Search
Submit an article
Kantian Journal

2023 Vol. 42. №3

Back to the list Download the article
Minkin D.

Kant als metaphilosophischer Skeptizist?

DOI
10.5922/0207-6918-2023-3-5
Pages
97-129
Metaphilosophy Disagreement Skepticism Rationality Kant Quine Wittgenstein

Abstract

Throughout history, both philosophers and non-philosophers have doubted that philosophical positions qua philosophical positions are justified and that philosophy is a rational enterprise. Today, such doubts are grouped under the term “Metaphilosophical Skepticism”. Nicholas Rescher, in his book Strife of Systems, includes Kant among the proponents of this kind of skepticism. I want to argue that while Rescher is wrong, Kant has con­tributed to a new version of such skepticism. In the first step, I characterize the basic idea of metaphilosophical skepticism in more detail and identify a version of this idea, which I call “Second-Stage-Skepticism” and on which I will focus. In the following part, I reconstruct Rescher’s reading of Second-Stage-Skepticism as well as his reasons for considering Kant to represent this version. My main claim in this part will be that there is no reading of the mentioned basic idea that makes Rescher’s view reasonable. In the third step, I introduce a newer form of metaphilosophical skepticism — “Third-Stage Skepticism” — and conjecture that this form can be seen as inspired by Kant’s thought on philosophical diversity. Finally, I point out a way to reject this newer form.

Reference

Ballantyne, N., 2016. Verbal Disagreements and Philosophical Scepticism. Australasian Journal of Philosophy, 94(4), pp. 752-765.

Baum, M., 2015. Metaphysik. In: M. Willaschek, J. Stolzenberg, G. Mohr und S. Bacin, Hg. 2015. Kant-Lexi­kon. Berlin und Boston: de Gruyter, S. 1530-1540.

Bernáth, L. and Tözsér, J., 2021. The Biased Nature of Philosophical Beliefs in the Light of Peer Disagreement. Metaphilosophy, 52(3-4), pp. 363-378.

Bourget, D. and Chalmers, D., 2013. What Do Philosophers Believe? Philosophical Studies, 170(3), pp. 465-500.

Brennan, J., 2010. Scepticism about Philosophy. Ratio (New Series), 23(1), pp. 1-16.

Cappelen, H., 2012. Philosophy Without Intuitions. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Coliva, A. and Doulas, L., 2022. What Philosophical Disagreement and Philosophical Skepticism Hinge On. Synthese, 200(3), Article 251. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-022-03735-6.

Crone, K., 2015. Erkenntnis, empirische/reine. In: M. Willaschek, J. Stolzenberg, G. Mohr und S. Bacin, Hg. 2015. Kant-Lexikon. Berlin und Boston: de Gruyter, S. 545-547.

Fischer, E., 2018. Wittgensteinian ‘Therapy’, Experimental Philosophy, and Metaphilosophical Naturalism. In: K. M. Cahill and T. Raleigh, eds. 2018. Wittgenstein and Naturalism. London & New York: Routledge, pp. 260-286.

Frances, B., 2016. Worrisome Skepticism about Philosophy. Episteme, 13(3), pp. 289-303.

Gerhardt, V., 2015. Philosophie. In: M. Willaschek, J. Stolzenberg, G. Mohr und S. Bacin, Hg. 2015. Kant-Lexi­kon. Berlin und Boston: de Gruyter, S. 1764-1775.

Glock, H., 2000. Wittgenstein-Lexikon. Darmstadt: WBG.

Grundmann, T., 2013. Doubts about Philosophy? The Alleged Challenge from Disagreement. In: T. Henning, T. and D. P. Schweikard, eds. 2013. Knowledge, Virtue, and Action. Essays on Putting Epistemic Virtues to Work. New York & London: Routledge, pp. 72-98.

Hardy, J. und Schamberger, C., 2015. Gibt es eine universale philosophische Methode? Deutsche Zeitschrift für Philosophie, 63(4), S. 644-669.

Hawking, S. and Mlodinow, L., 2010. The Grand Design. New York: Bentham Books.

Höffe, O., 1998. Architektonik und Geschichte der reinen Vernunft. In: G. Mohr und M. Willaschek, Hg. 1998. Immanuel Kant: Kritik der reinen Vernunft. Berlin: Akademie-Verlag, S. 617-645.

Keienburg, J., 2015. Friede in der Philosophie. In: M. Willaschek J. Stolzenberg, G. Mohr und S. Bacin, Hg. 2015. Kant-Lexikon. Berlin und Boston: de Gruyter, S. 649-650.

Kornblith, H., 2011. Is Philosophical Knowledge Possible? In: C. Jäger und W. Löffler, Hg. 2011. Epistemology: Contexts, Values, Disagreement. Heusenstamm: Ontos, S. 285-304.

Lewin, M., 2021. Kant’s Metaphilosophy. Open Philosophy, 4(1), pp. 292-310.

Mantel, S., 2019. Gründe und Evidenz. In: M. Graj­ner und G. Melchior, Hg. 2019. Handbuch Erkenntnistheorie. Stuttgart: Metzler, S. 212-217.

McGinn, C., 1993. Problems in Philosophy. The Limits of Inquiry. Oxford & Cambridge: Blackwell.

Minkin, D., 2021. Rationalität philosophischer Forschung. Grundlagen einer metaphilosophischen Positio­nierung. Paderborn: mentis.

Overgaard, S., Gilbert, P. and Burwood, S., 2013. An Introduction to Metaphilosophy. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Plant, B., 2012. Philosophical Diversity and Disagreement. Metaphilosophy, 43(5), pp. 567-591.

Quine, W., 1969. Natural Kinds. In: W. Quine, 1969. Ontological Relativity and Other Essays. New York: Columbia University Press, pp. 114-138.

Rescher, N., 1985. Der Streit der Systeme. Ein Essay über die Gründe und Implikationen philosophischer Vielfalt. Würzburg: Könighausen & Neumann.

Ribeiro, B., 2011. Philosophy and Disagreement. Critica: Revista Hispanoamericana de Filosofía, 43(127), pp. 3-25.

Spiegel, Th. J., 2021. Naturalism, Quietism, and the Threat to Philosophy. Basel: Schwabe.

Tetens, H., 2001. Der Streit der Philosophen. Deutsche Zeitschrift für Philosophie, 49(3), S. 353-366.

Williamson, T., 2007. The Philosophy of Philosophy. Malden, MA: Blackwell.

Wittgenstein, L., 1953. Philosophische Untersuchungen. In: L. Wittgenstein, 1984. Werkausgabe. Band 1. Frankfurt: Suhrkamp, S. 225-580.