Skip to main content

Kant, Real Possibility, and the Threat of Spinoza

Author(s): Chignell, Andrew

Download
To refer to this page use: http://arks.princeton.edu/ark:/88435/pr1x34mr32
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorChignell, Andrew-
dc.date.accessioned2022-01-25T14:49:33Z-
dc.date.available2022-01-25T14:49:33Z-
dc.date.issued2012-07en_US
dc.identifier.citationChignell, Andrew. "Kant, Real Possibility, and the Threat of Spinoza." Mind 121, no. 483 (2012): 635-675.en_US
dc.identifier.issn0026-4423-
dc.identifier.urihttp://arks.princeton.edu/ark:/88435/pr1x34mr32-
dc.description.abstractIn the first part of the paper I reconstruct Kant’s proof of the existence of a ‘most real being’ while also highlighting the theory of modality that motivates Kant’s departure from Leibniz’s version of the proof. I go on to argue that it is precisely this departure that makes the being that falls out of the pre-critical proof look more like Spinoza’s extended natura naturans than an independent, personal creator-God. In the critical period, Kant seems to think that transcendental idealism allows him to avoid this conclusion, but in the last section of the paper I argue that there is still one important version of the Spinozistic threat that remains.en_US
dc.format.extent635 - 675en_US
dc.languageEnglishen_US
dc.language.isoen_USen_US
dc.relation.ispartofMinden_US
dc.rightsFinal published version. This is an open access article.en_US
dc.titleKant, Real Possibility, and the Threat of Spinozaen_US
dc.typeJournal Articleen_US
dc.identifier.doidoi:10.1093/mind/fzs079-
pu.type.symplectichttp://www.symplectic.co.uk/publications/atom-terms/1.0/journal-articleen_US

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
KantRealPossibility.pdf202.43 kBAdobe PDFView/Download


Items in OAR@Princeton are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.