Adickes, Erich. 1924. Kant und das Ding an Sich. Berlin: Pan Verlag Rolf Heise.Google Scholar

Allais, Lucy. 2014. Manifest Reality. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Allison, Henry. 2004. Kant’s Transcendental Idealism. Revised and enlarged edition. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar

Alweis, Lilian. 2015. “Heidegger’s Black Notebooks.” Philosophy 90.2: 305–316.Google Scholar

Banham, Gary. 2005. Kant’s Transcendental Imagination. London: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar

Barash, Jeffrey Andrew. 2012. “Ernst Cassirer, Martin Heidegger, and the Legacy of Davos.” History and Theory 51: 436–450.Google Scholar

Barrett, William. 1968. “The Flow of Time.” In The Philosophy of Time. Edited by Gale, Richard M.. London: Macmillan, 355–378.Google Scholar

Beiser, Frederick C. 2014. The Genesis of Neo-Kantianism, 1796–1880. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Blattner, William. 1994. “Is Heidegger a Kantian Idealist?” Inquiry 37.2: 185–201.Google Scholar

Blattner, William. 1999. Heidegger’s Temporal Idealism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Blattner, William. 2004. “Heidegger’s Kantian Idealism Revisited.” Inquiry 47.4: 321–337.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Blattner, William. 2006. “Heidegger’s Appropriation of Kant.” In The Cambridge Companion to Heidegger. Edited by Guignon, Charles. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 149–176.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Brandom, Robert. 2002. Tales of the Mighty Dead. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Carman, Taylor. 2000. “Review of William D. Blattner: ‘Heidegger’s Temporal Idealism.’” Journal of Philosophy 97.5: 308–312.Google Scholar

Carman, Taylor. 2003. Heidegger’s Analytic: Interpretation, Discourse, and Authenticity in Being and Time. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Carman, Taylor. 2010. “Heidegger’s Anti-Neo-Kantianism.” Philosophical Forum 37.1–2: 131–142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Carr, David. 2007. “Heidegger on Kant on Transcendence.” In Transcendental Heidegger. Edited by Crowell, Steven and Malpas, Jeff. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar

Cassirer, Ernst. 1967. “Kant and the Problem of Metaphysics: Remarks on Martin Heidegger’s Interpretation of Kant.” In Kant: Disputed Questions. Edited and translated by Gram, Moltke S.. Chicago: Quadrangle Books, 131–157.Google Scholar

Cerbone, David. 1995. “World, World-Entry, and Realism in Early Heidegger.” Inquiry 38: 401–421.Google Scholar

Child, William. 2006. “Interpreting People and Interpreting Texts.” International Journal of Philosophical Studies 14.3: 423–441.Google Scholar

Cohen, Hermann. 1902. System der Philosophie 1: Logik der reinen Erkenntniss. Berlin: Bruno Cassirer.Google Scholar

Crowell, Steven. 2001. “Neo-Kantianism: Between Science and Worldview.” In Husserl, Heidegger, and the Space of Meaning. Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press, 23–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Crowell, Steven. 2002. “Does the Husserl/Heidegger Feud Rest on a Mistake? An Essay on Psychological and Transcendental Phenomenology.” Husserl Studies 18.2: 123–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Curtius, Ernst Robert. 1916. “Das Schematismuskapitel in der Kritik der reinen Vernunft.” Kant-Studien 19.1–3: 338–366.Google Scholar

Cutrofello, Andrew. 1990 “Derrida’s Deconstruction of the Ideal of Legitimation.” Man and World 23: 157–170.Google Scholar

Dahlstrom, Daniel. 1991. “Heidegger’s Kantian Turn: Notes to His Commentary on the ‘Kritik der reinen Vernunft.’” The Review of Metaphysics 45.2: 329–361.Google Scholar

Dahlstrom, Daniel. 1994. “Heidegger’s Kant-Courses at Marburg.” In Reading Heidegger from the Start. Edited by Kisiel, Theodore and van Buren, John. Albany: State University of New York Press, 293–308.Google Scholar

Dahlstrom, Daniel. 2010. “The Critique of Pure Reason and Continental Philosophy: Heidegger’s Interpretation of the Transcendental Imagination.” In The Cambridge Companion to Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason. Edited by Guyer, Paul. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 380–400.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Davidson, Donald. 1991. “James Joyce and Humpty Dumpty.” Midwest Studies in Philosophy 16: 1–12.Google Scholar

Davidson, Donald. 2001a. “A Coherence Theory of Truth and Knowledge.” In Subjective, Intersubjective, Objective. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 137–157.Google Scholar

Davidson, Donald. 2001b. Inquiries into Truth and Interpretation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

de Boer, Karin. 2000. Thinking in the Light of Time: Heidegger’s Encounter with Hegel. Albany: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar

de Boer, Karin. 2020. Kant’s Reform of Metaphysics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

de Boer, Karin. 2022. “Response to Morganna Lambeth, Finitude and Discursivity in Heidegger’s Interpretation of Kant.” Conference presentation (unpublished), Virtual Meeting of the North American Kant Society, March.Google Scholar

de Boer, Karin, and Howard, Stephen. 2019. “A Ground Completely Overgrown: Heidegger, Kant and the Problem of Metaphysics.” British Journal for the History of Philosophy 27.2: 358–377.Google Scholar

Declève, Henri. 1970. Heidegger et Kant. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff.Google Scholar

Derrida, Jacques. 1988. “Afterword: Toward an Ethic of Discussion.” In Limited Inc. Translated by Samuel Weber. Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press, 111–154.Google Scholar

Dreyfus, Hubert. 1991. Being-in-the-World. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Dreyfus, Hubert. 2005. “Overcoming the Myth of the Mental: How Philosophers Can Profit from the Phenomenology of Everyday Expertise.” Proceedings and Addresses of the American Philosophical Association 79.2: 47–65.Google Scholar

Dreyfus, Hubert. 2007. “Response to McDowell.” Inquiry 50.4: 371–377.Google Scholar

Dreyfus, Hubert. 2013. “The Myth of the Pervasiveness of the Mental.” In Mind, Reason and Being-in-the-World. Edited by Schear, Joseph. New York: Routledge, 15–40.Google Scholar

Dyck, Corey. 2014. Kant and Rational Psychology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Engelland, Chad. 2017. Heidegger’s Shadow: Kant, Husserl, and the Transcendental Turn. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar

Farías, Víctor. 1989. Heidegger and Nazism. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.Google Scholar

Farin, Ingo, and Malpas, Jeff. 2016. “Introduction.” In Reading Heidegger’s Black Notebooks 1931–1941. Edited by Farin, Ingo and Malpas, Jeff. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Franks, Paul W. 2005. All or Nothing. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar

Friedman, Michael. 2000. A Parting of the Ways. Peru, IL: Open Court.Google Scholar

Friedman, Michael. 2013. Kant’s Construction of Nature: A Reading of the Metaphysical Foundations of Natural Science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Gadamer, Hans-Georg. 2013. Truth and Method [TM]. London: Bloomsbury Publishing.Google Scholar

Golob, Sacha. 2013. “Heidegger on Kant, Time, and the ‘Form’ of Intentionality.” British Journal for the History of Philosophy 21.2: 345–367.Google Scholar

Golob, Sacha. 2014. Heidegger on Concepts, Freedom, and Normativity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Gordon, Peter. 2010. Continental Divide: Heidegger, Cassirer, Davos. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar

Gordon, Peter. 2013. “The Empire of Signs: Heidegger’s Critique of Idealism in Being and Time.” In The Cambridge Companion to Heidegger’s Being and Time. Edited by Wrathall, Mark. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Grene, Marjorie. 1957. Martin Heidegger. London: Bowes and Bowes.Google Scholar

Guyer, Paul. 2000. “Absolute Idealism and the Rejection of Kantian Dualism.” In Cambridge Companion to German Idealism. 2nd edition. Edited by Ameriks, Karl. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 37–56.Google Scholar

Han-Pile, Beatrice. 2005. “Early Heidegger’s Appropriation of Kant.” In A Companion to Heidegger. Edited by Dreyfus, Hubert and Wrathall, Mark. Malden, MA: Blackwell.Google Scholar

Hegel, G. W. F. 1977. Faith and Knowledge. Translated by W. Cerf and H. S. Harris. Albany: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar

Heidelberger, Michael. 2006. “Kantianism and Realism: Alois Riehl (and Moritz Schlick).” In The Kantian Legacy in Nineteenth-Century Science. Edited by Friedman, M., Nordmann, A., and Smith, G. E.. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 227–247.Google Scholar

Henrich, Dieter. 1994. “On the Unity of Subjectivity.” In The Unity of Reason: Essays on Kant’s Philosophy. Translated by Günter Zöller. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 17–54.Google Scholar

Hoppe, Hansgeorg. 1970. “Wandlungen in der Kant-Auffasung Heideggers.” In Durchblicke: Martin Heidegger zum 80. Geburtstag. Frankfurt am Main: Vittorio Klostermann.Google Scholar

Husserl, Edmund. 1997. Psychological and Transcendental Phenomenology and the Confrontation with Heidegger (1927–1931). Edited and translated by Sheehan, Thomas and Palmer, Richard E.. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic.Google Scholar

Kant, Immanuel. 1996. Practical Philosophy. Translated and edited by Gregor, Mary J.. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Kant, Immanuel. 2000. The Critique of the Power of Judgment. Translated by Paul Guyer and Eric Matthews. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Kant, Immanuel. 2003. The Critique of Pure Reason. Translated by P. Guyer and A. W. Wood. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Kant, Immanuel. 2004a. Lectures on Logic. Translated by J. Michael Young. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Kant, Immanuel. 2004b. Prolegomena to Any Future Metaphysics. Translated by Gary Hatfield. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Kant, Immanuel. 2006. Anthropology from a Pragmatic Point of View. Translated by Robert B. Louden. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Kinkaid, James. 2018. “Phenomenology, Idealism, and the Legacy of Kant.” British Journal for the History of Philosophy 27.3: 593–614.Google Scholar

Kisiel, Theodore. 1993. The Genesis of Heidegger’s Being and Time. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar

Korsgaard, Christine. 1996. Creating the Kingdom of Ends. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Kraus, Katharina. 2019. “Rethinking the Relationship between Empirical Psychology and Transcendental Philosophy in Kant.” International Yearbook of German Idealism 15: 47–76.Google Scholar

Krois, John Michael. 2004. “Why Did Cassirer and Heidegger not Debate in Davos?” In Symbolic Forms and Cultural Studies. Edited by Hamlin, Cyrus and Krois, John Michael. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 244–262.Google Scholar

Lafont, Cristina. 2008. “Meaning and Interpretation: Can Brandomian Scorekeepers Be Gadamerian Hermeneuts?” Philosophy Compass 3.1: 17–29.Google Scholar

Lambeth, Morganna. 2019. “A Case for Heidegger’s Interpretation of the Kantian Imagination.” In Proceedings of the 13th International Kant Congress ‘The Court of Reason’ (Oslo, 6–9 August 2019). Edited by Serck-Hanssen, Camilla and Himmelmann, Beatrix. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 1285–1293.Google Scholar

Lambeth, Morganna. 2020. “Book Review: Heidegger’s Shadow: Kant, Husserl, and the Transcendental Turn.” Journal of Transcendental Philosophy 1.2: 257–263.Google Scholar

Lambeth, Morganna. 2021a. “A Proposal for Translating Heidegger’s Interpretation of Kant.” Gatherings: The Heidegger Circle Annual 11: 20–57.Google Scholar

Lambeth, Morganna. 2021b. “A Tale of Two Faculties: Heidegger’s Method of Interpreting Kant.” History of Philosophy Quarterly 38.1: 57–80.Google Scholar

Lambeth, Morganna and Yeomans, Christopher. Forthcoming. “Reconsidering Heidegger’s Temporal Idealism: Finding a Successful Argument with the Help of Fichte and Hegel.” Epoché.Google Scholar

Llewelyn, John. 2000. The HypoCritical Imagination: Between Kant and Levinas. London: Routledge.Google Scholar

Longuenesse, Beatrice. 1998. Kant and the Capacity to Judge. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar

Lotze, Hermann. 1843. Logik. Leipzig: Weidmannsche Buchhandlung.Google Scholar

Löwith, Karl. 1995. “The Occasional Decisionism of Carl Schmitt.” In Martin Heidegger and European Nihilism. Edited by Wolin, Richard and translated by Gary Steiner. New York: Columbia University Press, 137–172.Google Scholar

Luft, Sebastian. 2011. “Continental Divide: Heidegger, Cassirer, Davos (review).” Journal of the History of Philosophy 49.4: 508–509.Google Scholar

Lynch, Dennis A. 1990. “Ernst Cassirer and Martin Heidegger: The Davos Debate.” Kant-Studien 81.3: 360–370.Google Scholar

McDowell, John. 2007a. “Response to Dreyfus.” Inquiry 50.4: 366–370.Google Scholar

McDowell, John. 2007b. “What Myth?” Inquiry 50.4: 338–351.Google Scholar

McDowell, John. 2013. “The Myth of the Mind as Detached.” In Mind, Reason and Being-in-the-World. Edited by Schear, Joseph. New York: Routledge, 41–58.Google Scholar

McLear, Colin. 2014. “The Kantian (Non)-Conceptualism Debate.” Philosophy Compass 9.11: 769–790.Google Scholar

McQuillan, Colin. 2017. “Kant, Heidegger, and the In/Finitude of Human Reason.” CR: The New Centennial Review 17.3: 81–102.Google Scholar

McQuillan, Colin. 2021. “Comments on Lambeth, ‘The Role of Receptivity in Heidegger’s Kant Interpretation.’” Conference Presentation (unpublished), Central Division Meeting of the American Philosophical Association, February.Google Scholar

Mörchen, Hermann. 1970. Die Einbildungskraft bei Kant. 2nd edition. Tübingen: Max Niemayer.Google Scholar

Natorp, Paul. 1923. Die Logischen Grundlagen der exakten Wissenschaften. Leipzig: B. G. Teubner.Google Scholar

Natorp, Paul. 2015. “Kant and the Marburg School.” Translated by Frances Bottenberg. In The Neo-Kantian Reader. Edited by Luft, Sebastian. London: Routledge, 180–197.Google Scholar

Newton, Alexandra. 2016. “Non-Conceptualism and Knowledge in Lucy Allais’s Manifest Reality.” Kantian Review 21.2: 273–282.Google Scholar

Nir, Gilad. 2021. “Heidegger on the Unity of Metaphysics and the Method of Being and Time.” The Review of Metaphysics, 74.3: 361–396.Google Scholar

Nordmann, Alfred. 2006. “Critical Realism, Critical Idealism, and Critical Common-Sensism: The School and World Philosophies of Riehl, Cohen, and Peirce.” In The Kantian Legacy in Nineteenth-Century Science. Edited by Friedman, M., Nordmann, A., and Smith, G. E.. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 249–274.Google Scholar

Philipse, Herman. Heidegger’s Philosophy of Being. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1998.Google Scholar

Piché, Claude. 2000. “Heidegger and the Neo-Kantian Reading of Kant.” In Heidegger, German Idealism, and Neo-Kantianism. Edited by Rockmore, Tom. Amherst, NY: Humanity Books, 179–208.Google Scholar

Poma, Andrea. 1997. The Critical Philosophy of Hermann Cohen. Translated by John Denton. Albany: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar

Reid, James D. 2003. “On the Unity of Theoretical Subjectivity in Kant and Fichte.” The Review of Metaphysics 57: 243–277.Google Scholar

Richardson, William J. 1993. Heidegger: Through Phenomenology to Thought. 4th edition. New York: Fordham University Press.Google Scholar

Ricoeur, Paul. 1978. “The Critique of Religion.” In The Philosophy of Paul Ricoeur. Edited by Reagan, Charles E. and Stewart, David. Boston: Beacon Press, 213–222.Google Scholar

Rousse, B. Scot. 2022. “Retrieving Heidegger’s Temporal Realism.” European Journal of Philosophy 30.1: 205–226.Google Scholar

Safranski, Rüdiger. 1998. Martin Heidegger: Between Good and Evil. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar

Sallis, John. 1980. Gathering of Reason. Albany: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar

Sallis, John. 1987. Spacings – Of Reason and Imagination. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar

Schalow, Frank. 1992. The Renewal of the Heidegger-Kant Dialogue. Albany: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar

Schalow, Frank. 2013. Departures: At the Crossroads between Heidegger and Kant. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.Google Scholar

Schalow, Frank. 2016. “A Diltheyan Loop? The Methodological Side of Heidegger’s Kant-Interpretation.” Frontiers of Philosophy in China 11.3: 377–394.Google Scholar

Schopenhauer, Arthur. 2010. The World as Will and Representation [WWR], vol. 1. Translated by Judith Norman, Alistair Welchman, and Christopher Janaway. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Serafin, Andrzej. 2015. “A Reception History of the Black Notebooks.” Gatherings 5: 118–142.Google Scholar

Serck-Hanssen, Camilla. 2015. “Towards Fundamental Ontology: Heidegger’s Phenomenological Reading of Kant.” Continental Philosophy Review 48: 217–235.Google Scholar

Sherover, Charles. 1971. Heidegger, Kant, and Time. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar

Strawson, Peter. 1966. Bounds of Sense. London: Methuen.Google Scholar

Truwant, Simon. 2022. Cassirer and Heidegger in Davos: The Philosophical Arguments. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Waxman, Wayne. 1991. Kant’s Model of the Mind. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Weatherston, Martin. 2002. Heidegger’s Interpretation of Kant. Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar

Woodward, William R. 2015. Hermann Lotze: An Intellectual Biography. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Wrathall, Mark. 2022. “The Question of Ontological Dependency.” British Journal for the History of Philosophy 30.3: 547–559.Google Scholar