Abaci, Uygar 2014. “Kant's Only Possible Argument and Chignell's Real Harmony,” Kantian Review 19.1: 1–25.Google Scholar

Abaci, Uygar 2016. “The Coextensiveness Thesis and Kant's Modal Agnosticism in the ‘Postulates,’” European Journal of Philosophy 24.1: 129–58.Google Scholar

Abela, Paul 2002. Kant's Empirical Realism. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar

Adams, Robert Merrihew 1994. Leibniz: Determinist, Theist, Idealist. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

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

Allais, Lucy 2004. “Kant's One World,” British Journal for the History of Philosophy 12.4: 655–84.Google Scholar

Allais, Lucy 2007. “Kant's Idealism and the Secondary Quality Analogy,” Journal of the History of Philosophy 45.3: 459–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Allais, Lucy 2015. Manifest Reality: Kant's Idealism and His Realism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Allison, H. 1983. Kant's Transcendental Idealism: An Interpretation and Defense. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar

Allison, H. 2004. Kant's Transcendental Idealism: An Interpretation and Defense. Rev. and enlarged ed. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar

Ameriks, Karl 2000. Kant's Theory of Mind. 2nd ed. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar

Ameriks, Karl 2003. Interpreting Kant's Critiques. Oxford: Clarendon Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Ameriks, Karl 2006. Kant and the Historical Turn. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar

Ameriks, Karl 2012. Kant's Elliptical Path. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Anscombe, G. E. M. 1975. “The First Person,” in Guttenplan, Samuel (ed.), Mind and Language. Oxford: Clarendon Press, pp. 45–65.Google Scholar

Aquinas, St. Thomas 1948. Summa Theologica. Fathers of the English Dominican Province (trans.). Rev. ed. New York: Benziger Brothers.Google Scholar

Aquinas, St. Thomas 1952. Truth, vol. 1. Mulligan, R. W. (trans.). Chicago: Henry Regnery.Google Scholar

Aristotle 1831a. Opera, ed. Bekker, I., vol. I. Berlin.Google Scholar

Aristotle 1831b. Analytica priora I, in 1831a: 1:24–52.Google Scholar

Arnauld, Antoine, and Nicole, Pierre 1996. Logic, or, The Art of Thinking. Buroker, Jill Vance (trans.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bader, Ralf M. 2012. “The Role of Kant's Refutation of Idealism,” Archiv für Geschichte der Philosophie 94.1: 53–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bader, Ralf M. 2013. “Self-Knowledge in §7 of the Transcendental Aesthetic,” in Bacin, S. (ed.), Proceedings of the XIth International Kant Kongress, vol. 2. New York: de Gruyter, pp. 531–40.Google Scholar

Baumgarten, A. (2013 [1739/1757]). Metaphysica. 4th ed. English trans. Metaphysics, Fugate, C. D. and Hymers, J. (eds.). New York: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar

Beck, Lewis White 1975. Essays on Kant and Hume. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar

Beck, Lewis White 1978. “Did the Sage of Königsberg Have No Dreams?” in Essays on Kant and Hume. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, pp. 38–61.Google Scholar

Beiser, Frederick 2006. “Moral Faith and the Highest Good,” in Guyer, Paul (ed.), Cambridge Companion to Kant and Modern Philosophy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 588–629.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bennett, Jonathan 1966. Kant's Analytic. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Bennett, Jonathan 1974. Kant's Dialectic. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Bird, Graham 1966. “The Beginning of the Universe,” Aristotelian Society XL(Suppl.): 139–50.Google Scholar

Bird, Graham 2006. The Revolutionary Kant: A Commentary on the Critique of Pure Reason. Chicago: Open Court.Google Scholar

Bird, Graham 2011. “Replies to My Critics,” Kantian Review 16.2: 274–82.Google Scholar

Boulter, Stephen 2011. “The Mediaeval Origin of Conceivability Arguments,” Metaphilosophy 42.5: 617–41.Google Scholar

Brandt, Reinhard, and Stark, Werner (eds.) 1987. Neue Autographen und Dokumente zu Kants Leben, Schriften und Vorlesungen. Hamburg: Felix Meiner.Google Scholar

Brewer, K., and Watkins, E. 2012. “A Difficulty Still Awaits: Kant, Spinoza, and the Threat of Theological Determinism,” Kant-Studien 103: S163–87.Google Scholar

Brook, Andrew 1994. Kant and the Mind. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Buchdahl, Gerd 1969. Metaphysics and the Philosophy of Science the Classical Origins: Descartes to Kant, vol. 46.Google Scholar

Buroker, Jill Vance 2006. Kant's Critique of Pure Reason: An Introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Byrne, Peter 2007. Kant on God. New York: Ashgate.Google Scholar

Caird, Edward 1889. The Critical Philosophy of Immanuel Kant. 2 vols. Glasgow: Maclehose.Google Scholar

Callanan, John J. 2008. “Kant on Analogy,” British Journal for the History of Philosophy 16.4: 747–72.Google Scholar

Callanan, John J. 2013. “Kant on Nativism, Scepticism and Necessity,” Kantian Review 18.1: 1–27. doi:10.1017/S136941541200026X.Google Scholar

Carnap, Rudolf 1950. “Empiricism, Semantics, and Ontology,” Revue International de Philosophie 4: 20–40; 2nd rev. ed. in: idem., (1956), 205–21.Google Scholar

Carnap, Rudolf 1956. Meaning and Necessity. 2nd rev. ed. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar

Chignell, Andrew 2007a. “Belief in Kant,” Philosophical Review 116.3: 72–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Chignell, Andrew 2007b. “Kant's Concepts of Justification,” Noûs 41.1: 33–63.Google Scholar

Chignell, Andrew 2009. “‘As Kant Has Shown…’: Analytic Theology and the Critical Philosophy,” in Analytic Theology. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 117–35.Google Scholar

Chignell, Andrew 2010a. “Causal Refutations of Idealism,” Philosophical Quarterly 60.240: 487–507.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Chignell, Andrew 2010b. “Real Repugnance and Belief about Things-in-Themselves: A Problem and Kant's Three Solutions,” in Kant's Moral Metaphysics, Krueger, James and Lipscomb, Benjamin Bruxvoort (eds.). Berlin: Walter De Gruyter, pp. 177–210.Google Scholar

Chignell, Andrew 2011. “Real Repugnance and Our Ignorance of Things-in-Themselves: A Lockean Problem in Kant and Hegel,” Internationales Jahrbuch Des Deutschen Idealismus 7: 135–59.Google Scholar

Chignell, Andrew 2014a. “Kant and the ‘Monstrous’ Ground of Possibility,” Kantian Review 19.1: 53–69.Google Scholar

Chignell, Andrew 2014b. “Modal Motivations for Noumenal Ignorance: Knowledge, Cognition, and Coherence,” Kant-Studien 105.4: 573–97.Google Scholar

Chignell, Andrew 2017. “Kant on Cognition, Givenness, and Ignorance,” Journal of the History of Philosophy 55: 131–42.Google Scholar

Chignell, Andrew, and Stang, Nicholas. 2015. “Postulate des Empirischen Denkens,” in Mohr, Georg, Stolzenberg, Juergen, and Willascheck, Marcus (eds.), Kant-Lexicon. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.Google Scholar

Cleeremans, Axel (ed.) 2003. The Unity of Consciousness: Binding, Integration and Dissociation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Coffa, Alberto 1991. The Semantic Tradition from Kant to Carnap: To the Vienna Station. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Conant, James 1991. “The Search for Logically Alien Thought: Descartes, Kant, Frege, and the Tractatus,” Philosophical Topics 20.1: 115–80.Google Scholar

Dennett, D. C. 1969. Content and Consciousness. New York: Routledge and Kegan Paul.Google Scholar

Descartes, René 1985 [CSM]. The Philosophical Writings of Descartes, vol. 1, Cottingham, J., Stoothoff, R., and Murdoch, D. (ed. and trans.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Descartes, René 1991. The Philosophical Writings of Descartes, vol. 3, Cottingham, J., Stoothoff, R., Murdoch, D., and Kenny, A. (ed. and trans.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

DiCenso, James 2011. Kant, Religion, and Politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Dummett, Michael 1993. “Realism and Anti-realism,” in Dummett, (ed.), The Seas of Language. New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 462–78.Google Scholar

Dyck, Corey W. 2011. “Turning the Game against the Idealist: Mendelssohn's Refutation of Idealism in the Morgenstunden and Kant's Replies,” Studies in German Idealism 13: 159–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Earman, John 1986. A Primer on Determinism. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Kluwer.Google Scholar

Emundts, Dina 2010. “The Refutation of Idealism and the Distinction between Phenomena and Noumena,” in Guyer, P. (ed.), The Cambridge Companion to Kant's ‘Critique of Pure Reason.’ Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 168–89.Google Scholar

Engstrom, Stephen 2006. “Understanding and Sensibility,” Inquiry 49: 2–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Engstrom, Stephen 2013. “Unity of Apperception,” Studi Kantiani 26: 37–54.Google Scholar

Erdmann, Benno 1881. Nachträge zu Kants Kritik der reinen Vernunft in 1881. Kiel: Lipsius & Tischer.Google Scholar

Evans, Gareth 1975. “Identity and Predication,” in Evans, (ed.), Collected Papers. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 25–48.Google Scholar

Evans, GarethEvans, 1982. The Varieties of Reference, McDowell, J. (ed.). Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar

Falkenstein, Lorne 1998. “A Double Edged Sword? Kant's Refutation of Mendel-ssohn's Proof of the Immortality of the Soul and Its Implications for His Theory of Matter,” Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 29.4: 561–88.Google Scholar

Falkenstein, Lorne 2006. “Kant's Transcendental Aesthetic,” in Bird, Graham (ed.), A Companion to Kant. Oxford: Blackwell, pp. 140–53.Google Scholar

Förster, Eckart 2012. Twenty-Five Years of Philosophy. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Friedman, Michael 1992. Kant and the Exact Sciences. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar

Friedman, Michael 2013. Kant's Construction of Nature. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Gardner, Sebastian 1999. Routledge Philosophy Guidebook to Kant and the Critique of Pure Reason. London: Routledge.Google Scholar

Gardner, Sebastian 2011. “Kant's Practical Postulates and the Limits of the Critical System,” Bulletin of the Hegel Society of Great Britain 63: 187–215.Google Scholar

Gava, Gabriele 2014. “Kant's Definition of Science in the Architectonic of Pure Reason and the Essential Ends of Reason,” Kant-Studien 105.3: 372–93.Google Scholar

Gava, Gabriele 2016. “The Fallibilism of Kant's Architectonic,” in Gava, G. and Stern, R. (eds.), Pragmatism, Kant and Transcendental Philosophy. London: Routledge, pp. 46–66.Google Scholar

Gava, Gabriele Forthcoming. “Sind die regulativen Ideen ein doktrinaler Glaube? Über die Rechtfertigung des regulativen Gebrauchs der Ideen im Anhang zur transzendentalen Dialektik” [Are the regulative ideas a doctrinal belief? On the justification of the regulative use of the ideas in the appendix to the transcendental dialectic], in Waibel, V. L. and Ruffing, M. (eds.), Akten des 12. internationalen Kant-Kongresses, Berlin: De Gruyter.Google Scholar

Geiger, Ido 2003. “Is the Assumption of a Systematic Whole of Empirical Concepts a Necessary Condition of Knowledge?” Kant-Studien 94.3: 273–98.Google Scholar

Gelfert, Axel 2006. “Kant on Testimony,” British Journal for the History of Philosophy 14.4: 627–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Gettier, Edmund 1963. “Is Justified True Belief Knowledge?” Analysis 23: 121–23.Google Scholar

Gill, Jerry H. 1984. “Kant, Analogy, and Natural Theology,” International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 16.1: 19–28.Google Scholar

Ginsborg, Hannah 2006. “Empirical Concepts and the Content of Experience,” European Journal of Philosophy 14.3: 349–72.Google Scholar

Ginsborg, Hannah 2013. “Kant's Perceiver,” Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 87.1: 221–28.Google Scholar

Gloy, Karen (ed.) 1990. “Die Differenz von Verstand und Sinnlichkeit,” in Studien zur theoretischen Philosophie Kants. Würzburg, pp. 1–41.Google Scholar

Gochnauer, Myron 1974. “Kant's Refutation of Idealism,” Journal of the History of Philosophy 12: 195–206.Google Scholar

Godlove, Terry 2014. Kant and the Meaning of Religion. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar

Greenberg, Robert 2001. Kant's Theory of A Priori Knowledge. University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press.Google Scholar

Grier, Michelle 2001. Kant's Doctrine of Transcendental Illusion. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Grier, Michelle 2010. “The Ideal of Pure Reason,” in Guyer, Paul (ed.), The Cambridge Companion to Kant's Critique of Pure Reason. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 266–89.Google Scholar

Griffith, Aaron 2010. “Perception and the Categories: A Conceptualist Reading of Kant's Critique of Pure Reason,” European Journal of Philosophy 20.2: 193–222.Google Scholar

Grüne, Stefanie 2017. “Givenness, Objective Reality, and A Priori Intuitions,” Journal of the History of Philosophy 55.1: 113–30.Google Scholar

Guyer, Paul 1983. “Kant's Intentions in the Refutation of Idealism,” The Philosophical Review 92.3: 329–83.Google Scholar

Guyer, Paul 1987. Kant and the Claims of Knowledge. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Guyer, Paul 1989. “Psychology and the Transcendental Deduction,” in Förster, E. (ed.), Kant's Transcendental Deductions. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, pp. 47–68.Google Scholar

Guyer, Paul 2006. Kant. London: Routledge.Google Scholar

Guyer, Paul 2007. “Debating Allison on Transcendental Idealism,” Kantian Review 12.2: 10–24.Google Scholar

Haag, Johannes 2007. Erfahrung und Gegenstand. Frankfurt am Main, Germany: Klostermann.Google Scholar

Hanna, Robert 2001. Kant and the Foundations of Analytic Philosophy. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar

Hanna, Robert 2006. Kant, Science and Human Nature. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar

Harper, William 2007. “Comments on Westphal,” Dialogue: Canadian Journal of Philosophy/Revue canadienne de philosophie 46.4: 729–36.Google Scholar

Harper, William 2011. Isaac Newton's Scientific Method: Turning Data into Evidence about Gravity and Cosmology. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Hatfield, Gary 2006. “Kant on the Perception of Space (and Time),” in Guyer, Paul (ed.), The Cambridge Companion to Kant and Modern Philosophy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 61–93.Google Scholar

Heidemann, Dietmar 2002. “Anschauung und Begriff. Ein Begründungsversuch des Stämme-Dualisms in Kants Erkenntnistheorie,” in Engelhard, K. (ed.), Aufklärungen. Festschrift für Klaus Düsing zum 60. Geburtstag. Berlin: de Gruyter, pp. 65–90.Google Scholar

Heine, Heinrich 1986. Religion and Philosophy in Germany: A Fragment. Snodgrass, John (trans.). New York: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar

Henrich, Dieter 1969. “The Proof-Structure of Kant's Transcendental Deduction,” Review of Metaphysics 22.4: 640–59.Google Scholar

Hillman, T. Allan 2010. “Leibniz on the Imago Dei,” in Garber, Daniel and Nadler, Steven M. (eds.), Oxford Studies in Early Modern Philosophy, vol. V. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 171–213.Google Scholar

Hinske, Norbert 1998. Zwischen Aufklarung und Vernunftkritik. Stuttgart: frommann-holzboog.Google Scholar

Hume, David 1739/1978. A Treatise of Human Nature. Nidditch, P. H. (ed.) (revision of Selby-Bigge, L. A.). 2nd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Hume, David 2000. A Treatise of Human Nature. Norton, D. F. and Norton, M. J. (eds.). Oxford: Oxford University Press (designated ‘T,’ cited by Book.Part.§.¶ numbers).Google Scholar

Hume, David 2007. Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion and Other Writings. Coleman, Dorothy (ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

James, William 1902. The Varieties of Religious Experience. London: Longmans Green.Google Scholar

Janiak, A., and Schliesser, E. 2012. Interpreting Newton: Critical Essays. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Kannisto, Toni 2013. “Modality and Metaphysics in Kant,” in Bacin, Stefano, Ferrarin, Alfredo, La Rocca, Claudio, and Ruffing, Margit (eds.), Kant Und Die Philosophie in Weltbürgerlicher Absicht. Akten Des XI. Kant-Kongresses 2010. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, pp. 633–46.Google Scholar

Kant, Immanuel 1900–. Kants gesammelte Schriften. Berlin: Reimer/de Gruyter.Google Scholar

Kant, Immanuel 1987. “Vom inneren Sinne (Loses Blatt Leningrad 1; Leningrad Fragment I, NF 364–6),” in Brandt, R. and Stark, W. (eds.), Neue Autographen und Dokumente zu Kants Leben, Schriften und Vorlesungen. Berlin: Felix Meiner, pp. 18–21.Google Scholar

Kemp Smith, Norman 1923/1962. A Commentary to Kant's “Critique of Pure Reason.” New York: Humanities Press.Google Scholar

Kemp Smith, Norman 1929. Immanuel Kant's Critique of Pure Reason. London: Macmillan.Google Scholar

Kepler, Johannes 1997 [1619]. The Harmony of the World. Aiton, E. J., Duncan, A. M. and Field, J. V. (eds., trans.). Memoirs of the American Philosophical Society 209. Philadelphia: American Philosophical Society.Google Scholar

Kitcher, Patricia 2011. Kant's Thinker. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Kneale, William, and Kneale, Martha 1975. The Development of Logic. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar

Kuehn, Manfred 2001. Kant: A Biography. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Lambert, Johann Heinrich 1764. Neues Organon. 2 vols. Leipzig: Wendler.Google Scholar

Land, Thomas 2006. “Kant's Spontaneity Thesis,” Philosophical Topics: Analytic Kantianism 34: 189–220.Google Scholar

Langton, Rae 1998. Kantian Humility: Our Ignorance of Things in Themselves. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar

Laplace, Pierre Simon de 1847 [1820]. Theorie analylique des probabilites. Paris: V. Courcier. In Oevres de LaPlace, vol. 7. Paris: Imprimerie Royale, 1847.Google Scholar

Laywine, Alison 1993. Kant's Early Metaphysics and the Origins of the Critical Philosophy. North American Kant Society Studies in Philosophy. Atrascadero, CA: Ridgeview.Google Scholar

Leech, Jessica 2014. “Making Modal Distinctions: Kant on the Possible, the Actual, and the Intuitive Understanding,” Kantian Review 19.3: 339–65.Google Scholar

Leibniz, Gottfried Wilhelm 1989. Philosophical Essays. Ariew, Roger and Garber, Daniel (eds.). Indianapolis, IN: Hackett.Google Scholar

Leibniz, Gottfried Wilhelm 1997. New Essays on Human Understanding. Remnant, Peter and Bennett, Jonathan (eds.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Lewis, Clarence Irving 1929 [1956]. Mind and the World Order: Outline of a Theory of Knowledge. New York: Dover.Google Scholar

Lewis, Clarence Irving 1970. Collected Papers of Clarence Irving Lewis. Goheen, J. D. and Mothershead, J. L. Jr. (eds.). Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar

Lighthill, Sir James 1986. “The Recently Recognized Failure of Predictability in Newtonian Dynamics,” Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, Series A 407: 33–55.Google Scholar

Locke, John 1975. An Essay Concerning Human Understanding. Nidditch, P. H. (ed.). Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar

Logan, Beryl 1998. “Hume and Kant on Knowing the Deity,” International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 43.3: 133–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Longuenesse, Béatrice 1998/2001. Kant and the Capacity to Judge: Sensibility and Discursivity in the Transcendental Analytic of the Critique of Pure Reason. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar

Longuenesse, Béatrice 2008. “Kant's ‘I Think’ versus Descartes’ ‘I Am a Thing That Thinks,’” in Kant and the Early Moderns, Garber, Daniel and Longuenesse, Béatrice (eds.). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, pp. 9–31.Google Scholar

Longuenesse, Béatrice 2012. “Two Uses of ‘I’ as Subject?” in Immunity to Error through Misidentification, Prosser, Simon and Recanati, François (eds.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 81–103.Google Scholar

Makkreel, Rudolf A. 2003. “The Cognition–Knowledge Distinction in Kant and Dilthey and the Implications for Psychology and Self-Understanding,” Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 34.1: 149–64.Google Scholar

Malebranche, Nicolas 1997. Dialogues on Metaphysics and on Religion. Jolley, Nicholas and Scott, David (eds.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Massimi, Michela 2014. “Prescribing Laws to Nature,” Kant-Studien 105.4: 491–508.Google Scholar

Massimi, Michela 2017. “The Legacy of Newton for the Pre-Critical Kant,” in The Oxford Handbook on Newton, Schliesser, E. and Smeenk, C. (eds.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

McDowell, John 1994. Mind and World. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar

McDowell, John 1998. “Having the World in View: Sellars, Kant, and Intentionality,” Journal of Philosophy 95.9: 431–92.Google Scholar

McDowell, John 2009a. Having the World in View: Essays on Kant, Hegel, and Sellars. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar

McDowell, John 2009b. “Hegel's Idealism as Radicalization of Kant,” in Having the World in View: Essays on Kant, Hegel, and Sellars. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, pp. 69–89.Google Scholar

McDowell, John 2009c. “Avoiding the Myth of the Given,” in Having the World in View: Essays on Kant, Hegel, and Sellars. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, pp. 256–72.Google Scholar

McDowell, John 2015. “Putnam on Natural Realism,” in Auxier, R. E., Anderson, D. R., and Hahn, L. E. (eds.), The Philosophy of Hilary Putnam. Chicago: Open Court, pp. 643–58.Google Scholar

Meier, George Friedrich 1752. Auszug aus der Vernuftlehre. Halle, Germany: Gebauer.Google Scholar

Melnick, Arthur 1989. Space, Time, and Thought in Kant. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Kluwer.Google Scholar

Mendelssohn, Moses 1997. Moses Mendelssohn: Philosophical Writings. Dahlstrom, Daniel O. (trans.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Mendelssohn, Moses 2011. Morning Hours, or Lectures on God's Existence. Dahlstrom, Daniel and Dyck, Corey W. (trans.). Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar

Milmed, Bella K. 1969. “‘Possible Experience’ and Recent Interpretations of Kant,” in Beck, L. W. (ed.), Kant Studies Today. LaSalle, IL: Open Court, pp. 301–21.Google Scholar

Montaigne, Michel de 2003 [1580]. “An Apology for Raymond Sebond,” in Essays, Screech, M. A. (trans.). London: Penguin Books, pp. 489–683.Google Scholar

Moore, A. W. 2010. “The Transcendental Doctrine of Method,” in Guyer, Paul (ed.), Cambridge Companion to Kant's Critique of Pure Reason. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 310–26.Google Scholar

Moore, A. W. 2011. “Bird on Kant's Mathematical Antinomies,” Kantian Review 16.2: 235–43.Google Scholar

Nagel, Ernest 1961. The Structure of Science. New York: Harcourt, Brace, and World.Google Scholar

Newton, Isaac 1999. The Principia: Mathematical Principles of Natural Philosophy. Cohen, Bernard, Whitman, Anne, and Budenz, Julia (trans.). Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar

Newton, Isaac 2004. “De Gravitatione,” in Janiak, A. (ed.), Philosophical Writings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 12–39.Google Scholar

Onof, Christian, and Schulting, Dennis 2015. “Space as Form of Intuition and as Formal Intuition: On the Note to B160 in Kant's Critique of Pure Reason,” The Philosophical Review 124.1: 1–58.Google Scholar

O'Shea, James R. 1997. “The Needs of Understanding: Kant on Empirical Laws and Regulative Ideals,” International Journal of Philosophical Studies 5.2: 216–54.Google Scholar

O'Shea, James R. 2014. Kant's Critique of Pure Reason: An Introduction and Interpretation. London: Routledge. First published by Acumen, 2012.Google Scholar

Parsons, Charles 1992. “The Transcendental Aesthetic,” in Guyer, Paul (ed.), The Cambridge Companion to Kant. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 62–99.Google Scholar

Pasternack, Lawrence 2010. “Kant's Doctrinal Belief in God,” in Thorndike, Oliver (ed.), Rethinking Kant, vol. 3. Newcastle upon Tyne, UK: Cambridge Scholars Press, pp. 200–18.Google Scholar

Pasternack, LawrenceThorndike, Oliver 2011. “Kant and Theology at the Boundaries of Reason,” Kantian Review 16.3: 495–98.Google Scholar

Pasternack, LawrenceThorndike, Oliver 2014a. “Kant on Opinion: Assent, Hypothesis, and the Norms of General Applied Logic,” Kant-Studien 105.1: 41–82.Google Scholar

Pasternack, LawrenceThorndike, Oliver 2014b. Kant's Religion within the Boundaries of Mere Reason: An Interpretation and Defense. London: Routledge.Google Scholar

Paton, H. J. 1936. Kant's Metaphysic of Experience. London: George Allen and Unwin.Google Scholar

Piché, David 1999. La Condamnation parisienne de 1277. Paris: Vrin.Google Scholar

Pickering, Mark 2016. “Kant's Theoretical Reasons for Belief in Things in Themselves,” Kant-Studien 107.4: 589–616.Google Scholar

Pippin, Robert B. 2005. The Persistence of Subjectivity: On the Kantian Aftermath. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Plantinga, Alvin 1966. “Kant's Objection to the Ontological Argument,” Journal of Philosophy 63.19: 537–46.Google Scholar

Prauss, Gerold 1969. “Zum Warheitsproblem bei Kant,” Kant-Studien 60: 166–82.Google Scholar

Prauss, Gerold 1971. Erscheinung bei Kant. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.Google Scholar

Prauss, Gerold 1974. Kant und das Problem der Dinge an sich. Bonn: Bouvier Verlag Herbert Grundmann.Google Scholar

Proops, Ian 2014. “Kant on the Cosmological Argument,” Philosophers’ Imprint 14.12: 1–21.Google Scholar

Proops, Ian 2015. “Kant on the Ontological Argument,” Noûs 49.1: 1–27.Google Scholar

Reich, Klaus 2001. Gesammelte Schriften. With Introduction and annotations. Baum, M., Rameil, U., Reisinger, K., and Scholz, G. (eds.). Hamburg, Germany: Meiner.Google Scholar

Ricoeur, Paul 1970. Freud and Philosophy: An Essay on Interpretation. Savage, Denis (trans.). New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar

Rosenberg, Jay F. 2005. Accessing Kant: A Relaxed Introduction to the Critique of Pure Reason. Oxford: Clarendon.Google Scholar

Rosenkoetter, Timothy 2010. “Absolute Positing, the Frege Anticipation Thesis, and Kant's Definitions of Judgment,” European Journal of Philosophy 18: 539–66.Google Scholar

Schaffer, Karl Forthcoming. “Kant's Conception of Cognition and Our Knowledge of Things-in-Themselves,” in Stang, Nick (ed.), The Sensible and Intelligible Worlds: New Essays on Kant's Metaphysics and Epistemology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Schliesser, Eric 2013. “On Reading Newton as an Epicurean: Kant, Spinozism and the Changes to the Principia,” Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 44: 416–28.Google Scholar

Senderowicz, Yaron M. 2005. The Coherence of Kant's Transcendental Idealism. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer.Google Scholar

Setiya, Kieran 2004. “Transcendental Idealism in the Aesthetic,” Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 68.1: 63–88.Google Scholar

Shabel, Lisa 2003. Mathematics in Kant's Critical Philosophy: Reflections on Mathematical Practice. London: Routledge.Google Scholar

Shabel, Lisa 2010. “The Transcendental Aesthetic,” in Guyer, Paul (ed.), The Cambridge Companion to Kant's Critique of Pure Reason. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 93–117.Google Scholar

Shaffer, Jerome 1962. “Existence, Predication, and the Ontological Argument,” Mind 71.283: 307–25.Google Scholar

Shoemaker, Sydney 1968. “Self-Reference and Self-Awareness,” Journal of Philosophy 65: 555–67.Google Scholar

Shoemaker, Sydney 1970. “Persons and Their Pasts,” American Philosophical Quarterly 7.4: 269–85.Google Scholar

Smith, Donald P. 2003. “Kant on the Dependency of the Cosmological Argument on the Ontological Argument,” European Journal of Philosophy 11.2: 206–18.Google Scholar

Stang, Nicholas 2016. Kant's Modal Metaphysics. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Stevenson, Leslie 2003. “Opinion, Belief or Faith, and Knowledge,” Kantian Review 7.1: 72–101.Google Scholar

Strawson, P. F. 1966. The Bounds of Sense: An Essay on Kant's Critique of Pure Reason. London: Methuen.Google Scholar

Strawson, P. F. 1974. “Imagination and Perception,” in Freedom and Resentment and Other Essays. London: Methuen, pp. 45–65.Google Scholar

Strawson, P. F. 1979. “Perception and Its Objects,” in MacDonald, G. F. (ed.), Perception and Identity. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, pp. 41–60.Google Scholar

Strawson, P. F. 1989. “Sensibility, Understanding, and the Doctrine of Synthesis: Comments on Henrich and Guyer,” in Förster, E. (ed.), Kant's Transcendental Deductions. Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University Press, pp. 69–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Strawson, P. F. 1997a. “Kant's New Foundations of Metaphysics,” in Entity and Identity and Other Essays. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 233–44.Google Scholar

Strawson, P. F. 1997b. “The Problem of Realism and the A Priori,” in Entity and Identity and Other Essays. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 246–51.Google Scholar

Stroud, Barry 1994. “Kantian Argument, Conceptual Capacities, and Invulnerability,” in Parrini, P. (ed.), Kant and Contemporary Epistemology. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Kluwer, pp. 231–51.Google Scholar

Sutherland, Daniel 2005. “The Point of the Axioms of Intuition,” Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 86.1: 135–59.Google Scholar

Swinburne, Richard 1996. “The Beginning of the Universe,” Aristotelian Society XL(Suppl.): 139–50.Google Scholar

Tempier, Étienne 1277. Opiniones ducentae undeviginti Sigeri de Brabantia, Boetii de Dacia aliorumque, a Stephano episcopo Parisiensi de consilio doctorum Sacrae Scripturae condemnatae 1277. Paris. http://hiphi.ubbcluj.ro/fam/texte/tempier_opiniones_219.htm.Google Scholar

Tempier, Étienne 1999. Critical edition of Tempier (1277), in Piché, David, La Condamnation parisienne de 1277. Paris: Vrin, pp. 17–62.Google Scholar

Tolley, Clinton 2013. “The Non-Conceptuality of the Content of Intuitions: A New Approach,” Kantian Review 18: 107–36.Google Scholar

Treisman, Anne 2003. “Consciousness and Perceptual Binding,” in Cleeremans, Axel (ed.), The Unity of Consciousness: Binding, Integration and Dissociation. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 95–113.Google Scholar

Van Cleve, James 1999. Problems from Kant. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Vogel, Jonathan 1993. “The Problem of Self-Knowledge in Kant's ‘Refutation of Idealism’: Two Recent Views,” Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 53.4: 875–87.Google Scholar

Walker, Ralph C. S. 1978. Kant. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.Google Scholar

Walker, Ralph C. S. 1995. “Verificationism, Anti-Realism, and Idealism,” European Journal of Philosophy, 3.3: 257–72.Google Scholar

Warren, Daniel 1998. “Kant and the A Priority of Space,” Philosophical Review 107: 179–224.Google Scholar

Watkins, Eric 2000. “Kant on Rational Cosmology,” in Watkins, E. (ed.), Kant and the Sciences. New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 70–89.Google Scholar

Watkins, Eric 2005. Kant and the Metaphysics of Causality. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Watkins, Eric 2006. “On the Necessity and Nature of Simples: Leibniz, Wolff, Baumgarten, and the Pre-Critical Kant,” in Garber, D. (ed.), Oxford Studies in Early Modern Philosophy, vol. 3. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 261–314.Google Scholar

Watkins, Eric (ed., trans.) 2009. Kant's “Critique of Pure Reason”: Background Source Materials. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Watkins, Eric 2013. “Kant on the Natural, Moral, Human, and Divine Orders,” in The Divine Order, the Human Order, and the Order of Nature. New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 219–36.Google Scholar

Watkins, Eric Forthcoming. “Breaking with Rationalism: Kant, Crusius, and the Priority of Existence,” in Look, B. (ed.), Leibniz and Kant. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Watkins, Eric, and Willaschek, Marcus 2017. “Kant's Account of Cognition,” Journal of the History of Philosophy 55: 83–112.Google Scholar

Watson, John 1881. Kant and His English Critics: A Comparison of Critical and Empirical Philosophy. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar

Weizsäcker, C. F., von 1971. “Kant's ‘First Analogy of Experience’ and Conservation Principles of Physics,” Synthese 23: 75–95.Google Scholar

Westphal, Kenneth R. 2004. Kant's Transcendental Proof of Realism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Westphal, Kenneth R. 2005. “Kant, Wittgenstein and Transcendental Chaos,” Philosophical Investigations 28.4: 303–23.Google Scholar

Westphal, Kenneth R. 2007a. “Kant's Anti-Cartesianism,” Dialogue: Canadian Journal of Philosophy/Revue canadienne de philosophie 46.4: 709–15.Google Scholar

Westphal, Kenneth R. 2007b. “Proving Realism Transcendentally: Replies to Rolf George and William Harper,” Dialogue: Canadian Journal of Philosophy/Revue canadienne de philosophie 46.4: 737–50.Google Scholar

Westphal, Kenneth R. 2007c. “Consciousness and Its Transcendental Conditions: Kant's Anti-Cartesian Revolt,” in Heinämaa, S., Lähteenmäki, V., and Remes, P. (eds.), Consciousness: From Perception to Reflection in the History of Philosophy. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer, pp. 223–43.Google Scholar

Westphal, Kenneth R. 2008. “Contemporary Epistemology: Kant, Hegel, McDowell,” in Lindgaard, J. (ed.), John McDowell: Experience, Norm and Nature. Oxford: Blackwell, pp. 124–51.Google Scholar

Westphal, Kenneth R. 2010. “Kant's Critique of Pure Reason and Analytic Philosophy,” in Guyer, P. (ed.), The Cambridge Companion to Kant's Critique of Pure Reason. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 401–30.Google Scholar

Westphal, Kenneth R. 2013a. “Hume, Empiricism and the Generality of Thought,” Dialogue: Canadian Journal of Philosophy/Revue canadienne de philosophie 52.2: 233–70.Google Scholar

Westphal, Kenneth R. 2013b. “Kant's Cognitive Semantics, Newton's Rule Four of Natural Philosophy and Scientific Realism Today,” in Kant and Contemporary Theory of Knowledge, Kant Yearbook 5:127–68.Google Scholar

Westphal, Kenneth R. 2016. “Mind, Language and Behaviour: Kant's Critical Cautions contra Contemporary Internal and Causal Naturalism,” in Babür, S. (ed.), Felsefede Yöntem/Method in Philosophy, special issue of Yeditepe'de Felsefe/Philosophy at Yeditepe, vol. 10. Istanbul: Yedite Üniversi Press, pp. 102–49.Google Scholar

Westphal, Kenneth R. 2017. “Kant's Analytic of Principles,” in Timmons, M. and Baiasu, S. (eds.), Kant. London: Routledge.Google Scholar

Wittgenstein, Ludwig 1958. The Blue and the Brown Books. New York: Harper.Google Scholar

Wolff, Christian 1740. Philosophia rationalis sive logica, Pars I–III. Frankfurt und Leipzig. Reprinted in Gesammelte Werke (Hildesheim: Olms, 1983), 2. Abt., vols. 1.1, 1.2, 1.3.Google Scholar

Wolff, Michael 1995. Die Vollständigkeit der kantischen Urteilstafel. Mit einem Essay über Freges “Begriffsschrift.” Frankfurt am Main, Germany: Klostermann.Google Scholar

Wolff, Michael 2000. “Kantische Urteilstafel und vollständige Induktion: Nachtrag zu meiner Kontroverse mit Ulrich Nortmann.” Zeitschrift für Philosophische Forschung 54.1: 86–94.Google Scholar

Wolff, Michael 2009a. Abhandlung über die Prinzipien der Logik. Mit einer Rekonstruktion der aristotelischen Syllogistik. 2nd rev. ed. Frankfurt am Main, Germany: Klostermann.Google Scholar

Wolff, Michael 2009b. “Vollkommene Syllogismen und reine Vernunftschlüsse: Aristoteles und Kant,” Journal for General Philosophy of Science 40: 341–55.Google Scholar

Wolff, Michael 2010a. “Vollkommene Syllogismen und reine Vernunftschlüsse: Aristoteles und Kant. Eine Stellungnahme zu Theodor Eberts Gegeneinwänden,” Part 1. Journal for General Philosophy of Science 41: 199–213.Google Scholar

Wolff, Michael 2010b. “Vollkommene Syllogismen und reine Vernunftschlüsse: Aristoteles und Kant. Eine Stellungnahme zu Theodor Eberts Gegeneinwänden,” Part 2. Journal for General Philosophy of Science 41: 359–71.Google Scholar

Wolff, Michael 2013. “Viele Logiken – Eine Vernunft. Warum der logische Pluralismus ein Irrtum ist,” Methodus: International Journal for Modern Philosophy 7: 73–128.Google Scholar

Wolff, Michael Forthcoming. “Kant's Table of Judgments: Frege's Critique and Kant's Rejoinder,” Westphal, K. R. (trans.), Dialogue: Canadian Journal of Philosophy/Revue canadienne de philosophie.Google Scholar

Wolterstorff, Nicholas 1991. “Conundrums in Kant's Rational Religion,” in Rossi, P. J. and Wreen, M. J. (eds.), Kant's Philosophy of Religion Reconsidered. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, pp. 40–53.Google Scholar

Wolterstorff, Nicholas 1998. “Is It Possible and Desirable for Theologians to Recover from Kant?” Modern Theology 14.1: 1–18.Google Scholar

Wood, Allen W. 1970. Kant's Moral Religion. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar

Wood, Allen W. 1978. Kant's Rational Theology. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar

Wood, Allen W. 1992. “Rational Theology, Moral Faith, and Religion,” in Guyer, Paul (ed.), Cambridge Companion to Kant. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 394–416.Google Scholar

Wood, Allen W. 2005. Kant. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar

Wood, Allen W. 2010. “The Antinomies of Pure Reason,” in Guyer, Paul (ed.), The Cambridge Companion to Kant's Critique of Pure Reason. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 245–65.Google Scholar

Wright, Crispin 1992. Truth and Objectivity. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar

Wright, Crispin 1996. Realism, Meaning and Truth. Cambridge: Wiley-Blackwell/Polity.Google Scholar

Yong, Peter 2014. “God, Totality and Possibility in Kant's Only Possible Argument,” Kantian Review 19.1: 27–51.Google Scholar