its widespread neglect, by unpacking the specific purpose served by each perspective on “nothing” that appears in Kant’s table. Closer analysis shows how the table clarifies Kant’s notion of “something in general” by contrasting it with four distinct opposites. The passage thereby orients us to appreciate how the Critique secures the status of metaphysics as queen of the sciences. (shrink)

While the term “metaphilosophy” enjoys increasing popularity in Kant scholarship, it is neither clear what distinguishes a metaphilosophical theory from a philosophical one nor to what extent Kant’s philosophy contains metaphilosophical views. In the first part of the article, I will introduce a demarcation criterion and show how scholars fall prey to the fallacy of extension confusing Kant’s philosophical theories with his theories about philosophy. In the second part, I will analyze eight elements for an “imperfect definition” of philosophy outlining (...) the scope of Kant’s explicit metaphilosophy against the backdrop of recent metaphilosophical research: scientific concept of philosophy, philosophy as an activity, worldly concept, philosophy as a science, philosophy as an architectonic idea, philosophy as a social practice and the appropriate holding-to-be-true, reason as the absolute condition and subject of philosophy, and methodology of philosophy. I will put these elements together for an attempt to give an imperfect definition of philosophy – something that Kant promised but never did – in the conclusion. (shrink)

Gabriele Gava's new monograph makes sense of Kant's obscure claim that the Critique of Pure Reason is a "doctrine of method" for the science of metaphysics. Gava does this by offering a reading of the whole Critique as aiming to show that metaphysics can become an "architectonic" science. The book shows impressive range; it covers diverse topics throughout the Aesthetic, Analytic, Dialectic, and Method, brings out appealing parallels between them, and relates them to the task of exhibiting (...) metaphysic's architectonic unity. But, I argue, it stops short of a full explanation of how the Critique is meant to outline or anticipate the whole of metaphysics in advance of actually completing that science. (shrink)

God and the City, based on the Aquinas Lecture delivered at the University of Dallas in 2022, aims to think about politics ontologically. In other words, it seeks to reflect on, not some political theory or other, nor on the legitimacy of political action or the distinctiveness of particular regimes, but on the nature of political order as such, and how this order implicates the fundamental questions of existence, those concerning man, being, and God. Aristotle, and Aquinas after him, identified (...) metaphysics and politics as "architectonic" sciences, since each concerns in some respect the whole of reality, of which the particular sciences study a part. Chapter one of this book argues that, just as metaphysics, in studying being as a whole, cannot but address the question of God in some respect, so too does politics, the ordering of human life as a whole, necessarily implicate the existence of God. In this regard, the modern liberal project has deluded itself in attempting to render religion a private, rather than a genuinely political, matter. We cannot organize human existence without making some claim, whether implicitly or explicitly, about the nature of God and God's relation to the world. The second chapter approaches this theme from the anthropological dimension. As Plato affirmed, the "city is the soul writ large": if man is religious by nature, he cannot be properly understood, and the human good cannot be properly secured and fostered, if the "God question" is "bracketed out" of the properly political order. Moreover, if we fail to recognize the essentially political dimension of relation to God, we will be unable properly to grasp the presence of God in the (ecclesial and sacramental) Body of Christ: God cannot be real in the Church as Church unless he is also real in the city as city (and vice versa). In his De regno, Aquinas famously affirms that "the king is to be in the kingdom what the soul is in the body and what God is in the world." Chapter three offers a careful study of the body-soul relationship in order to illuminate, on the one hand, the nature of political authority, and, on the other, the precise way that God is present in human community. (shrink)

This essay investigates the transformation of the faculty of understanding in Kant’s Transition from Metaphysical Foundations of Natural Science to Physics drafts found in Opus postumum. I argue that in fascicles X and XI Kant implicitly reverses the architectonic order of sensibility and understanding. Without an account of this reversal, Kant’s critique of Isaac Newton’s conception of phenomena and the so called Selbstsetzungslehre in fascicle VII fall apart. I argue that what is at stake is a challenge Kant (...) makes to his own presuppositions and a challenge to the Kantian philosopher who wishes to stay with a strictly ‘critical’ Kant. (shrink)

Kant’s preoccupation with architectonics is a characteristic and noteworthy aspect of his thought. Various features of Kant’s argumentation and philosophical system are founded on the precise definitions of the various subdomains of human knowledge and the derivative borders among them. One science conspicuously absent from Kant’s routine discussions of the organization of knowledge is chemistry. Whereas sciences such as physics, psychology, and anthropology are all explicitly located in the architectonic, chemistry finds no such place. In this paper, I (...) examine neglected passages from Kant’s corpus as well as texts regarding chemistry that Kant himself read in order to unveil his views on the definition of chemistry and its relations with the other sciences. These considerations reveal chemistry to be the science that studies the changes of matter into new kinds. Yet Kant idiosyncratically believes that such a change requires an infinite division of matter, effected by chemical forces. Although this understanding of chemical change dovetails with Kant’s dynamical, continualist theory of matter, it implies that chemistry cannot be reduced to physics. Thus, although chemistry stands alongside empirical physics as an applied natural science in Kant’s architectonic, it remains a distinct, independent science. (shrink)

The Crisis of Judgment in Kant's Three Critiques is intended as an analysis and reconstruction of the role of the faculty of judgment as it evolves through the course of Kant's critical philosophy. It offers an analysis of the mental power of judgment and systematically develops its links to feeling, cognition, and the will. In the introductory chapter, Scherer spells out the two guiding questions of her study: How does judgment relate systematically to understanding, reason, and the will? Is judgment (...) constitutive or regulative? Scherer's study emphasizes the architectonic and antinomic nature of reason in Kant, thereby stressing the necessarily resolutive function of judgment. (shrink)

The article explains the essence and architectonics of informatization and the constructivism of its impact on all spheres of social development. This process has contradictions related to the intensive development of new information technologies, modernization processes and their revolutionary influence on all spheres of public life. As a dialectical process, informatization is explained as a factor containing risks in the development of a scientific knowledge. These risks are associated with the informatization of the individual about the state of the information (...) resources of science which generates the process of amplification of foundation of the development of various forms of extra-scientific knowledge. Risk is characterized as a share of "bad" in "good", it is associated with subjectivism and destructivism in the interpretation of true scientific knowledge, its use in selfish interests. In the information age, technological development has led to the fact that attention has shifted from objectives to means. Not the search for truth but the solution of the status problems became the main thing. Attention is focused on the specific weight of the development of quasi-science and anti-science which consciously distort the idea of science about the essence of natural and social reality. Pseudoscience is explained as an intellectual activity of the subject, imitating scientific activity and not bringing increments of a new objectively true knowledge. The attention is on the formation of the psevdoequivalence of subject which leads to his spiritual disintegration and the loss him capacity to discern truth. The process of strengthening information cynicism in the public consciousness which is formed by modern informatization processes is disclosed. Information cynicism is presented as a form of worldview reflecting a nihilistic attitude to info-resources and forming a mistrust of the truth of any information including science-based. And as a result there is a real threat of falsification and speculation on modern but not very productive areas. (shrink)

This paper examines freedom and the determination of the will in §4 of Hegel’s Grundlinien der Philosophie des Rechts, in light of Aristotle’s concept of leading arts (architektonikē technē) from Metaphysics A.1–2. Traditionally, intellect determines truth, while will determines action—a distinction central to Aristotle’s differentiation between theoretical and practical philosophy. Hegel, however, challenges this division, arguing that will is an extension of intelligence, integrating insight and goal-setting into a unified self-determination. By engaging with contemporary interpretations—Fulda, Pippin, and Pinkard—this paper explores (...) the tension between theory and practice. While Fulda defends philosophy’s indirect political relevance, Pippin argues it lacks practical justification. Pinkard links philosophy to institutional self-understanding, grounding practical reasoning in human biology. Reassessing Hegel’s implicit use of Aristotle’s leading arts, this paper argues that freedom of the will in §4 should be understood as intersubjective self-determination—not a mere choice among possibilities, but an identification with a politically and normatively determined highest practical ground. This reading reconciles theory and practice while emphasizing the institutional and social dimensions of self-determination. (shrink)

This paper presents Christian Wolff’s argument on the evidence of metaphysical principles as expounded in his article Directive notions and the true use of the first science (1729). This article was a central and yet forgotten reference for those who responded to the 1762/1763 academy questions such as Kant. Wolff here asserts that metaphysics has a kind of certainty that is equal or even superior to mathematics and that it communicates such certainty to the remaining sciences. It is this (...) Wolffian thesis that Kant attacked in 1763. A closer reading allows to acknowledge more philosophical premises of Wolff’s argument. Wolff’s thesis on the mathematical certainty of metaphysics inverts the former order of priorities between metaphysics (ontology) and mathematics. According to Wolff (who here seemed to be influenced by Euclides’ geometry), metaphysical notions are at the foundation of mathematical and logical rules. Notions such as “identity”, “thing”, “possibility” etc. have a “directive” or methodical status : they direct the mind searching the truth. Together, these notions constitute a modern and “architectonic” ontology. This framework shows the methodological continuity between Wolff and Kant. Even though Kant contested the form of Wolff’s system, his response still formed part of the general program sketched by Wolff. Kant still attempted to found some kind of architectonic metaphysics containing a table of directive concepts. From this viewpoint, Kant owes more to Wolff than what has been commonly assumed, and the deep and complex debate between the two thinkers calls for more attention. (shrink)