Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-dh8gc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-06T10:09:23.887Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Kant’s (Non-Question-Begging) Refutation of Cartesian Scepticism

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 February 2019

Colin Marshall*
Affiliation:
University of Washington

Abstract

Interpreters of Kant’s Refutation of Idealism face a dilemma: it seems to either beg the question against the Cartesian sceptic or else offer a disappointingly Berkeleyan conclusion. In this article I offer an interpretation of the Refutation on which it does not beg the question against the Cartesian sceptic. After defending a principle about question-begging, I identify four premises concerning our representations that there are textual reasons to think Kant might be implicitly assuming. Using those assumptions, I offer a reconstruction of Kant’s Refutation that avoids the interpretative dilemma, though difficult questions about the argument remain.

Type
Articles
Copyright
© Kantian Review 2019 

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

Abela, Paul (2002) Kant’s Empirical Realism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Allais, Lucy (2007) ‘Kant’s Idealism and the Secondary Quality Analogy’. Journal of the History of Philosophy, 45, 459484.Google Scholar
Allais, Lucy (2015) Manifest Reality: Kant’s Idealism and his Realism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Allison, Henry (2004) Kant’s Transcendental Idealism, 2nd edn. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Ameriks, Karl (2000 ) Kant’s Theory of Mind , 2nd edn. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Ameriks, Karl (2003) Interpreting Kant’s Critiques. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Ameriks, Karl (2011) ‘Kant’s Idealism on a Moderate Interpretation’. In Dennis Schulting and Jacco Verburgt (eds), Kant’s Idealism: New Interpretations of a Controversial Doctrine (Dordrecht: Springer), 2953.Google Scholar
Anscombe, G. E. M. (1994) ‘The First Person’. In Quassim Cassam (ed.), Self-Knowledge (Oxford: Oxford University Press), 140159.Google Scholar
Ayers, Michael. (1991) Locke: Epistemology and Ontology. 2 vols. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Bader, Ralf M. (2012) ‘The Role of Kant’s Refutation of Idealism’. Archiv für Geschichte der Philosophie, 94, 5373.Google Scholar
Bader, Ralf M. (2017) ‘The Refutation of Idealism’. In James R. O’Shea (ed.), Kant’s ‘Critique of Pure Reason: A Critical Guide (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press), 205222.Google Scholar
Caranti, Luigi (2007) Kant and the Scandal of Philosophy: The Kantian Critique of Cartesian Scepticism. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.Google Scholar
Chignell, Andrew (2009) ‘Causal Refutations of Idealism’. Philosophical Quarterly, 60, 487507.Google Scholar
Chignell, Andrew (2011) ‘Causal Refutations of Idealism Revisited’. Philosophical Quarterly, 61/242, 184186.Google Scholar
Cohen, S. Marc and Keyt, David (1992) ‘Analysing Plato’s Arguments: Plato and Platonism’. In James Klagge and Nicholas Smith (eds), Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy Supplementary Volume: Methods of Interpreting Plato and his Dialogues (Oxford: Clarendon Press), 173200.Google Scholar
Davidson, Donald (1984) Inquiries into Truth and Interpretation. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Descartes, René (1984–91) Philosophical Writings of Descartes. 3 vols. Trans. John Cottingham, Robert Stoothoff, Dugald Murdoch and Anthony Kenny. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Dicker, Georges (2008) ‘Kant’s Refutation of Idealism’. Noûs, 42, 80108.Google Scholar
Dicker, Georges (2011) ‘Kant’s Refutation of Idealism: A Reply to Chignell’. Philosophical Quarterly, 61, 175183.Google Scholar
Emundts, Dina (2010) ‘The Refutation of Idealism and the Distinction between Phenomena and Noumena’. In Paul Guyer (ed.), Cambridge Companion to Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press), 168189.Google Scholar
Findlay, J. N. (1981) Kant and the Transcendental Object. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Fischer, John Martin and Pendergraft, Garrett (2013) ‘Does the Consequence Argument Beg the Question?’. Philosophical Studies, 166, 575595.Google Scholar
Guyer, Paul (1987) Kant and the Claims of Knowledge. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Guyer, Paul (1998) ‘The Postulates of Empirical Thinking in General and the Refutation of Idealism’. In G. Mohr and M. Willaschek (eds), Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft: Klassiker Auslegen (Berlin: Akademie Verlag), 297324.Google Scholar
Hogan, Desmond (2009) ‘Noumenal Affection’. Philosophical Review, 118, 501532.Google Scholar
Kant, Immanuel (1900–) Kants Gesammelte Schriften. Ed. German Academy of Sciences. Berlin: De Gruyter.Google Scholar
Kant, Immanuel (1992) Lectures on Logic. Trans. J. Michael Young. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Kant, Immanuel (1997) Critique of Pure Reason. Trans. Paul Guyer and Allen Wood. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Kant, Immanuel (2001) Prolegomena to Any Future Metaphysics. Trans. Gary Hatfield. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Kitcher, Patricia (1999) ‘Kant’s Epistemological Problem and its Coherent Solution’. Philosophical Perspectives, 13, 415441.Google Scholar
McDaniel, Kris (2015) ‘A Philosophical Model of the Relation between Things in Themselves and Appearances’. Noûs, 49, 643664.Google Scholar
Marshall, Colin (2010) ‘Kant’s Metaphysics of the Self’. Philosophers’ Imprint, 10, 121.Google Scholar
Marshall, Colin (2013) ‘Kant’s Appearances and Things in Themselves as Qua-Objects’. Philosophical Quarterly, 63, 520545.Google Scholar
Marshall, Colin (2014) ‘Does Kant Demand Explanations for All Synthetic A Priori Claims?Journal of the History of Philosophy, 52, 549576.Google Scholar
Rosefeldt, Tobias (2007) ‘Dinge an sich und sekundäre Qualitäten’. In J. Stolzenburg (ed.), Kant in der Gegenwart (Berlin and New York: Walter de Gruyter), 167209.Google Scholar
Sellars, Wilfred (1968) Science and Metaphysics: Variations on Kantian Themes. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
Sgaravatti, Daniele (2013) ‘Petitio Principii: A Bad Form of Reasoning’. Mind, 122, 749779.Google Scholar
Spinoza, Baruch (1988) The Collected Works of Spinoza, vol. 1. Ed. and trans. Edwin Curley. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Stang, Nicholas (2015) ‘Who’s Afraid of Double Affection?Philosophers’ Imprint, 15, 128.Google Scholar
Tolley, Clinton (forthcoming) ‘The Meaning of “Perception” in Kant and his Historical Context’. In Violetta L. Waibel, Margit Ruffing and David Wagner (eds), Natur und Freiheit. Akten des XII. Internationalen Kant-Kongresses (Berlin: de Gruyter).Google Scholar
Twain, Mark (1992) The Mysterious Stranger and Other Stories. New York: Dover.Google Scholar
Tye, Michael (1995) Ten Problems of Consciousness: A Representational Theory of the Phenomenal Mind. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.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, 875887.Google Scholar
Walton, Douglas (1994) ‘Begging the Question as a Pragmatic Fallacy’. Synthese, 100, 95131.Google Scholar
Watkins, Eric (2005) Kant and the Metaphysics of Causality. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Westphal, Kenneth R. (2004) Kant’s Transcendental Proof of Realism. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar