Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-v9fdk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-09T06:16:32.240Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Asymmetry of Space: Kant’s Theory of Absolute Space in 1768

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  25 October 2016

Matthew S. Rukgaber
Matthew S. Rukgaber*
Affiliation:
Eastern Connecticut State University
*
Email: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

I propose that we interpret Kant’s argument from incongruent counterparts in the 1768 article ‘Concerning the Ultimate Ground of the Differentiation of Directions in Space’ in light of a theory of dynamic absolute space that he accepted throughout the 1750s and 1760s. This force-based or material conception of space was not an unusual interpretation of the Newtonian notion of absolute space. Nevertheless, commentators have continually argued that Kant’s argument is an utter failure that shifts from the metaphysics of space to its epistemology, because he has no way to connect ‘directionality’ and ‘handedness’ to absolute space. This supposed failure is based on an understanding of absolute space in purely mathematical terms and as an absolute void that lacks any qualitative or dynamic features. If we recognize that Kant held that space had an intrinsic directional asymmetry then his argument successfully connects incongruent counterparts to absolute space. The presence of this notion in Kant’s pre-Critical thought is rarely noted, and its necessity in understanding his incongruence argument is novel.

Keywords

spacepre-Critical philosophyabsolutismincongruent counterparts
Type
Articles
Information
Kantian Review , Volume 21 , Issue 3 , November 2016 , pp. 415 - 435
Copyright
© Kantian Review 2016 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Alexander, Peter (1984) ‘Incongruent Counterparts and Absolute Space’. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, 85, 1–21.Google Scholar
Aristotle (1984) Physics . trans. R. P. Hardie and R. K. Gaye. In Jonathan Barnes (ed.), The Complete Works. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Baker, J. T. (1935) ‘Some Pre-Critical Developments of Kant’s Theory of Space and Time’. Philosophical Review, 44, 267–282.Google Scholar
Bernecker, Sven (2010) ‘Kant on Spatial Orientation’. European Journal of Philosophy, 20, 519–533.Google Scholar
Broad, C. D. (1978) Kant: An Introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Buroker, Jill Vance (1981) Space and Incongruence: The Origins of Kant’s Idealism. Dordrecht: D. Reidel Publishing.Google Scholar
Buroker, Jill Vance (1991) ‘The Role of Incongruent Counterparts in Kant’s Transcendental Idealism’. In James Van Cleve and Robert Frederick (eds), The Philosophy of Right and Left: Incongruent Counterparts and the Nature of Space (Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers), pp. 315–339.Google Scholar
Byrd, Jeremy (2008) ‘A Remark on Kant’s Argument from Incongruent Counterparts’. British Journal for the History of Philosophy, 16, 789–800.Google Scholar
De Risi, Vicenzo (2007) Geometry and Monadology: Leibniz’s Analysis Situs and Philosophy of Space . Basel: Birkhäuser.Google Scholar
Descartes, René (1644) Principles of Philosophy, trans. Jonathan Bennett. <http://www.earlymoderntexts.com/pdfs/descartes1644.pdf>. [2008].+[2008]>Google Scholar
Du Châtelet, Emilie (1740) Institutions de physique [Foundations of Physics]. Paris: Chez Prault Fils.Google Scholar
Earman, John (1991) ‘Kant, Incongruous Counterparts, and the Nature of Space and Space-Time’. In James Van Cleve and Robert Frederick (eds), The Philosophy of Right and Left: Incongruent Counterparts and the Nature of Space (Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers), pp. 131–149.Google Scholar
Falkenstein. Lorne (1995) Kant’s Intuitionism: A Commentary on the Transcendental Aesthetic. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.Google Scholar
Frederick, Robert (1991) ‘Introduction to the Argument of 1768’. In James Van Cleve and Robert Frederick (eds), The Philosophy of Right and Left: Incongruent Counterparts and the Nature of Space (Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers), pp. 1–14.Google Scholar
Gardner, Martin (2005) The New Ambidextrous Universe: Symmetry and Asymmetry from Mirror Reflections to Superstrings. Mineola: Dover Publications.Google Scholar
Garnett, Christopher Jr. (1939) The Kantian Philosophy of Space. Port Washington: Kennikat Press.Google Scholar
Gaukroger, Stephan (2002) Descartes’ System of Natural Philosophy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Hoefer, Carl (2000) ‘Kant’s Hands and Earman’s Pions: Chirality Arguments for Substantival Space’. International Studies in the Philosophy of Science, 14, 237–256.Google Scholar
Jammer, Max (1954) Concepts of Space. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Kant, Immanuel (1902–) Gesammelte Schriften. Berlin: Preussische Akademie der Wissenschaften (and successors).Google Scholar
Kant, Immanuel (1992) Theoretical Philosophy, 1755–1770 , trans. and ed. David Walford in collaboration with Ralf Meerbote Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kant, Immanuel (2012) Natural Science, ed. Eric Watkins. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leibniz, G. W. (1956) Philosophical Papers and Letters, 2nd edn. Dordrecht: D. Reidel Publishing.Google Scholar
McManus, Chris (2002) Right Hand, Left Hand: The Origins of Asymmetry in Brains, Bodies, Atoms and Cultures. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Nerlich, Graham (1994) The Shape of Space. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Newton, Isaac (1952) Opticks . New York: Dover.Google Scholar
Newton, Isaac (1999) The Principia , trans. I. Bernard Cohen and Anne Whitman Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Nuzzo, Angelica (2008) Ideal Embodiment: Kant’s Theory of Sensibility. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
Parsons, Charles (1992) ‘The Transcendental Aesthetic’. In Paul Guyer (ed.), The Cambridge Companion to Kant (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press), pp. 62–100.Google Scholar
Remnant, Peter (1991) ‘Incongruous Counterparts and Absolute Space’. In James Van Cleve and Robert Frederick (eds), The Philosophy of Right and Left: Incongruent Counterparts and the Nature of Space (Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers), pp. 51–59.Google Scholar
Rukgaber, Matthew (2009) ‘“The Key to Transcendental Philosophy”: Space, Time, and the Body in Kant’. Kant-Studien, 100, 166–186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rusnock, Paul, and George, Rolf (1994) ‘Snails Rolled up Contrary to All Sense’. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 54, 459–466.Google Scholar
Rusnock, Paul (1995) ‘A Last Shot at Kant and Incongruent Counterparts’. Kant-Studien, 86, 257–277.Google Scholar
Russell, Bertrand (1903) Principles of Mathematics. New York: Norton & Co.Google Scholar
Schönfeld, Martin (2006) ‘Kant’s Early Dynamics’. In Graham Bird (ed.), A Companion to Kant (Malden, MA: Blackwell), pp. 33–46.Google Scholar
Severo, Rogério Passos (2005) ‘Three Remarks on the Interpretation of Kant on Incongruent Counterparts’. Kantian Review, 9, 30–57.Google Scholar
Sklar, Lawrence (1991) ‘Incongruous Counterparts, Intrinsic Features, and the Substantiviality of Space’. In James Van Cleve and Robert Frederick (eds), The Philosophy of Right and Left: Incongruent Counterparts and the Nature of Space (Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers), pp. 173–186.Google Scholar
Storrie, Stefan (2013) ‘Kant’s 1768 Attack on Leibniz’ Conception of Space’. Kant-Studien, 104, 145–166.Google Scholar
Van Cleve, James (1991) ‘Right, Left, and the Fourth Dimension’. In James Van Cleve and Robert Frederick (eds), The Philosophy of Right and Left: Incongruent Counterparts and the Nature of Space (Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers), pp. 203–233.Google Scholar
Walford, David (1999) ‘The Aims and Methods of Kant’s 1768 Gegenden im Raume Essay in the Light of Euler’s 1748 Réflexions sur L’Espace ’. British Journal for the History of Philosophy, 7, 305–332.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Walford, David (2001) ‘Towards an Interpretation of Kant’s 1768 Gegenden im Raume Essay’. Kant-Studien, 92, 407–439.Google Scholar
Wolff, Robert Paul (1963) Kant’s Theory of Mental Activity. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Zerbudis, Ezequiel (2012) ‘Incongruent Counterparts and the Origin of Kant’s Distinction between Sensibility and Understanding’. Archiv für geschichte der Philosophie, 94, 326–352.Google Scholar