TY - JOUR
T1 - Kant’s regulative metaphysics of god and the systematic lawfulness of nature
AU - Hoffer, Noam
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2019, University of Memphis, Department of Philosophy. All rights reserved.
PY - 2019/6/1
Y1 - 2019/6/1
N2 - In the “Appendix to the Transcendental Dialectic” of the Critique of Pure Reason, Kant contends that the idea of God has a positive regulative role in the systematization of empirical knowledge. But why is this regulative role assigned to this specific idea? Kant’s account is rather opaque, and this question has also not received much attention in the literature. In this article, I argue that an adequate understanding of the regulative role of the idea of God depends on the specific metaphysical content Kant attributes to it in the Critique and other writings. I show that neither a heuristic principle of conceptual systematicity, nor conceiving God as a hypothesis of an intelligent designer, can satisfy the demands of reason to make the unity and necessity of the laws of nature intelligible. Regarding the positive account about the metaphysical content of the idea of God, I support my argument by referring to Kant’s precritical discussion of the usefulness of the conception of God for the project of science, and by expounding Kant’s critical account of the necessity of the laws of nature. Thus, my account sheds light on the continuity of Kant’s conception of God and his appropriation of his own rationalistic metaphysics.
AB - In the “Appendix to the Transcendental Dialectic” of the Critique of Pure Reason, Kant contends that the idea of God has a positive regulative role in the systematization of empirical knowledge. But why is this regulative role assigned to this specific idea? Kant’s account is rather opaque, and this question has also not received much attention in the literature. In this article, I argue that an adequate understanding of the regulative role of the idea of God depends on the specific metaphysical content Kant attributes to it in the Critique and other writings. I show that neither a heuristic principle of conceptual systematicity, nor conceiving God as a hypothesis of an intelligent designer, can satisfy the demands of reason to make the unity and necessity of the laws of nature intelligible. Regarding the positive account about the metaphysical content of the idea of God, I support my argument by referring to Kant’s precritical discussion of the usefulness of the conception of God for the project of science, and by expounding Kant’s critical account of the necessity of the laws of nature. Thus, my account sheds light on the continuity of Kant’s conception of God and his appropriation of his own rationalistic metaphysics.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85066822712&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1111/sjp.12323
DO - 10.1111/sjp.12323
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85066822712
SN - 0038-4283
VL - 57
SP - 217
EP - 239
JO - Southern Journal of Philosophy
JF - Southern Journal of Philosophy
IS - 2
ER -