इमानुएल कांट
कांट के अनुसार, हम संसार को केवल वैसा ही जान सकते हैं जैसा वह हमें दिखता है – और नैतिकता तर्क से आती है, भावनाओं या पुरस्कारों से नहीं।
पृष्ठभूमि
कोपरनिकन क्रांति: ज्ञान वस्तुओं के अनुरूप नहीं होता; बल्कि वस्तुएँ हमारे ज्ञान के अनुरूप होती हैं।
मुख्य विचार
- निरपेक्ष आदेश
- अनुभवातीत आदर्शवाद
- संश्लेषणात्मक अनुभव-पूर्व (a priori) निर्णय
- स्वयं-आरोपित अपरिपक्वता से बाहर निकलने के रूप में प्रबोधन
शिष्य: योहान गॉटफ़्रीड हेर्डर
प्रभाव
जिनसे प्रभावित 5
आइज़क न्यूटन
जिनसे प्रभावित ✓
Kant’s Universal Natural History (1755) explained the origin of the planetary system by Newtonian attraction plus a repulsive force, a question Newton had left to God. I. Kant, Allgemeine Naturgeschichte und Theorie des Himmels (1755); SEP “Kant’s Philosophy of Science”
आइज़क न्यूटन › 1643–1727
फ्रांसिस हचेसन
जिनसे प्रभावित ✓
In the Prize Essay (1764) Kant saw in Hutcheson’s ‘moral feeling’ a promising start towards the first material principles of morality, before developing his ethics of reason. I. Kant, Untersuchung über die Deutlichkeit der Grundsätze der natürlichen Theologie und der Moral (1764); SEP “Kant’s Moral Philosophy”
फ्रांसिस हचेसन › 1694–1746
जाँ-जाक रुसो
जिनसे प्रभावित ✓
In his Remarks on the Observations (1764–65) Kant wrote that Rousseau had set him right: he learned to honour human beings, not only to prize knowledge. I. Kant, Bemerkungen in den “Beobachtungen über das Gefühl des Schönen und Erhabenen” (1764–65); SEP “Kant’s Moral Philosophy”
जाँ-जाक रुसो › 1712–1778
एडम स्मिथ
जिनसे प्रभावित
Marcus Herz called Smith Kant’s ‘favourite’ (letter of 1771); S. Fleischacker traces echoes of the Theory of Moral Sentiments in Kant’s moral philosophy. M. Herz to I. Kant, 9 July 1771; S. Fleischacker, “Philosophy in Moral Practice: Kant and Adam Smith”, Kant-Studien (1991)
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
एडम स्मिथ › 1723–1790
एडमण्ड बर्क
जिनसे प्रभावित
Kant’s Critique of Judgement (1790) cited Burke’s Enquiry as the leading empirical, ‘physiological’ account of the sublime and the beautiful, which Kant sought to ground transcendentally. I. Kant, Kritik der Urteilskraft (1790), General Remark on the Exposition of Aesthetic Reflective Judgements; E. Burke, A Philosophical Enquiry into the Origin of Our Ideas of the Sublime and Beautiful (1757; Ger. tr. 1773)
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
एडमण्ड बर्क › 1729–1797
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया 56
सोरेन किर्केगार्द
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया ✓
According to Ronald M. Green, Kierkegaard’s ethics and view of sin and grace answer Kant’s Religion, a debt he rarely named (Kierkegaard and Kant: The Hidden Debt, 1992). R. M. Green, Kierkegaard and Kant: The Hidden Debt (1992); I. Kant, Die Religion innerhalb der Grenzen der bloßen Vernunft (1793)
सोरेन किर्केगार्द › 1813–1855
कार्ल मार्क्स
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया
In a letter to his father (1837) Marx described building a philosophy of law on the idealism of Kant and Fichte before he turned to Hegel. K. Marx, letter to Heinrich Marx, 10–11 November 1837 (MEW Ergänzungsband 1; MECW 1)
साक्ष्य: InPhO में भी · InPhO
कार्ल मार्क्स › 1818–1883
एडमुंड हुसल
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया ✓
Husserl took up Kant’s transcendental question (Ideas I, 1913) but faulted his constructions not drawn from intuition (‘Kant und die Idee der Transzendentalphilosophie’, 1924; Krisis, 1936). E. Husserl, Ideen zu einer reinen Phänomenologie I (1913); “Kant und die Idee der Transzendentalphilosophie” (1924; publ. 1956); Die Krisis der europäischen Wissenschaften (1936); SEP “Edmund Husserl”
एडमुंड हुसल › 1859–1938
मार्टिन हाइडेगर
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया ✓
Heidegger read the Critique of Pure Reason as grounding metaphysics in finite knowledge, rooted in the transcendental imagination (Kant und das Problem der Metaphysik, 1929). M. Heidegger, Kant und das Problem der Metaphysik (1929); Phänomenologische Interpretation von Kants Kritik der reinen Vernunft (lectures 1927–28; publ. 1977); SEP “Martin Heidegger”
मार्टिन हाइडेगर › 1889–1976
मिशेल फूको
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया ✓
Foucault translated Kant’s Anthropology for his secondary thesis (1961) and later read ‘What is Enlightenment?’ as the start of a critical ontology of ourselves (‘What is Enlightenment?’, 1984). M. Foucault, Introduction à l’Anthropologie de Kant (1961; publ. 2008); I. Kant, Anthropologie du point de vue pragmatique, trans. M. Foucault (1964); M. Foucault, “What is Enlightenment?”, in P. Rabinow (ed.), The Foucault Reader (1984); SEP “Michel Foucault”
मिशेल फूको › 1926–1984
युर्गन हाबरमास
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया ✓
Habermas recast Kant’s categorical imperative as a principle of universalisation that norms must pass in real discourse among all those affected (Moralbewußtsein und kommunikatives Handeln, 1983). J. Habermas, “Diskursethik – Notizen zu einem Begründungsprogramm”, in Moralbewußtsein und kommunikatives Handeln (1983); SEP “Jürgen Habermas”
युर्गन हाबरमास › 1929–2026
सभी दिखाएँ (56)कम दिखाएँ
योहान गॉटलीब फ़िशटे
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया ✓
Fichte’s Attempt at a Critique of All Revelation (1792), published anonymously, was taken for Kant’s; his Wissenschaftslehre (1794) sought to derive Kant’s results from a single principle. J. G. Fichte, Versuch einer Critik aller Offenbarung (1792); Grundlage der gesammten Wissenschaftslehre (1794); SEP “Johann Gottlieb Fichte”
साक्ष्य: Wikidata में भी · Wikidata
योहान गॉटलीब फ़िशटे › 1762–1814
फ़्रीडरिश श्लाइअरमाखर
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया
Schleiermacher’s early essays On the Highest Good (1789) and On Freedom (1790–92) worked through Kant’s ethics, rejecting its linking of virtue and happiness in the highest good. F. Schleiermacher, Über das höchste Gut (1789); Über die Freiheit (1790–92); SEP “Friedrich Daniel Ernst Schleiermacher”
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
फ़्रीडरिश श्लाइअरमाखर › 1768–1834
फ़्रीडरिश हेल्डरलिन
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया
Hölderlin studied Kant from his Tübingen years and, writing to his brother (1799), called him ‘the Moses of our nation’, leading it out of Egyptian slackness. F. Hölderlin, letter to his brother Karl Gok, 1 Jan. 1799
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
फ़्रीडरिश हेल्डरलिन › 1770–1843
फ़्रीडरिश श्लेगल
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया
In his Essay on the Concept of Republicanism (1796) Schlegel took up Kant’s Toward Perpetual Peace (1795) but argued, against Kant, that republicanism is necessarily democratic. F. Schlegel, Versuch über den Begriff des Republikanismus (1796); I. Kant, Zum ewigen Frieden (1795); SEP “Friedrich Schlegel”
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
फ़्रीडरिश श्लेगल › 1772–1829
फ्रेडरिख शेलिंग
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया ✓
In Ideas for a Philosophy of Nature (1797) Schelling took up Kant’s dynamic theory of matter as attractive and repulsive forces (Metaphysical Foundations of Natural Science, 1786). F. W. J. Schelling, Ideen zu einer Philosophie der Natur (1797); I. Kant, Metaphysische Anfangsgründe der Naturwissenschaft (1786); SEP “Friedrich Wilhelm Joseph von Schelling”
फ्रेडरिख शेलिंग › 1775–1854
आर्थर शोपेनहावर
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया ✓
Schopenhauer kept Kant’s distinction of appearance and thing in itself, calling the latter will, and appended a Critique of the Kantian Philosophy to his main work (1819). A. Schopenhauer, Die Welt als Wille und Vorstellung (1819), appendix “Kritik der Kantischen Philosophie”; SEP “Arthur Schopenhauer”
आर्थर शोपेनहावर › 1788–1860
राल्फ वाल्डो इमर्सन
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया
In ‘The Transcendentalist’ (1842) Emerson traced his movement’s name to Kant’s use of ‘transcendental’, a Kant he knew largely at second hand, through Coleridge and Carlyle. R. W. Emerson, “The Transcendentalist” (1842); SEP “Ralph Waldo Emerson”
साक्ष्य: InPhO में भी · InPhO
राल्फ वाल्डो इमर्सन › 1803–1882
विल्हेल्म डिल्थाई
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया ✓
Dilthey called his project a ‘critique of historical reason’, doing for the human sciences what Kant had done for natural science (Introduction to the Human Sciences, 1883). W. Dilthey, Einleitung in die Geisteswissenschaften (1883); SEP “Wilhelm Dilthey”
विल्हेल्म डिल्थाई › 1833–1911
हेनरी सिजविक
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया
In The Methods of Ethics (1874) Sidgwick accepted Kant’s universalisability principle as a self-evident axiom of justice, holding that alone it cannot settle what we ought to do. H. Sidgwick, The Methods of Ethics (1874); “The Kantian Conception of Free Will”, Mind (1888); SEP “Henry Sidgwick”
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
हेनरी सिजविक › 1838–1900
चार्ल्स सैंडर्स पियर्स
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया
Peirce studied the Critique of Pure Reason for years in his youth and took the name ‘pragmatism’ from Kant’s distinction between pragmatisch and praktisch (‘What Pragmatism Is’, 1905). C. S. Peirce, “What Pragmatism Is”, The Monist (1905); SEP “Charles Sanders Peirce”
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
चार्ल्स सैंडर्स पियर्स › 1839–1914
हेर्मान कोहेन
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया ✓
In Kant’s Theory of Experience (1871) Cohen read the first Critique as a theory of the conditions of scientific knowledge, starting from the ‘fact’ of mathematical natural science. H. Cohen, Kants Theorie der Erfahrung (1871; 2nd ed. 1885); SEP “Hermann Cohen”
साक्ष्य: Wikidata में भी · Wikidata
हेर्मान कोहेन › 1842–1918
एमिल दुरकेम
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया
Durkheim gave Kant’s categories a social origin: time, space and causality derive from collective life, above all religion (Les formes élémentaires de la vie religieuse, 1912). É. Durkheim, Les formes élémentaires de la vie religieuse (1912), introduction; S. Lukes, Émile Durkheim: His Life and Work (1973)
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
एमिल दुरकेम › 1858–1917
गेऑर्ग ज़िमेल
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया
Simmel recast Kant’s ‘How is nature possible?’ as ‘How is society possible?’, answering with a priori forms through which individuals experience themselves as members of society (Soziologie, 1908). G. Simmel, Soziologie (1908), “Exkurs über das Problem: Wie ist Gesellschaft möglich?”; Kant. Sechzehn Vorlesungen (1904); D. Frisby, Georg Simmel (1984)
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
गेऑर्ग ज़िमेल › 1858–1918
डेविड हिल्बर्ट
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया ✓
Hilbert took Kant’s sentence on intuitions, concepts and ideas as motto of the Grundlagen der Geometrie (1899) and grounded finitism in Kant’s extra-logical content of mathematics (1926). D. Hilbert, Grundlagen der Geometrie (1899); “Über das Unendliche”, Mathematische Annalen 95 (1926); I. Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft (1781/87); SEP “Hilbert’s Program”
साक्ष्य: Wikidata में भी · Wikidata
डेविड हिल्बर्ट › 1862–1943
याकोब फ़ॉन युक्सकुल
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया
Uexküll applied Kant’s thesis that the forms of perception belong to the subject to animals, each living in its own Umwelt (Theoretische Biologie, 1920). J. von Uexküll, Theoretische Biologie (1920); Umwelt und Innenwelt der Tiere (1909)
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
याकोब फ़ॉन युक्सकुल › 1864–1944
मैक्स वेबर
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया विवादित
Through Rickert’s neo-Kantianism Weber took over Kant’s gulf between is and ought: science cannot ground value judgements, and concepts select from an infinite reality (‘Objectivity’ essay, 1904). M. Weber, “Die ‚Objektivität‘ sozialwissenschaftlicher und sozialpolitischer Erkenntnis” (1904); SEP “Max Weber”; SEP “Neo-Kantianism”
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
मैक्स वेबर › 1864–1920
लियांग छिचाओ
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया
Liang Qichao introduced Kant to Chinese readers via Japanese sources in an essay series of 1903–04, explaining Kant’s moral freedom through Buddhism and Wang Yangming’s innate knowing. Liang Qichao, “Jinshi diyi dazhe Kangde zhi xueshuo”, Xinmin congbao (1903–04); H. Chang, Liang Ch’i-ch’ao and Intellectual Transition in China (1971)
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
लियांग छिचाओ › 1873–1929
अर्न्स्ट कासिरर
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया
Cassirer, trained in Marburg Neo-Kantianism, widened Kant’s critique of reason into a critique of culture covering myth, language and science (Philosophie der symbolischen Formen, 1923–29). E. Cassirer, Philosophie der symbolischen Formen I–III (1923–29); Substanzbegriff und Funktionsbegriff (1910); Kants Leben und Lehre (1918); SEP “Ernst Cassirer”
साक्ष्य: InPhO में भी · InPhO
अर्न्स्ट कासिरर › 1874–1945
कृष्ण चन्द्र भट्टाचार्य
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया
K. C. Bhattacharya started from Kant’s limits of theoretical knowledge but argued in The Subject as Freedom (1930) that the subject is realised through progressive freedom from objectivity. K. C. Bhattacharya, The Subject as Freedom (1930); N. Bhushan & J. L. Garfield (eds.), Indian Philosophy in English (2011)
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
कृष्ण चन्द्र भट्टाचार्य › 1875–1949
अल्बर्ट आइंस्टीन
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया
Einstein, who read Kant as a schoolboy, held that physical concepts are free creations, not abstracted from experience, but rejected their a priori status (‘Reply to Criticisms’, 1949). A. Einstein, “Reply to Criticisms”, in P. A. Schilpp (ed.), Albert Einstein: Philosopher-Scientist (1949); “Geometrie und Erfahrung” (1921); SEP “Einstein’s Philosophy of Science”
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
अल्बर्ट आइंस्टीन › 1879–1955
कार्ल यास्पर्स
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया ✓
Jaspers appended a study of Kant’s doctrine of ideas to his Psychology of Worldviews (1919) and took Kant’s limits of knowledge as the frame of his Philosophy (1932). K. Jaspers, Psychologie der Weltanschauungen (1919), appendix “Kants Ideenlehre”; Philosophie (1932); SEP “Karl Jaspers”
कार्ल यास्पर्स › 1883–1969
रुडोल्फ कार्नैप
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया ✓
Carnap kept a Kantian synthetic a priori for the topological structure of intuitive space (Der Raum, 1922); Friedman reads the Aufbau (1928) as recasting neo-Kantian constitution. R. Carnap, Der Raum (1922); Der logische Aufbau der Welt (1928); M. Friedman, Reconsidering Logical Positivism (1999); SEP “Rudolf Carnap”
रुडोल्फ कार्नैप › 1891–1970
वाल्टर बेन्यामीन
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया
In ‘On the Programme of the Coming Philosophy’ (1918) Benjamin kept Kant’s system as the frame but demanded a higher concept of experience that includes religious experience. W. Benjamin, “Über das Programm der kommenden Philosophie” (written 1917–18, printed 1963); SEP “Walter Benjamin”
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
वाल्टर बेन्यामीन › 1892–1940
लूचियन ब्लागा
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया
Blaga set unconscious ‘abyssal categories’ beside Kant’s categories of understanding (Horizon and Style, 1935) and engaged with Kant’s theory of knowledge in his Trilogy of Knowledge (1943). L. Blaga, Orizont și stil (1935); Trilogia cunoașterii (1943)
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
लूचियन ब्लागा › 1895–1961
मैक्स होर्कहाइमर
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया
Horkheimer took his doctorate (1922) and habilitation (1925) under Hans Cornelius with studies of Kant’s Critique of Judgement as the link between theoretical and practical philosophy. M. Horkheimer, Zur Antinomie der teleologischen Urteilskraft (1922); Über Kants Kritik der Urteilskraft als Bindeglied zwischen theoretischer und praktischer Philosophie (1925)
साक्ष्य: InPhO में भी · InPhO
मैक्स होर्कहाइमर › 1895–1973
ज़ाँ प्याज़े
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया ✓
Piaget kept Kant’s necessary categories but held that they are constructed in development, not given, a position he described as a dynamic Kantianism (Introduction à l’épistémologie génétique, 1950). J. Piaget, Introduction à l’épistémologie génétique (1950); Sagesse et illusions de la philosophie (1965)
साक्ष्य: Wikidata में भी · Wikidata
ज़ाँ प्याज़े › 1896–1980
कार्ल पॉपर
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया
Popper called demarcation ‘Kant’s problem’ and reinterpreted Kant’s claim that the intellect prescribes its laws to nature: we propose conjectures, which nature may defeat (Conjectures and Refutations, 1963). K. R. Popper, Logik der Forschung (1934); “Kant’s Critique and Cosmology” (1954), in Conjectures and Refutations (1963); SEP “Karl Popper”
साक्ष्य: InPhO में भी · InPhO
कार्ल पॉपर › 1902–1994
थियोडोर डब्ल्यू. एडोर्नो
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया ✓
Adorno lectured on Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason (1959) and devoted the model on freedom in Negative Dialectics (1966) to a metacritique of Kant’s practical reason. T. W. Adorno, Kants „Kritik der reinen Vernunft“ (lectures 1959, publ. 1995); Negative Dialektik (1966), “Freiheit. Zur Metakritik der praktischen Vernunft”
थियोडोर डब्ल्यू. एडोर्नो › 1903–1969
हांस योनास
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया
Jonas recast Kant’s imperative for technology: ‘act so that the effects of your action are compatible with the permanence of genuine human life’ (Das Prinzip Verantwortung, 1979). H. Jonas, Das Prinzip Verantwortung (1979)
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
हांस योनास › 1903–1993
ज्यां-पाल सार्त्र
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया
Sartre agreed with Kant that freedom wills its own and others’ freedom, but held formal, universal principles too abstract to define action (L’existentialisme est un humanisme, 1946). J.-P. Sartre, L’existentialisme est un humanisme (lecture 1945, publ. 1946)
साक्ष्य: InPhO में भी · InPhO
ज्यां-पाल सार्त्र › 1905–1980
हाना आरंट
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया ✓
Arendt read Kant’s judgement of taste, with its ‘enlarged mentality’, as the model of political judgement (Lectures on Kant’s Political Philosophy, given 1970, publ. 1982). H. Arendt, Lectures on Kant’s Political Philosophy, ed. R. Beiner (1982); I. Kant, Kritik der Urteilskraft (1790); SEP “Hannah Arendt”
हाना आरंट › 1906–1975
नोरबेर्तो बोब्बियो
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया
Bobbio studied Kant’s philosophy of law (1957) and took Kant’s ‘sign of history’ in the French Revolution as evidence of progress in rights (L’età dei diritti, 1990). N. Bobbio, Diritto e stato nel pensiero di Emanuele Kant (1957); L’età dei diritti (1990); I. Kant, Der Streit der Fakultäten (1798)
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
नोरबेर्तो बोब्बियो › 1909–2004
मोउ ज़ोंगसान
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया
Mou Zongsan, who translated Kant’s three Critiques, kept Kant’s framework but argued that moral experience grants humans intellectual intuition (Intellectual Intuition and Chinese Philosophy, 1971). Mou Zongsan, Zhi de zhijue yu Zhongguo zhexue (1971); Xianxiang yu wu zishen (1975); IEP “Mou Zongsan”
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
मोउ ज़ोंगसान › 1909–1995
विल्फ्रिड सेलर्स
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया
Sellars took up Kant’s distinction between sensibility and understanding for his account of sensory and conceptual elements in perception (Science and Metaphysics: Variations on Kantian Themes, 1968). W. Sellars, Science and Metaphysics: Variations on Kantian Themes (John Locke Lectures 1965–66; publ. 1968); SEP “Wilfrid Sellars”
साक्ष्य: InPhO में भी · InPhO
विल्फ्रिड सेलर्स › 1912–1989
आर. एम. हेयर
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया
Hare built his universal prescriptivism on Kant’s universalizability and argued that Kant’s test leads to utilitarian results (Freedom and Reason, 1963; ‘Could Kant Have Been a Utilitarian?’, 1993). R. M. Hare, Freedom and Reason (1963); Moral Thinking (1981); “Could Kant Have Been a Utilitarian?”, Utilitas 5 (1993); SEP “Richard Mervyn Hare”
साक्ष्य: InPhO में भी · InPhO
आर. एम. हेयर › 1919–2002
पी. एफ़. स्ट्रॉसन
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया
Strawson reconstructed the analytic core of Kant’s Critique – the conditions of any experience intelligible to us – while rejecting transcendental idealism (The Bounds of Sense, 1966). P. F. Strawson, The Bounds of Sense (1966); Individuals (1959); SEP “Peter Frederick Strawson”
साक्ष्य: InPhO में भी · InPhO
पी. एफ़. स्ट्रॉसन › 1919–2006
जॉन राल्स
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया ✓
Rawls read the original position of justice as fairness as a procedural expression of Kant’s autonomy (A Theory of Justice, 1971; ‘Kantian Constructivism in Moral Theory’, 1980). J. Rawls, A Theory of Justice (1971); “Kantian Constructivism in Moral Theory”, Journal of Philosophy 77 (1980); SEP “John Rawls”
जॉन राल्स › 1921–2002
ज़ाँ-फ़्रांस्वा ल्योतार
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया
Lyotard took from Kant the heterogeneity of the faculties and the sublime as presentation of the unpresentable (Le différend, 1983; Leçons sur l’Analytique du sublime, 1991). J.-F. Lyotard, Le différend (1983); L’enthousiasme. La critique kantienne de l’histoire (1986); Leçons sur l’Analytique du sublime (1991); SEP “Jean François Lyotard”
साक्ष्य: InPhO में भी · InPhO
ज़ाँ-फ़्रांस्वा ल्योतार › 1924–1998
गिल्लेस देलयूज़े
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया ✓
Deleuze read Kant’s doctrine of the faculties and their discordant accord in the sublime (La philosophie critique de Kant, 1963) and recast transcendental philosophy as ‘transcendental empiricism’ (1968). G. Deleuze, La philosophie critique de Kant (1963); “L’idée de genèse dans l’esthétique de Kant” (1963); Différence et répétition (1968); SEP “Gilles Deleuze”
गिल्लेस देलयूज़े › 1925–1995
ली ज़ेहोउ
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया
In Critique of Critical Philosophy (1979) Li Zehou read Kant’s a priori forms of knowledge and morality as products of collective practice, calling this process ‘sedimentation’. Li Zehou, Pipan zhexue de pipan: Kangde shuping (1979), Eng. A New Approach to Kant (2018); J. S. Rošker, Following His Own Path: Li Zehou and Contemporary Chinese Philosophy (2019)
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
ली ज़ेहोउ › 1930–2021
सादिक़ जलाल अल-अज़्म
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया
Al-Azm took his doctorate at Yale on Kant and wrote Kant’s Theory of Time (1967) and The Origins of Kant’s Arguments in the Antinomies (1972). S. J. al-Azm, Kant’s Theory of Time (1967); The Origins of Kant’s Arguments in the Antinomies (Oxford, 1972)
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
सादिक़ जलाल अल-अज़्म › 1934–2016
रॉबर्ट नॉजिक
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया
Nozick grounded his side constraints in Kant’s principle that individuals are ends and not merely means, ruling out sacrificing some for others (Anarchy, State, and Utopia, 1974). R. Nozick, Anarchy, State, and Utopia (1974); SEP “Libertarianism”
साक्ष्य: InPhO में भी · InPhO
रॉबर्ट नॉजिक › 1938–2002
कारातानी कोजिन
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया
In Transcritique (2001) Karatani read Kant’s critique as a movement between perspectives, a ‘pronounced parallax’, and the realm of ends as a task for associations. Karatani Kōjin, Toransukuritīku (2001), tr. S. Kohso, Transcritique: On Kant and Marx (2003)
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
कारातानी कोजिन › जन्म 1941
ओनोरा ओ’नील
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया
O’Neill read Kant as a constructivist: moral principles are those all could adopt, not derived from a prior good (Constructions of Reason, 1989; Towards Justice and Virtue, 1996). O. O’Neill, Constructions of Reason (1989); Towards Justice and Virtue (1996)
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
ओनोरा ओ’नील › जन्म 1941
स्लावोय झ़िझ़ेक
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया ✓
Žižek read Kant’s paralogisms, in which the subject cannot know itself as a substance, as anticipating Lacan’s empty subject (Tarrying with the Negative, 1993). S. Žižek, Tarrying with the Negative: Kant, Hegel, and the Critique of Ideology (1993)
स्लावोय झ़िझ़ेक › जन्म 1949
सेला बेनहबीब
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया
Benhabib took Kant’s cosmopolitan right of hospitality as the starting point for her account of the rights of migrants and refugees (The Rights of Others, 2004). S. Benhabib, The Rights of Others: Aliens, Residents, and Citizens (2004); Another Cosmopolitanism (2006); I. Kant, Zum ewigen Frieden (1795)
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
सेला बेनहबीब › जन्म 1950
क्रिस्टीन कोर्सगार्ड
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया
Korsgaard derived normativity from Kant’s reflective agent, who cannot act without some practical identity and so must value humanity itself (The Sources of Normativity, 1996). C. M. Korsgaard, The Sources of Normativity (Tanner Lectures 1992; publ. 1996); Creating the Kingdom of Ends (1996)
साक्ष्य: InPhO में भी · InPhO
क्रिस्टीन कोर्सगार्ड › जन्म 1952
क्वामे एंथनी अप्पिया
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया
Appiah counted Kant’s proposal of a league of nations (Perpetual Peace, 1795) among the Enlightenment sources of his cosmopolitanism of universal concern and respect for difference (Cosmopolitanism, 2006). K. A. Appiah, Cosmopolitanism: Ethics in a World of Strangers (2006); I. Kant, Zum ewigen Frieden (1795)
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
क्वामे एंथनी अप्पिया › जन्म 1954
लुचियानो फ़्लोरिडी
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया
Floridi gave his constructionism a Kantian shape: things in themselves remain unknowable, and we know systems through models at chosen levels of abstraction (The Philosophy of Information, 2011). L. Floridi, “The Method of Levels of Abstraction”, Minds and Machines 18 (2008); The Philosophy of Information (2011)
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
लुचियानो फ़्लोरिडी › जन्म 1964
राइनर फ़ोर्स्ट
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया
Forst grounded his theory of justice in a Kantian, reflexive ‘right to justification’ that each person holds as a moral agent (Das Recht auf Rechtfertigung, 2007). R. Forst, Das Recht auf Rechtfertigung. Elemente einer konstruktivistischen Theorie der Gerechtigkeit (2007)
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
राइनर फ़ोर्स्ट › जन्म 1964
आलोचना
जिनके द्वारा आलोचित 26
योहान गॉटफ़्रीड हेर्डर जिन्हें पढ़ाया
जिन्हें पढ़ाया ✓
Herder studied at Königsberg from 1762 to 1764 and attended Kant’s lectures, among them those on metaphysics and moral philosophy; Kant gave him special privileges, and Herder’s notes on the metaphysics and ethics lectures are printed in the Academy edition. SEP “Johann Gottfried von Herder”; Kant, Gesammelte Schriften (Akademie-Ausgabe), vols. 27–28 (Herder’s lecture notes)
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
जिनके द्वारा आलोचित
Herder rejected dividing humanity into races, seeing only shades of one species (Ideas II, 1785), and in his Metacritique (1799) attacked Kant’s split of sensibility and understanding. J. G. Herder, Ideen zur Philosophie der Geschichte der Menschheit II (1785), book 7, ch. 1; Verstand und Erfahrung. Eine Metakritik zur Kritik der reinen Vernunft (1799); SEP “Johann Gottfried von Herder”
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
योहान गॉटफ़्रीड हेर्डर › 1744–1803
गेऑर्ग विल्हेल्म फ़्रीडरिश हेगल जिन्हें प्रभावित किया
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया ✓
Hegel took from Kant’s antinomies the insight that contradiction belongs to reason itself, and from the unity of apperception his concept of the concept (Science of Logic, 1812–16). G. W. F. Hegel, Wissenschaft der Logik (1812–16), “Vom Begriff im Allgemeinen”; SEP “Hegel”
जिनके द्वारा आलोचित
Hegel likened Kant’s critique of knowledge to learning to swim before entering the water and called his moral law empty formalism (Encyclopaedia §10; Philosophy of Right §135). G. W. F. Hegel, Enzyklopädie (1830), §10; Grundlinien der Philosophie des Rechts (1820), §135; SEP “Hegel”
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
गेऑर्ग विल्हेल्म फ़्रीडरिश हेगल › 1770–1831
अर्न्स्ट माक जिन्हें प्रभावित किया
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया
Mach recalled that Kant’s Prolegomena, read at fifteen, made a ‘powerful, indelible impression’ and turned him to the critique of knowledge (Beiträge zur Analyse der Empfindungen, 1886). E. Mach, Beiträge zur Analyse der Empfindungen (1886); SEP “Ernst Mach”
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
जिनके द्वारा आलोचित
Mach, who read Kant’s Prolegomena at fifteen, came to see the thing in itself as playing an ‘idle role’: the world consists of elements such as sensations (1886). E. Mach, Die Analyse der Empfindungen (1886), ch. I, note; SEP “Ernst Mach”
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
अर्न्स्ट माक › 1838–1916
फ़्रीडरिश नीत्शे
जिनके द्वारा आलोचित
Nietzsche mocked Kant’s synthetic a priori, possible ‘by virtue of a faculty’, and called the categorical imperative a danger to life (Beyond Good and Evil §11; Antichrist §11). F. Nietzsche, Jenseits von Gut und Böse (1886), §11; Der Antichrist (1888), §11
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
फ़्रीडरिश नीत्शे › 1844–1900
गॉटलोब फ़्रेगे जिन्हें प्रभावित किया
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया
Frege kept Kant’s view that geometry rests on a priori intuition and recast his analytic–synthetic distinction as concerning how a truth is justified (Grundlagen der Arithmetik, 1884). G. Frege, Die Grundlagen der Arithmetik (1884); SEP “Gottlob Frege”
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
जिनके द्वारा आलोचित
Frege argued against Kant that arithmetic is analytic, not synthetic a priori, and that Kant underestimated analytic judgements; geometry he left to intuition (Grundlagen der Arithmetik, 1884). G. Frege, Die Grundlagen der Arithmetik (1884), §§ 5, 12–13, 88–90
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
गॉटलोब फ़्रेगे › 1848–1925
टॉम रीगन जिन्हें प्रभावित किया
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया
Regan extended Kant’s principle of respect – never to treat someone merely as a means – to all ‘subjects-of-a-life’ with inherent value (The Case for Animal Rights, 1983). T. Regan, The Case for Animal Rights (1983); SEP “The Moral Status of Animals”
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
जिनके द्वारा आलोचित
Regan rejected Kant’s view that we have only indirect duties concerning animals: beings with inherent value are owed direct duties of respect (The Case for Animal Rights, 1983). T. Regan, The Case for Animal Rights (1983), ch. 5 (indirect duty views); I. Kant, Lectures on Ethics (Collins), “Of Duties towards Animals and Spirits”
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
टॉम रीगन › 1938–2017
सभी दिखाएँ (26)कम दिखाएँ
फ़्रीडरिश हाइनरिष याकोबी
जिनके द्वारा आलोचित
Jacobi objected that without the thing in itself one cannot enter Kant’s system, and with it one cannot remain inside (David Hume on Faith, 1787, appendix). F. H. Jacobi, David Hume über den Glauben (1787), appendix “Über den transzendentalen Idealismus”; SEP “Friedrich Heinrich Jacobi”
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
फ़्रीडरिश हाइनरिष याकोबी › 1743–1819
बेरनार्ड बोल्त्सानो
जिनके द्वारा आलोचित
Bolzano rejected Kant’s grounding of mathematics in pure intuitions of space and time and sought proofs from concepts alone (Beyträge zu einer begründeteren Darstellung der Mathematik, 1810). B. Bolzano, Beyträge zu einer begründeteren Darstellung der Mathematik (1810), appendix “Über die Kantische Lehre von der Construction der Begriffe durch Anschauungen”; Wissenschaftslehre (1837); SEP “Bernard Bolzano”
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
बेरनार्ड बोल्त्सानो › 1781–1848
अंतोनियो रोस्मिनी
जिनके द्वारा आलोचित
Rosmini held against Kant that the a priori is not a set of subjective forms but the single, objective idea of being (Nuovo saggio sull’origine delle idee, 1830). A. Rosmini, Nuovo saggio sull’origine delle idee (1830)
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
अंतोनियो रोस्मिनी › 1797–1855
जॉन स्टुअर्ट मिल
जिनके द्वारा आलोचित
Mill argued that when Kant derives actual duties from the categorical imperative he shows no contradiction, only consequences no one would choose (Utilitarianism, 1861, ch. 1). J. S. Mill, Utilitarianism (1861), ch. 1; ch. 5
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
जॉन स्टुअर्ट मिल › 1806–1873
फ़्रीडरिश एंगल्स
जिनके द्वारा आलोचित
Engels held that practice, experiment and industry refute Kant’s unknowable thing-in-itself: once chemistry produces alizarin, the thing-in-itself becomes a thing for us (Ludwig Feuerbach, 1886). F. Engels, Ludwig Feuerbach und der Ausgang der klassischen deutschen Philosophie (1886), part II
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
फ़्रीडरिश एंगल्स › 1820–1895
आँरी बेर्गसोन
जिनके द्वारा आलोचित
Bergson objected that Kant took time for a homogeneous medium like space and so had to banish freedom to a timeless noumenal realm (Time and Free Will, 1889). H. Bergson, Essai sur les données immédiates de la conscience (1889), Conclusion; SEP “Henri Bergson”
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
आँरी बेर्गसोन › 1859–1941
मैक्स शेलर
जिनके द्वारा आलोचित
Scheler rejected Kant’s formal ethics, holding that a priori values are given in feeling and ground a material ethics of value (Der Formalismus in der Ethik, 1913–16). M. Scheler, Der Formalismus in der Ethik und die materiale Wertethik (1913–16); SEP “Max Scheler”
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
मैक्स शेलर › 1874–1928
जॉर्ज लुकाच
जिनके द्वारा आलोचित
Lukács read Kant’s unknowable thing-in-itself and the split between form and content as antinomies of bourgeois thought rooted in reification (History and Class Consciousness, 1923). G. Lukács, Geschichte und Klassenbewußtsein (1923), “Die Verdinglichung und das Bewußtsein des Proletariats”, part II
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
जॉर्ज लुकाच › 1885–1971
हान्स राइशनबाख
जिनके द्वारा आलोचित
Reichenbach argued that relativity theory is incompatible with Kant’s synthetic a priori of Euclidean space, keeping only a revisable, constitutive a priori (Relativitätstheorie und Erkenntnis apriori, 1920). H. Reichenbach, Relativitätstheorie und Erkenntnis apriori (1920); SEP “Hans Reichenbach”
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
हान्स राइशनबाख › 1891–1953
नॉरबर्ट एलियास
जिनके द्वारा आलोचित
Elias rejected Kant’s timeless a priori categories, arguing that concepts such as time and causality are learned and developed socially over generations (Über die Zeit, 1984). N. Elias, Über die Zeit (1984); on his dissertation dispute with R. Hönigswald: Notizen zum Lebenslauf (1984)
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
नॉरबर्ट एलियास › 1897–1990
हंस-गेऑर्ग गादामर
जिनके द्वारा आलोचित
Gadamer argued that Kant’s Critique of Judgement subjectivised aesthetics and so cut art off from the question of truth (Truth and Method, 1960). H.-G. Gadamer, Wahrheit und Methode (1960), part I (“Die Subjektivierung der Ästhetik durch die Kantische Kritik”)
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
हंस-गेऑर्ग गादामर › 1900–2002
मोरिस मर्लो-पोंती
जिनके द्वारा आलोचित
Merleau-Ponty objected that Kant’s reflective analysis makes the world the work of a constituting intellect and passes over perception lived through the body (Phénoménologie de la perception, 1945). M. Merleau-Ponty, Phénoménologie de la perception (1945), preface and introduction (critique of ‘intellectualism’)
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
मोरिस मर्लो-पोंती › 1908–1961
जी. ई. एम. एन्सकॉम्ब
जिनके द्वारा आलोचित
Anscombe called Kant’s idea of legislating for oneself absurd and objected that universalisability is useless without a rule on relevant descriptions of an act (‘Modern Moral Philosophy’, 1958). G. E. M. Anscombe, “Modern Moral Philosophy”, Philosophy 33 (1958), 1–19
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
जी. ई. एम. एन्सकॉम्ब › 1919–2001
एलास्डेयर मैकिन्टायर
जिनके द्वारा आलोचित
MacIntyre argued that Kant’s attempt to ground morality in pure practical reason fails: universalisability lets through trivial and immoral maxims alike (After Virtue, 1981, chs. 4–5). A. MacIntyre, After Virtue (1981), chs. 4–5; A Short History of Ethics (1966)
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
एलास्डेयर मैकिन्टायर › 1929–2025
बर्नार्ड विलियम्स
जिनके द्वारा आलोचित
Williams objected that Kantian impartiality alienates agents from their attachments: a husband rescuing his wife on impartial grounds has ‘one thought too many’ (‘Persons, Character and Morality’, 1976). B. Williams, “Persons, Character and Morality” (1976), in Moral Luck (1981); Ethics and the Limits of Philosophy (1985), ch. 10
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
बर्नार्ड विलियम्स › 1929–2003
रिचर्ड रोर्टी
जिनके द्वारा आलोचित
Rorty held that Kant turned philosophy into a tribunal of pure reason and made epistemology the foundation of culture (Philosophy and the Mirror of Nature, 1979, ch. 3). R. Rorty, Philosophy and the Mirror of Nature (1979), Introduction, ch. 3
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
रिचर्ड रोर्टी › 1931–2007
वॉल्टर मिन्योलो
जिनके द्वारा आलोचित
In “The Many Faces of Cosmo-polis” (2000) Mignolo read Kant’s cosmopolitanism as a global design from the centre of colonial power and set against it a “critical cosmopolitanism” grounded in border thinking. W. D. Mignolo, “The Many Faces of Cosmo-polis: Border Thinking and Critical Cosmopolitanism”, Public Culture 12:3 (2000), 721–748
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
वॉल्टर मिन्योलो › जन्म 1941
ब्रूनो लातूर
जिनके द्वारा आलोचित
Latour read Kant’s split between things in themselves and the knowing subject as the moderns’ model ‘purification’ separating nature from society (We Have Never Been Modern, 1991). B. Latour, Nous n’avons jamais été modernes (1991)
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
ब्रूनो लातूर › 1947–2022
चार्ल्स डब्ल्यू. मिल्स
जिनके द्वारा आलोचित
Mills argued that Kant’s theory of personhood, read together with his racial theory, in practice treated non-whites as ‘sub-persons’ (‘Kant’s Untermenschen’, 2005). C. W. Mills, “Kant’s Untermenschen”, in A. Valls (ed.), Race and Racism in Modern Philosophy (2005); Black Rights/White Wrongs (2017)
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
चार्ल्स डब्ल्यू. मिल्स › 1951–2021
माइकल सैंडेल
जिनके द्वारा आलोचित
Sandel criticised the Kantian self prior to its ends, the basis of deontological liberalism, as an ‘unencumbered self’ (‘The Procedural Republic and the Unencumbered Self’, 1984). M. J. Sandel, “The Procedural Republic and the Unencumbered Self”, Political Theory 12 (1984); Liberalism and the Limits of Justice (1982)
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
माइकल सैंडेल › जन्म 1953
जिनकी आलोचना की 15
रने देकार्त
जिनकी आलोचना की
Kant rejected Descartes’ inference from ‘I think’ to a simple thinking substance (Paralogisms) and argued that inner experience presupposes outer objects (Refutation of Idealism, B 274–279). I. Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, A 341–405 / B 399–432 (Paralogisms); B 274–279 (Refutation of Idealism)
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
रने देकार्त › 1596–1650
जॉन लॉक
जिनकी आलोचना की
Kant objected that Locke derived the pure concepts of the understanding from experience, a ‘physiology’ of the understanding that cannot show their necessity (Critique of Pure Reason, 1781). I. Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, A ix; §§ 13–14 (B 118–119, B 127–128)
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
जॉन लॉक › 1632–1704
बारुख़ स्पिनोज़ा
जिनकी आलोचना की
Kant objected that Spinoza’s single substance turns the purposive unity of nature into mere inherence and cannot explain purposiveness (Critique of the Power of Judgment, 1790). I. Kant, Kritik der Urteilskraft (1790), §§ 72–73; Was heißt: sich im Denken orientieren? (1786)
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
बारुख़ स्पिनोज़ा › 1632–1677
गॉटफ़्रीड विल्हेल्म लाइबनित्स जिनसे प्रभावित
जिनसे प्रभावित ✓
Kant’s early works, such as the New Elucidation (1755), argued within Leibniz’s principles, and in 1790 he called the Critique ‘the genuine apology for Leibniz’. I. Kant, Principiorum primorum cognitionis metaphysicae nova dilucidatio (1755); Über eine Entdeckung, nach der alle neue Kritik der reinen Vernunft durch eine ältere entbehrlich gemacht werden soll (1790); SEP “Leibniz’s Influence on Kant”
जिनकी आलोचना की
Kant held that Leibniz ‘intellectualised the appearances’, taking sensibility for confused thought, and so misapplied the identity of indiscernibles (Critique of Pure Reason, A 263–264, A 271). I. Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, Amphiboly of the Concepts of Reflection, A 260–289 / B 316–346
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
गॉटफ़्रीड विल्हेल्म लाइबनित्स › 1646–1716
क्रिस्टियन वोल्फ़ जिनसे प्रभावित
जिनसे प्रभावित ✓
Kant learned metaphysics in the Wolffian school and taught from Baumgarten’s textbook; Wolff’s division into ontology, rational psychology, cosmology and theology structures the Critique of Pure Reason (1781). I. Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft (1781), Transcendental Dialectic; A. G. Baumgarten, Metaphysica (1739); SEP “Christian Wolff”
जिनकी आलोचना की
Kant praised Wolff as ‘the greatest of all dogmatic philosophers’ yet faulted his method for lacking a prior critique of reason’s capacity (Critique of Pure Reason, B xxxvi). I. Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft (1787), B xxxvi–xxxvii; A 44 / B 61–62
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
क्रिस्टियन वोल्फ़ › 1679–1754
डेविड ह्यूम जिनसे प्रभावित
जिनसे प्रभावित ✓
Kant generalised Hume’s question about cause and effect into the problem of how synthetic judgements a priori are possible (Critique of Pure Reason, 2nd ed. 1787, Introduction). I. Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft (2nd ed. 1787), Introduction; Prolegomena (1783); SEP “Kant and Hume on Causality”
जिनकी आलोचना की
Kant credited Hume with interrupting his dogmatic slumber but rejected deriving causality from habit, making it an a priori category (Prolegomena, 1783, Preface). I. Kant, Prolegomena (1783), Preface (AA IV 257–260); Kritik der reinen Vernunft, B 19–20, B 127–128
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
डेविड ह्यूम › 1711–1776
सभी दिखाएँ (15)कम दिखाएँ
लाओ-त्सू
जिनकी आलोचना की
In “The End of All Things” (1794) Kant named “the monstrous system of Lao-kiun”, whose highest good is said to consist in nothingness, as an example of a mysticism in which the person dissolves into the deity. Kant, Das Ende aller Dinge (1794), AA 8:335
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
लाओ-त्सू › किंवदंतियों से जुड़ा व्यक्तित्व
हुगो ग्रोटियस
जिनकी आलोचना की
Kant called Grotius, Pufendorf and Vattel ‘sorry comforters’: their law of nations has no binding force and is cited only to justify wars (Perpetual Peace, 1795). I. Kant, Zum ewigen Frieden (1795), Second Definitive Article (AA VIII 355)
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
हुगो ग्रोटियस › 1583–1645
निकोला मालब्रांश
जिनकी आलोचना की
Kant counted Malebranche’s continuing intuition of God among the deus ex machina answers to how concepts fit objects – ‘the greatest absurdity’ (letter to Marcus Herz, 1772). I. Kant, letter to Marcus Herz, 21 February 1772 (AA X 129–135)
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
निकोला मालब्रांश › 1638–1715
बर्नार्ड मैंडेविल
जिनकी आलोचना की
Kant listed Mandeville’s grounding of morality in the civil constitution among the material, heteronomous principles unfit to found moral law (Critique of Practical Reason, 1788, Ak. 5:40). I. Kant, Kritik der praktischen Vernunft (1788), §8, Remark II (AA V 40)
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
बर्नार्ड मैंडेविल › 1670–1733
जार्ज बर्कली
जिनकी आलोचना की
Kant set his transcendental idealism apart from Berkeley’s ‘dogmatic’ idealism, which he said degrades bodies to mere illusion (Critique of Pure Reason, 1787, B 71, B 274). I. Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft (1787), B 69–71, B 274; Prolegomena (1783), Appendix; SEP “Kant’s Transcendental Idealism”
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
जार्ज बर्कली › 1685–1753
इमानुएल स्वीडनबोर्ग
जिनकी आलोचना की
Kant likened Swedenborg’s visions of spirits to the dreams of speculative metaphysics: both claim knowledge of a spirit world no experience can confirm (Dreams of a Spirit-Seer, 1766). I. Kant, Träume eines Geistersehers, erläutert durch Träume der Metaphysik (1766)
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
इमानुएल स्वीडनबोर्ग › 1688–1772
एमिली दु शातले
जिनकी आलोचना की
In his first book (Living Forces, 1746/49) Kant discussed du Châtelet’s Leibnizian arguments for vis viva against Mairan and rejected parts of them. I. Kant, Gedanken von der wahren Schätzung der lebendigen Kräfte (1746/49), §§ 44, 57, 111 (AA I 55–56, 67, 124); R. Hagengruber (ed.), Emilie du Châtelet between Leibniz and Newton (2012)
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
एमिली दु शातले › 1706–1749
मोज़ेस मेंडेलसन
जिनकी आलोचना की
Kant rejected Mendelssohn’s proof of the soul’s immortality in Phaedon (1767): a simple soul could still fade away by degrees of intensity (Critique of Pure Reason, B 413–415). I. Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft (1787), B 413–415 (“Refutation of Mendelssohn’s Proof of the Permanence of the Soul”); M. Mendelssohn, Phädon (1767)
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
मोज़ेस मेंडेलसन › 1729–1786
शेजारे बेक्कारिया
जिनकी आलोचना की
Kant rejected Beccaria’s argument against the death penalty: one is punished not for having willed the punishment but for willing a punishable act (Doctrine of Right, 1797). I. Kant, Metaphysik der Sitten, Rechtslehre (1797), §49 E (AA VI 334–335); C. Beccaria, Dei delitti e delle pene (1764), §28
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
शेजारे बेक्कारिया › 1738–1794
कृतियाँ
संश्लेषणात्मक अनुभव-पूर्व निर्णय कैसे संभव हैं? ज्ञान की सीमाएँ।
साहस करो जानने का! अपनी समझ का उपयोग करने का साहस रखो।
निरपेक्ष आदेश और व्यक्ति की गरिमा।
मेरे ऊपर तारों भरा आकाश और मेरे भीतर नैतिक नियम।
सुंदर, उदात्त और प्रकृति की प्रयोजनशीलता।
- 1795शाश्वत शांति
गणतंत्र, राष्ट्रों का संघ, विश्वनागरिक अधिकार।
मत
Kant sought to settle the conflict between rationalism and empiricism by asking what reason can know at all. His “Copernican turn” holds that objects conform to our cognition: space and time are forms of our intuition, and categories such as causality are concepts of our understanding. We therefore know things only as they appear to us, never as they are in themselves, and metaphysics cannot prove God, freedom or immortality. In morality, practical reason gives itself the law: the categorical imperative bids us act only on maxims we could will as universal laws and to treat persons always as ends. Kant shaped all subsequent philosophy, from idealism to analytic thought. His writings on human “races” (1775, 1785) and his lectures on anthropology ranked white Europeans above other peoples and made disparaging claims about women; whether his later critique of colonialism in Perpetual Peace (1795) amounts to a revision is debated.
जीवन और संदर्भ
Born in Königsberg, East Prussia, in 1724, Kant grew up in a modest Pietist household and spent his entire life in and around his home city. After long years as a private lecturer he became professor of logic and metaphysics in 1770. Following a “silent decade” he published the Critique of Pure Reason in 1781, followed by a series of major works. He died in Königsberg in 1804.
अन्य प्रमुख कृतियाँ
- Critique of Pure Reason (1781)
- Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals (1785)
- Critique of Practical Reason (1788)
- Critique of Judgment (1790)
- Perpetual Peace (1795)
इनमें आता है
- यात्रा ‘संदेह और आत्म’ · 10 में से पड़ाव 6
- बहस ‘पशु और औद्योगिक पशुपालन’
- बहस ‘पशुओं के लिए अधिकार?’
- बहस ‘पशुओं पर प्रयोग’
- बहस ‘क्या हम स्वतंत्र हैं? तंत्रिका-विज्ञान के युग में स्वतंत्र इच्छा’
- बहस ‘युद्ध और शांति: सशस्त्र बल कब उचित है?’
- बहस ‘खुली या बंद सीमाएँ? प्रवासन की नैतिकता’
- बहस ‘मरने का अधिकार? मृत्यु में सहायता’
- बहस ‘लाइबनित्स और क्लार्क: दिक्, काल और ईश्वर पर’
नवंबर 2026 तक · स्रोत · इस पृष्ठ को बेहतर बनाएँ · Agora कैसे बना है