Zusammenfassung
In the paper I discuss Kant’s justification for judging organized beings (or organisms) in teleological terms, through the concept of the “end” or “natural end”. Nowadays there are different answers to this question. For instance, from the perspective of what I call the “objective point of view”, organized beings have some objective characteristics that justify us having to comprehend them teleologically, while from that of what I call the “ordinary subjective viewpoint”, we must do so only on account of the discursive character of our understanding. I argue that both positions are, for different reasons that I outline, misleading, and I offer my own answer, a refined subjective position. By means of the distinction between the “essential character” of our understanding, on the one hand, and its “limits”, on the other, I hope to give a consistent answer to the question why organized beings must be judged teleologically and one that is well-supported in the sources.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsPreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Literatur
Driesch, Hans (1924). “Kant und das Ganze”. Kantstudien. 29 B, II, pp. 365-376.
Düsing, Klaus (1968). Die Teleologie in Kants Weltbegriff. Kantstudien. Bonn: H. Bouvier u. Co. Verlag.
Ewing, Alfred Cyril (1924). Kant’s Treatment of Causality. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
Förster, Eckart (2008). “Von der Eigentümlichkeit unseres Verstandes in Ansehung der Urteilskraft (§§ 74–78)”. In Immanuel Kant. Kritik der Urteilskraft. hrsg. Otfried Höffe: 259–274. Berlin: Akademie Verlag.
Förster, Eckart (2012). The Twenty-Five Years of Philosophy. A Systematic Reconstruction. Trans. by B. Bowman. Cambridge/London: The Harvard University Press.
Fugate, Courney D. (2014). The Teleology of Reason. A study of the Structure of Kant’s Critical Philosophy. Berlin/Boston: De Gruyter.
Ginsborg, Hannah (2001). “Kant on Understanding Organisms as Natural Purposes”. In Kant and the Sciences hrsg. Watkins, Eric. New York: Oxford University Press.
Ginsborg, Hannah (2004). “Two Kinds of Mechanical Inexplicability in Kant and Aristotle”. Journal of the History of Philosophy. 42. 33–65.
Goy, Ina (2017). Kants Theorie der Biologie. Ein Kommentar. Eine Lesart. Eine historische Einordnung. Berlin/Boston: De Gruyter.
Kant, Immanuel (1902ss). Gesammelte Schriften. Berlin et alia: Hrsg. von der Königlich/ Preussischen Akademie der Wissenschaften. [I have used the following translations into English: Critique of Pure Reason (2000 [1998]). Trans. and Ed. by Paul Guyer and Allen Wood. New York: Cambridge University Press; Prolegomena to any Future Metaphysics (2004 [1997]). Ed. and Trans. by Gary Hatfield. New York: Cambridge University Press; Critique of the Power of Judgment (2002). Ed. by Paul Guyer, Trans. by Paul Guyer and Eric Matthews. New York: Cambridge University Press; Lectures on Logic (1992). Ed. and Trans. by Michael Young. New York: Cambridge University Press].
Lebrun, Gérard (1970). Kant et la fin de la métaphysique. Essai sur la Critique de la faculté de jugar. Paris: Armand Colin.
Lerussi, Natalia (2011). “Sobre la justificación para introducir el concepto de ‚fin natural‘ (Naturzweck) en la investigación de la naturaleza según la Kritik der Urteilskraft”. Kant e-Print. International Journal. 6, 1, pp. 62-92.
McLaughlin, Peter (1989). Kants Kritik der teleologischen Urteilskraft. Bonn: Bouvier Verlag.
Pauen, Michael (1999). “Teleologie und Geschichte in der Kritik der Urteilskraft”. In Aufklärung und Interpretation hrsg. Heiner Klemme, Bernd Ludwig und andere. Würzburg: Königshausen & Neumann.
Peter, Joachim (1992). Das transzendentale Prinzip der Urteilskraft. Eine Untersuchung zur Funktion und Struktur der reflektierenden Urteilskraft bei Kant. Berlin/New York: Walter de Gruyter.
Rivera de Rosales, Jacinto (1998). Kant: La “Crítica del juicio teleológico” y la corporeidad del sujeto. Madrid: Universidad Nacional de Educación a Distancia.
Schrader, George (1953/1954). “The Status of Teleological Judgment in the Critical Philosophy”. Kantstudien. 45, pp. 204-235.
Ungerer, Emil (1922). Die Teleologie Kants und ihre Bedeutung für die Logik der Biologie. Berlin: Verlag von Gebrüder Borntraeger.
Zuckert, Rachel (2007). Kant on Beauty and Biology. An Interpretation of the Critique of Judgment. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2019 Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden GmbH, ein Teil von Springer Nature
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Lerussi, N. (2019). Why must Organized Beings be Judged in Teleological Terms?. In: Órdenes, P., Pickhan, A. (eds) Teleologische Reflexion in Kants Philosophie. Springer VS, Wiesbaden. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-23694-6_12
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-23694-6_12
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer VS, Wiesbaden
Print ISBN: 978-3-658-23693-9
Online ISBN: 978-3-658-23694-6
eBook Packages: Social Science and Law (German Language)