Search
Submit an article RU
Kantian Journal

2026 Vol. 45. №1

Back to the list Download the article
ENG
Сохранить XML для: JATS (вып.)
RUS
Сохранить XML для: JATS (вып.)
Kornilaev L. Yu.

Discussions on Subjectivity / Objectivity of Space and Time According to Kant: Main Approaches

DOI
10.5922/0207-6918-2026-1-3
Pages
59-77
space time Kant transcendental aesthetics empirical realism

Abstract

Space and time may be seen either as independent entities, as properties of things or as properties inherent in the subject. Kant, of course, maintains that space and time have a subjective character: he rules out their objective reality, which leads to a substantial separation of the cognising subject and the reality being cognised. This approach to the definition of the ontological and epistemological statuses of space and time is often criticised in the studies of Kantian philosophy. Attempts are made to clarify the objective side of cognition and the exclusiveness of the subjectivistic conception of space and time is problematised, leading to interpretations that try, along with subjectivity, to reconstruct the objective component in Kant’s understanding of space and time. This article purports to summarise and systematise the approaches which stress the ambivalence of Kant’s conception of space and time. The study identifies the following main approaches to the problem of the relation between subjectivity and objectivity of space and time in Kant’s philosophy: 1) the approach which claims that space and time in Kant’s philosophy are subjective only in the epistemological sense whereas ontologically they have objective reality; 2) the position which interprets subjectivity and objectivity of space and time in the context of the Kantian distinction between transcendental idealism and empirical realism; 3) the interpretation which stresses subjectivity as objective validity; 4) the subjective-objective understanding of space and time. I arrive at the conclusion that subjective-objective interpretations of the Kantian doctrine of space and time are mainly based on the problematisation of the concept of subjectivity, which is manifested in the broadening or, on the contrary, the narrowing of the concept of subjectivity, making it more complex and hierarchical, establishing a link between this concept and the concept of empirical reality and the concept of general validity.

Reference

Abela, P., 1996. Putnam’s Internal Realism and Kant’s Empirical Realism: The Case for a Divorce. Idealistic study, 26(1), pp. 45-56.

Abela, P., 2002. Kant’s Empirical Realism. New York: Oxford University Press.

Allais, L., 2015. Manifest Reality. Kant’s Idealism and his Realism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Allison, H., 1996. Idealism and Freedom: Essays on Kant’s Theoretical and Practical Philosophy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Asmus, V. F., 1973. Immanuil Kant [Immanuel Kant]. Moscow: Nauka. (In Rus.)

Brinkmann, K., 2011. Idealism Without Limits: Hegel and the Problem of Objectivity. Boston: Springer Netherlands.

Chaplin, R., 2022. Kant on the Givenness of Space and Time. European Journal of Philosophy, 30(3), pp. 877-898. https://doi.org/10.1111/ejop.12817.

Demin, M. R., 2010. The Right to Kant: On the Dispute between Adolf Trendelenburg and Kuno Fischer. In: I. N. Griftsova and N. A. Dmitrieva, eds. 2010. Neokantianstvo nemetskoe i russkoe: mezhdu teoriei poznaniya i kritikoi kul’tury [German and Russian Neo-Kantianism: Between Theory of Cognition and Critique of Culture]. Moscow: Rossiiskaya politicheskaya entsiklopediya (ROSSPEN), pp. 66-85. (In Rus.)

Heidemann, D., 2021. Kant and the Forms of Realism. Synthese, 198, Suppl 13, pp. 3231-3252. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-019-02502-4.

Kant, I., 1998. Critique of Pure Reason. Edited by P. Guyer and A. Wood. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Kant, I., 2004. Metaphysical Foundations of Natural Science. Edited by K. Americks and D. Clark. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Kılınç, B., 2008. Concepts of Objectivity in Kant. In: V. Rohden, R. R. Terra, G.A. de Almeida and M. Ruffing, eds. 2008. Recht und Frieden in der Philosophie Kants: Akten des X. Internationalen Kant-Kongresses. Berlin & New York: De Gruyter, pp. 363-374. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110210347.2.363.

Lega, V. P., 2009. Istoriya zapadnoi filosofii. Chast’ vtoraya. Novoe vremya. Sovremennaya zapadnaya filosofiya: uchebnoe posobie [The History of Western Philosophy. Part Two. The Modern Era. Contemporary Western Philosophy: A Textbook]. Moscow: PSTGU Press. (In Rus.)

Martić, M., 2022. Zeit und Raum. Eine Untersuchung zur Entwicklung der Zeit- und Raumlehre bei Immanuel Kant. Berlin & Boston: De Gruyter.

Melnick, A., 1989. Space, Time, and Thought in Kant. Dordrecht, Boston & London: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

Oizerman, T. I., 2009. Kantian Conception of Space and Time. Kantian Journal, 29(1), pp. 7-18. (In Rus.)

Razeev, D. N., 2010. Teleologiya I. Kanta [I. Kant’s Teleology]. Saint-Petersburg: Nauka. (In Rus.)

Schrader, G., 1951. The Transcendental Ideality and Empirical Reality of Kant’s Space and Time. The Review of Metaphysics, 4(4), pp. 507-536.

Semenov, V. E., 2022. I. Kant’s Copernican Revolution and the Theory of Experience. Studies in Transcendental Philosophy, 3(1-2). http://dx.doi.org/10.18254/S271326680020910-1 (Accessed 1 April 2025). (In Rus.)

Trendelenburg, A., 1862. Logische Untersuchungen. Second Edition. Volume 1. Leipzig: S. Hirzel.

Trendelenburg, A., 1867. Über eine Lücke in Kants Beweis von der ausschließenden Subjektivität des Raumes und Zeit. Historische Beiträge zur Philosophie. Volume 3. Berlin: G. Bethge, pp. 215-276.

Tusсhling, B., 2006. Nachwort der deutschen Herausgeber. In: I. Kant, 2006. Werke. Zweisprachige deutsch-russische Ausgabe. Volume 2, Part 2: Kritik der reinen Vernunft. Moscow: Nauka, pp. 509-574. (In Rus.)

Vaihinger, H., 1922. Kommentar zu Kants Kritik der reinen Vernunft. Stuttgart: Union deutsche Verlagsgesellschaft.

Vvedensky, A. I., 1895a. Kant’s Doctrine of Space (Explanation and Criticism). Bogoslovskiy vestnik [Theological Bulletin], 2(6), pp 390-404. (In Rus.)

Vvedensky, A. I., 1895b. Kant’s Doctrine of Space (Explanation and Criticism). Bogoslovskiy vestnik [Theological Bulletin], 3(7), pp 73-102. (In Rus.)

Vvedensky, A. I. and Rozhin, D. O., 2024. “The Great Rationalist”: Alexey Vvedensky on Kant in the Context of Russian Kantiana. Kantian Journal, 43(1), pp. 149-180. http://dx.doi.org/10.5922/0207-6918-2024-1-7.

Westphal, K., 2004. Kant’s Transcendental Proof of Realism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.