Skip to main content Accessibility help
Kant's Theory of Normativity
  • Get access
    Check if you have access via personal or institutional login
  • Cited by 2
  • Cited by
    This book has been cited by the following publications. This list is generated based on data provided by CrossRef.

    Bacin, Stefano and Sensen, Oliver 2018. The Emergence of Autonomy in Kant's Moral Philosophy.

    Hutton, James 2018. Epistemic normativity in Kant's “Second Analogy”. European Journal of Philosophy,


Book description

Konstantin Pollok offers the first book-length analysis of Kant's theory of normativity that covers foundational issues in theoretical and practical philosophy as well as aesthetics. Interpreting Kant's 'critical turn' as a normative turn, he argues that Kant's theory of normativity is both original and radical: it departs from the perfectionist ideal of early modern rationalism, and arrives at an unprecedented framework of synthetic a priori principles that determine the validity of our judgments. Pollok examines the hylomorphism in Kant's theory of normativity and relates Kant's idea of our reason's self-legislation to the 'natural right' tradition, revealing Kant's debt to his predecessors as well as his relevance to contemporary debates on normativity. This book will appeal to academic researchers and advanced students of Kant, early modern philosophy and intellectual history.


'Pollok’s book deserves close engagement; it is … uncommonly demanding, but it is also uncommonly rich.'

Yoon H. Choi Source: Notre Dame Philosophical Review

'… readers will appreciate Pollok’s well-researched account of the unity of the critical philosophy and his explanation of how, on Kant’s view, we can be bound by norms. It is an important piece of Kant scholarship.'

Matthew C. Altman Source: Journal of the History of Philosophy

'Kant’s Theory of Normativity is a fascinating, outstandingly structured and extensive research into the core of Kant’s critical philosophy. Its all-encompassing perspective not only casts light on different problematic aspects of Kant’s thought but, most importantly, lets the reader realize how these different aspects are all traceable back to reason’s attempt to self-legislate its own demands.'

Luigi Filieri Source: Studi Kantiani

Refine List

Actions for selected content:

Select all | Deselect all
  • View selected items
  • Export citations
  • Download PDF (zip)
  • Send to Kindle
  • Send to Dropbox
  • Send to Google Drive
  • Send content to

    To send content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about sending content to .

    To send content items to your Kindle, first ensure is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

    Note you can select to send to either the or variations. ‘’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

    Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

    Please be advised that item(s) you selected are not available.
    You are about to send

Save Search

You can save your searches here and later view and run them again in "My saved searches".

Please provide a title, maximum of 40 characters.


Adams, R.M., “God, Possibility, and Kant,” Faith and Philosophy 17 (2000), pp. 425–40.
Adams, R.M., Leibniz: Determinist, Theist, Idealist (Oxford University Press, 1999).
Adams, R.M., “The Priority of the Perfect in the Philosophical Theology of the Continental Rationalists,” Proceedings of the British Academy 149 (2007), pp. 91116.
Adickes, E., “Ueber die Abfassungszeit der Kritik der reinen Vernunft,” Kant-Studien (Kiel und Leipzig: Lipsius und Tischer, 1895), pp. 167–85.
Allison, H.E., “Comments on Guyer,” Inquiry 50 (2007), pp. 480–88.
Allison, H.E., Kant’s Groundwork for the Metaphysics of Morals: A Commentary (Oxford University Press, 2011).
Allison, H.E., Kant’s Theory of Freedom (Cambridge University Press, 1990).
Allison, H.E., Kant’s Theory of Taste: A Reading of the ‘Critique of Judgment’ (Cambridge University Press, 2001).
Allison, H.E., Kant’s Transcendental Idealism: An Interpretation and Defense, Revised and enlarged edition (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2004).
Allison, H.E., “The Originality of Kant’s Distinction between Analytic and Synthetic Judgments,” in Kennington, R. (ed.), The Philosophy of Immanuel Kant (Washington, DC: Catholic University of America Press, 1985), pp. 1538.
Allison, H.E., “Revisiting Judgments of Perception,” in Egger, M. (ed.), Philosophie nach Kant: Neue Wege zum Verständnis von Kants Transzendental- und Moralphilosophie (Berlin: DeGruyter, 2014), pp. 7186.
Altmann, A., Moses Mendelssohns Frühschriften zur Metaphysik (Tübingen: Mohr, 1969).
Ameriks, K., Kant and the Fate of Autonomy: Problems in the Appropriation of the Critical Philosophy (Cambridge University Press, 2000).
Ameriks, K., Kant’s Elliptical Path (Oxford University Press, 2012).
Anderson, R.L., “The Introduction to the Critique: Framing the Question,” in Guyer, P. (ed.), Cambridge Companion to Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason (Cambridge University Press, 2010), pp. 7592.
Anderson, R.L., “Neo-Kantianism and the Roots of Anti-Psychologism,” British Journal for the History of Philosophy 13 (2005), pp. 287323.
Anderson, R.L., The Poverty of Conceptual Truth: Kant’s Analytic/Synthetic Distinction and the Limits of Metaphysics (Oxford University Press, 2015).
Anderson, R.L., “Synthesis, Cognitive Normativity, and the Meaning of Kant’s Question, ‘How Are Synthetic Cognitions a Priori Possible?’,” European Journal of Philosophy 9 (2001), pp. 275305.
Aquinas, T., St Thomas Aquinas Treatise On Man, trans. Anderson, J.F. (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1962).
Aquinas, T., Summa Theologica, Fathers of the English Dominican Province (trans.) (New York, NY: Benziger, 1947); (New York, NY: Cosimo, 2007).
Ariew, R., and Grene, M., “The Cartesian Destiny of Form and Matter,” in Early Science and Medicine 2/3 (The Fate of Hylomorphism: ‘Matter’ and ‘Form’ in Early Modern Science) (1997), pp. 300–25.
Aristotle, , De Anima, Books II and III, trans. with an introduction and notes Hamlyn, D.W. (Oxford University Press, 2002).
Arnauld, A., and Nicole, P., Logic, or the Art of Thinking, Containing, besides Common Rules, Several New Observations Appropriate for Forming Judgments [1683], trans. Buroker, J. Vance (Cambridge University Press, 1996).
Baumgarten, A.G., Aesthetica (Francofurti ad Oderam: I.C. Kleyb, 1750/1758), in Mirbach, D. (trans. and ed.), Alexander Gottlieb Baumgarten: Ästhetik, (Hamburg: Meiner, 2007), vol. I.
Baumgarten, A.G., Metaphysica, Halae Magdeburgicae: Hemmerde, 1739 (reprint in Kant, AA, vol. 15); Fugate, C.D. and Hymers, J. (trans.) Metaphysics: A Critical Translation with Kant’s Elucidations, Selected Notes, and Related Materials (London: Bloomsbury, 2013).
Beiser, F.C., Diotima’s Children: German Aesthetic Rationalism from Leibniz to Lessing (Oxford University Press, 2009).
Beiser, F.C., “Kant’s intellectual development: 1746–1781,” in Guyer, P. (ed.) The Cambridge Companion to Kant (Cambridge University Press, 1992), pp. 2661.
Bergmann, E., Die Begründung der deutschen Ästhetik durch Alexander Gottlieb Baumgarten und Georg Friedrich Meier (Leipzig: Röder & Schunke, 1911).
Bird, G., Kant’s Theory of Knowledge: An Outline of One Central Argument in the ‘Critique of Pure Reason’ (London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1962).
Brandom, R., Tales of the Mighty Dead: Historical Essays in the Metaphysics of Intentionality (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2002).
Brandt, R., Die Bestimmung des Menschen bei Kant (Hamburg: Meiner, 2007).
Brandt, R., Kritischer Kommentar zu Kants Anthropologie in pragmatischer Hinsicht (1798) (Hamburg: Meiner, 1999).
Brandt, R., “Schön, Erhaben, nicht Häßlich: Überlegungen zur Entstehung und Systematik der Kantischen Theorie des ästhetischen Urteils,” in Klemme, H., Pauen, M., and Raters, M-L. (eds.), Im Schatten des Schönen: Die Ästhetik des Häßlichen in historischen Ansätzen und aktuellen Debatten (Bielefeld: Aisthesis, 2006, 6592).
Brandt, R., “Die Schönheit der Kristalle und das Spiel der Erkenntniskräfte: Zum Gegenstand und zur Logik des ästhetischen Urteils bei Kant,” in Brandt, R. and Stark, W. (eds.), Autographen, Dokumente und Berichte: Zu Edition, Amtsgeschäften und Werk Immanuel Kants (Hamburg: Meiner, 1994), pp. 1957.
Brandt, R., “Transzendentale Ästhetik, §§1–3,” in Mohr, G. and Willaschek, M. (eds.), Immanuel Kant: Kritik der reinen Vernunft (Berlin: Akademie, 1998), pp. 81105.
Brandt, R., “Die vielfältige Verwendung der 1, 2, 3/4 – Konstellation in Kants Philosophie,” Die Macht des Vierten: Über eine Ordnung der europäischen Kultur, ed. Brandt, R. (Hamburg: Meiner, 2013), pp. 169222.
Bratman, M.E., Intentions, Plans, and Practical Reason (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1987).
Broome, J., “Does Rationality Give Us Reasons?Philosophical Issues 15 (2005), pp. 321–37.
Broome, J., “Normative Requirements,” Ratio 12 (1999), pp. 398419.
Broome, J., Rationality Through Reasoning (Hoboken, NJ: Wiley-Blackwell, 2013).
Broome, J., “Wide or Narrow Scope?,” Mind 116 (2007), pp. 359–70.
Brown, G., “Compossibility, Harmony, and Perfection in Leibniz,” in Philosophical Review 96 (1987), pp. 173203.
Brunero, J., “The Scope of Rational Requirements,” Philosophical Quarterly 60 (2010), pp. 2849.
Buroker, J.V., Kant’s ‘Critique of Pure Reason’: An Introduction (Cambridge University Press, 2006).
Byrd, B.S. and Hruschka, J., Kant’s Doctrine of Right: A Commentary (Cambridge University Press, 2010).
Callanan, J., “Kant on Nativism, Scepticism and Necessity,” Kantian Review 18 (2013), pp. 1–27.
Callanan, J., “Normativity and the Acquisition of the Categories,” Hegel Society of Great Britain. Bulletin 32 (Special Issue 1–2, 1, 2011), pp. 126.
Cassirer, E., Gesammelte Werke: Hamburger Ausgabe, ed. Recki, Birgit (Hamburg: Meiner, 1998–2008) [ECW].
Chignell, A., “Kant on the Normativity of Taste: The Role of Aesthetic Ideas,” Australasian Journal of Philosophy 85 (2007), pp. 415–33.
Cramer, K., Nicht-reine synthetische Urteile a priori: Ein Problem der Transzendentalphilosophie Immanuel Kants (Heidelberg: Winter, 1985).
Crawford, D.W., Kant’s Aesthetic Theory (Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1974).
Crusius, C.A., Entwurf der nothwendigen Vernunftwahrheiten wiefern sie den zufälligen entgegengesetzt werden (Leipzig: Gleditsch, 1745).
Crusius, C.A., Weg zur Gewißheit und Zuverlässigkeit der menschlichen Erkenntnis (Leipzig: Gleditsch, 1747).
De Pierris, G., “The Constitutive A Priori,” Canadian Journal of Philosophy, Supplementary Volume 18 (1992), pp. 179214.
Descartes, R., Oeuvres de Descartes, Adam, C. and Tannery, P. (ed.), revised edition, 12 vols (Paris: J. Vrin), pp. 1964–74 [AT].
Descartes, R., The Philosophical Writings of Descartes, Cottingham, J., Stoothoff, R., Murdoch, D., Kenny, A. (trans.), (Cambridge University Press, 1984) vol. I, (1985) vol. II, (1991) vol. III, [CSMK].
Engstrom, S., “The Complete Object of Practical Knowledge,” in Aufderheide, J. and Bader, R., (eds.), The Highest Good in Aristotle and Kant (Oxford University Press, 2015), pp. 129–57.
Fisher, M. and Watkins, E., “Kant on the Material Ground of Possibility: From The Only Possible Argument to the Critique of Pure Reason,” The Review of Metaphysics 52 (1998), pp. 369–95.
Floyd, J., “Kant on Reflective Judgment and Systematicity,” in Parret, H. (ed.), Kants Ästhetik/Kant’s Aesthetics/L’esthétique de Kant (Berlin/New York: Walter de Gruyter, 1998), pp. 192218.
Förster, E., Kant’s Final Synthesis: An Essay on the Opus Postumum (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2000).
Fricke, C., Kants Theorie des reinen Geschmacksurteils (Berlin: de Gruyter, 1990).
Friedman, M., “Causal Laws and the Foundations of Natural Science,” in Guyer, P. (ed.), The Cambridge Companion to Kant (Cambridge University Press, 1992), pp. 161–99.
Friedman, M., “Exorcising the Philosophical Tradition: Comments on John McDowell’s Mind and World,” The Philosophical Review 105 (1996), pp. 427–67.
Friedman, M., “Geometry, Construction and Intuition in Kant and His Successors,” in Sher, G. and Tieszen, R. (eds.), Between Logic and Intuition: Essays in Honor of Charles Parsons (Cambridge University Press, 2000), pp. 186218.
Friedman, M., Kant’s Construction of Nature: A Reading of the ‘Metaphysical Foundations of Natural Science’ (Cambridge University Press, 2013).
Friedman, M., “Laws of Nature and Causal Necessity,” Kant-Studien 105 (2014), pp. 531–53.
Friedman, M., “The Prolegomena and Natural Science,” in Lyre, H. and Schliemann, O. (eds.), Kants Prolegomena: Ein kooperativer Kommentar (Frankfurt/M.: Klostermann, 2012), pp. 299326.
Friedman, M., “Regulative and Constitutive,” Southern Journal of Philosophy (1991), pp. 73102.
Garber, D., Descartes Embodied: Reading Cartesian Philosophy through Cartesian Science (Cambridge University Press, 2001).
Garber, D., “Leibniz on Form and Matter,” in Early Science and Medicine 2/3 (The Fate of Hylomorphism: ‘Matter’ and ‘Form’ in Early Modern Science) (1997), pp. 326–52.
Ginsborg, H., The Normativity of Nature: Essays on Kant’s Critique of Judgement (Oxford University Press, 2015).
Giovanelli, M., Reality and Negation – Kant’s Principle of Anticipations of Perception: An Investigation of its Impact on the Post-Kantian Debate (Dordrecht: Springer, 2011).
Giordanetti, P., “Sachanmerkungen,” in Kritik der Urteilskraft (Hamburg: Meiner, 2001), pp. 431–70.
Gloy, K., Die Kantische Theorie der Naturwissenschaft: Eine Strukturanalyse ihrer Möglichkeit, ihres Umfangs und ihrer Grenzen (Berlin: de Gruyter, 1976).
Graubner, H., Form und Wesen: ein Beitrag zur Deutung des Formbegriffs in Kants Kritik der reinen Vernunft (Bonn: Bouvier, 1972).
Grene, M., and Ariew, R., “The Cartesian Destiny of Form and Matter,” in Early Science and Medicine 2/3 (The Fate of Hylomorphism: ‘Matter’ and ‘Form’ in Early Modern Science) (1997), pp. 300–25.
Grier, M., Kant’s Doctrine of Transcendental Illusion (Cambridge University Press, 2001).
Guyer, P., “The Deduction of the Categories: The Metaphysical and Transcendental Deductions,” in Guyer, P. (ed.), Cambridge Companion to Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason (Cambridge University Press, 2010), pp. 118–50.
Guyer, P., Kant and the Claims of Knowledge (Cambridge University Press, 1987).
Guyer, P., Kant and the Claims of Taste (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1979).
Guyer, P., Kant and the Experience of Freedom: Essays on Aesthetics and Morality (Cambridge University Press, 1996).
Guyer, P., “Kantian Perfectionism,” in Jost, L. and Wuerth, J. (eds.), Perfecting Virtue: New Essays on Kantian Ethics and Virtue Ethics (Cambridge University Press, 2011), pp. 194214.
Guyer, P., “Naturalistic and Transcendental Moments in Kant’s Moral Philosophy,” Inquiry 50 (2007), pp. 444–64.
Guyer, P., “Response to Critics,” Inquiry 50 (2007), pp. 497510.
Guyer, P., Values of Beauty: Historical Essays in Aesthetics (Cambridge University Press, 2005).
Hampton, J., The Authority of Reason, ed. Healey, R., (Cambridge University Press, 1998).
Hegel, G.W.F., The Phenomenology of Spirit, trans. Miller, A.V. (Oxford University Press, 1977).
Hill, T.E., Dignity and Practical Reason in Kant’s Moral Theory (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1992).
Hobbes, T., Leviathan or The Matter, Forme and Power of a Common Wealth Ecclesiasticall and Civil (London: Crooke, 1651).
Hoeppner, T., “Kants Begriff der Funktion und die Vollständigkeit der Urteils- und Kategorientafel,” Zeitschrift für philosophische Forschung 65 (2011), pp. 193217.
Hoffman, P., Essays on Descartes (Oxford University Press, 2009).
Hruschka, J. and Byrd, B.S., Kant’s Doctrine of Right: A Commentary (Cambridge University Press, 2010).
Kästner, A.G., Anfangsgründe der Arithmetik, Geometrie, ebenen und sphärischen Trigonometrie und Perspectiv (Göttingen: Vandenhoek, 1758).
Kain, P., “Self-Legislation in Kant’s Moral Philosophy,” Archiv für Geschichte der Philosophie 86 (2004), pp. 257306.
Kleingeld, P., “Moral Consciousness and the ‘Fact of Reason,’” in Reath, A. and Timmermann, J. (eds.), Kant’s Critique of Practical Reason: A Critical Guide (Cambridge University Press, 2010), pp. 5572.
Klemme, H.F., “Einleitung,” in Immanuel Kant: Kritik der praktischen Vernunft (Hamburg: Meiner, 2003), pp. ixlxiii.
Klemme, H.F., “Einleitung,” in Immanuel Kant: Kritik der Urteilskraft (Hamburg: Meiner, 2001), pp. xiiixcvii.
Kolodny, N., “Why Be Disposed to Be Coherent?Ethics 118 (2008), pp. 437–63.
Kolodny, N., “Why Be Rational?Mind 114 (2005), pp. 509–63.
Kolodny, N., “State or Process Requirements?Mind 116 (2007), pp. 371–85.
Korsgaard, C.M., “The Normativity of Instrumental Reason,” in Cullity, G. and Gaut, B. (eds.), Ethics and Practical Reason (Oxford University Press, 1997), pp. 215–54.
Kraus, K.T., “Quantifying Inner Experience? Kant’s Mathematical Principles in the Context of Empirical Psychology,” European Journal of Philosophy, forthcoming.
Kühn, M., Kant: A Biography (Cambridge University Press, 2001).
Lavin, D., “Practical Reason and the Possibility of Error,” Ethics 114 (2004), pp. 424–57.
Leibniz, G.W., New Essays on Human Understanding (Nouveaux Essais sur l’entendement humain, 1704/1765), trans. Remnant, P. and Bennett, J. (Cambridge University Press, 1996).
Leibniz, G.W., Philosophical Essays, ed. and trans. Ariew, R. and Garber, D. (Indianapolis: Hackett, 1989).
Lewis, F.A., “Form and Matter,” in Anagnostopoulos, G. (ed.), A Companion to Aristotle (Oxford: Blackwell, 2009), pp. 162–85.
Locke, J., Essay Concerning Human Understanding (London: Basset/Mory, 1690).
Longuenesse, B., Kant and the Capacity to Judge: Sensibility and Discursivity in the Transcendental Analytic of the Critique of Pure Reason (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1998).
Longuenesse, B., “Kant’s Theory of Judgment, and Judgments of Taste,” Inquiry 46 (2003), pp. 143–63.
Lu-Adler, H., “Kant and the Normativity of Logic,” European Journal of Philosophy, forthcoming.
Lu-Adler, H., “Epigenesis of Pure Reason and the Source of Pure Cognitions: How Kant Is No Nativist about Logical Cognition,” in Muchnik, P. and Thorndike, O. (eds.), Rethinking Kant, vol. 5 (Newcastle, UK: Cambridge Scholarly Publishing), forthcoming.
Ludwig, B., “Einleitung,” in Immanuel Kant: Metaphysische Anfangsgründe der Rechtslehre (Hamburg: Meiner, 1986), xiiiliv.
Lumer, C., “Geltung, Gültigkeit,” in Enzyklopädie Philosophie, ed. Sandkühler, H.J. (Hamburg: Meiner, 1999), vol. I, pp. 450–55.
Lüthy, C., and Newman, W.R., “‘Matter’ and ‘Form’: By Way of a Preface,” in Lüthy, C. and Newman, W.R. (eds.), The Fate of Hylomorphism: ‘Matter’ and ‘Form’ in Early Modern Science, (Early Science and Medicine Special Issue, fascicle 2.3) (Leiden: Brill, 1997), pp. 215–26.
Maier, A., Kants Qualitätskategorien (Berlin: Pan-Verlag, 1930).
MacFarlane, J.G., “What Does it Mean to Say that Logic is Formal?” (PhD Dissertation, University of Pittsburgh, 2000).
Meier, G.F., Anfangsgründe aller schönen Künste und Wissenschaften (Halle: Hemmerde, 1748), vol. I.
Meier, G.F., Auszug aus der Vernunftlehre (Halle: Gebauer, 1752).
Meier, G.F., Versuch eines neuen Lehrgebäudes von den Seelen der Thiere (Halle: Hemmerde, 1749).
Melamed, Y.Y., “‘Omnis determinatio est negatio’: Determination, Negation, and Self-Negation in Spinoza, Kant, and Hegel,” in Förster, E. and Melamed, Y.Y. (eds.), Spinoza and German Idealism (Cambridge University Press, 2012), pp. 175–95.
Mendelssohn, M., Rhapsodie (1761/1771), in Bamberger, F. et. al. (eds.), Gesammelte Schriften (Berlin: Akademie Verlag, 1929) vol. I [Philosophical Writings, transl. and ed. Dahlstrom, D.O. (Cambridge University Press, 1997)].
Natorp, P., Platos Ideenlehre: Eine Einführung in den Idealismus (Leipzig: Dürr, 1903).
Newman, W.R., and Lüthy, C., “‘Matter’ and ‘Form’: By Way of a Preface,” in Lüthy, C. and Newman, W.R. (eds.) The Fate of Hylomorphism: ‘Matter’ and ‘Form’ in Early Modern Science, (Early Science and Medicine, Special Issue, fascicle 2.3) (Leiden: Brill, 1997, pp. 215–26).
Nicole, P., and Arnauld, A., Logic, or the Art of Thinking, Containing, besides Common Rules, Several New Observations Appropriate for Forming Judgments [1683], trans. Buroker, J.V. (Cambridge University Press, 1996).
O’Neill, O., Constructions of Reason: Explorations of Kant’s Practical Philosophy (Cambridge University Press, 1989).
Pippin, R.B., Kant’s Theory of Form: An Essay on the Critique of Pure Reason (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1982).
Pollok, A., Facetten des Menschen: Zur Anthropologie Moses Mendelssohns (Hamburg: Meiner, 2009).
Pollok, K., “‘An Almost Single Inference’ – Kant’s Deduction of the Categories Reconsidered,” Archiv für Geschichte der Philosophie 90 (2008), pp. 323–45.
Pollok, K., “Einleitung,” in Immanuel Kant: Prolegomena zu einer jeden künftigen Metaphysik, die als Wissenschaft wird auftreten können (Hamburg: Meiner, 2001), pp. ixlxii.
Pollok, K., “Kant’s Critical Concepts of Motion,” in Journal of the History of Philosophy 44 (2006), pp. 559–75.
Pollok, K., Kants “Metaphysische Anfangsgründe der Naturwissenschaft”: Ein Kritischer Kommentar (Hamburg: Meiner, 2001).
Pollok, K., “Kant und Habermas über das principium executionis moralischer Handlungen,” in Klemme, H.F., Kühn, M., Schönecker, D. (eds.), Moralische Motivation (Hamburg: Felix Meiner-Verlag, 2006), pp. 193227.
Pollok, K., “Naturalism and Kant’s Resolution of the Third Antinomy.” Proceedings of the XI International Kant Congress: Kant and Philosophy in a Cosmopolitan Sense, ed. Bacin, S., Ferrarin, A., La Rocca, C., Ruffing, M. (Berlin: De Gruyter, 2013), vol. III, pp. 731–42.
Pollok, K., “The ‘Transcendental Method’: On the Reception of the Critique of Pure Reason in Neo-Kantianism,” in Guyer, P. (ed.), Cambridge Companion to Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason (Cambridge University Press, 2010), pp. 346–79.
Pollok, K., “Von der Transzendentalphilosophie zum Vergnügen. Die Karriere der Wahrnehmungsurteile in der Kritischen Philosophie Kants,” Die Vollendung der Transzendentalphilosophie in Kants ‘Kritik der Urteilskraft,’ ed. Hiltscher, R., Klingner, S., Süß, D. (Berlin: Duncker & Humblot, 2006), pp. 235–57.
Pollok, K., “Wie sind Erfahrungsurteile möglich?” in Lyre, H. and Schliemann, O. (eds.), Kants Prolegomena: Ein kooperativer Kommentar (Frankfurt/M.: Klostermann, 2012), pp. 103–25.
Pollok, K., “‘Wenn Vernunft volle Gewalt über das Begehrungsvermögen hätte’ – Über die gemeinsame Wurzel der Kantischen Imperative,” Kant-Studien 98 (2007), pp. 5780.
Prior, A.N., Objects of Thought, ed Geach, P.T. and Kenny, A.J.P. (Oxford University Press, 1971).
Rauscher, F., “Freedom and Reason in Groundwork III,” in Timmermann, J. (ed.), Kant’s ‘Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals’: A Critical Guide (Cambridge University Press, 2009), pp. 203–23.
Reath, A., Agency and Autonomy in Kant’s Moral Theory (Oxford University Press, 2006).
Reich, K., Die Vollständigkeit der Kantischen Urteilstafel (Berlin: Schoetz, 1932).
Reisner, A., “Unifying the Requirements of Rationality,” Philosophical Explorations 12 (2009), pp. 243–60.
Richardson, A., “‘The Fact of Science’ and Critique of Knowledge: Exact Science as Problem and Resource in Marburg Neo-Kantianism,” in Friedman, M. and Nordmann, A. (eds.), The Kantian Legacy in Nineteenth-Century Science (Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press, 2006), pp. 211–26.
Richardson, K., “The Metaphysics of Agency: Avicenna and his Legacy” (PhD Dissertation, University of Toronto, 2008).
Rippon, S., “In Defense of the Wide-Scope Instrumental Principle,” Journal of Ethics & Social Philosophy 5 (2011), pp. 121.
Ritter, C., Der Rechtsgedanke Kants nach den frühen Quellen (Frankfurt/M.: Klostermann, 1971).
Rohs, P., “Kants Prinzip der durchgängigen Bestimmung alles Seinden,” Kant-Studien 69 (1978), pp. 170–80.
Rousseau, J-J., Second Discourse, in Dunn, S. (ed. and trans.), ‘The Social Contract’ and ‘The First and Second Discourses’ (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2002).
Rutherford, D., Leibniz and the Rational Order of Nature (Cambridge University Press, 1995).
Sassen, B., (ed.), Kant’s Early Critics: The Empiricist Critique of the Theoretical Philosophy (Cambridge University Press, 2000).
Schmaltz, T.M., Descartes on Causation (Oxford University Press, 2007).
Schneewind, J.B., “Kant Against the ‘Spurious Principles of Morality,’” in Timmermann, J. (ed.), Kant’s ‘Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals’: A Critical Guide (Cambridge University Press, 2009), pp. 140–58.
Schroeder, M., “The Hypothetical Imperative?Australasian Journal of Philosophy 83 (2005), pp. 357–72.
Schroeder, M., “Means-End Coherence, Stringency, and Subjective Reasons,” Philosophical Studies 143 (2009), pp. 223–48.
Schroeder, M., “The Scope of Instrumental Reason,” Philosophical Perspectives (Ethics) 18 (2004), pp. 337–64.
Sedgwick, S., Hegel’s Critique of Kant: From Dichotomy to Identity (Oxford University Press, 2012).
Sensen, O., “Human Dignity in Historical Perspective: The Contemporary and Traditional Paradigms,” European Journal of Political Theory 10 (2011), pp. 7191.
Sensen, O., Kant on Human Dignity (Berlin/New York: de Gruyter, 2011).
Sensen, O., “Kant’s Constructivism,” in Bagnoli, C. (ed.) Constructivism in Ethics (Cambridge University Press, 2013), pp. 6381.
Sensen, O., “The Moral Importance of Autonomy,” in Sensen, O. (ed.), Kant on Moral Autonomy (Cambridge University Press, 2013), pp. 262–81.
Shabel, L., “Kant on the ‘Symbolic Construction’ of Mathematical Concepts,” Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 29 (1998), pp. 589621.
Shabel, L., “Kant’s Philosophy of Mathematics,” in Guyer, P. (ed.), The Cambridge Companion to Kant and Modern Philosophy (Cambridge University Press, 2006), pp. 94128.
Shabel, L., “Kant’s Transcendental Aesthetic,” in Guyer, P. (ed.), The Cambridge Companion to Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason (Cambridge University Press, 2010), pp. 93117.
Southwood, N., “Vindicating the Normativity of Rationality,” Ethics 119 (2008), pp. 930.
Spinoza, B., Ethica, Ordine Geometrico Demonstrata (1677).
Spinoza, B., Opera Omnia. Epistolae, ed. Gebhardt, Carl (Heidelberg: Winter, 1925) vol. IV.
Sutherland, D., “Kant’s Philosophy of Mathematics and the Greek Mathematical Tradition,” The Philosophical Review 113 (2004), pp. 157201.
Sweet, K., “Reflection: Its Structure and Meaning in Kant’s Judgements of Taste,” Kantian Review 14 (2009), pp. 5380.
Timmermann, J., Kant’s Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals: A Commentary (Cambridge University Press, 2007).
Tolley, C., “Kant on the Nature of Logical Laws,” Philosophical Topics 34 (2006), pp. 371407.
Velkley, R., “Transcending Nature, Unifying Reason: On Kant’s Debt to Rousseau,” in Sensen, O. (ed.), Kant on Moral Autonomy (Cambridge University Press, 2013), pp. 89106.
Warren, D., Reality and Impenetrability in Kant’s Philosophy of Nature, Studies in Philosophy (New York: Routledge, 2001).
Watkins, E., and Fisher, M., “The Antinomy of Practical Reason: Reason, the Unconditioned and the Highest Good,” in Reath, A. and Timmermann, J. (eds.), Kant’s Critique of Practical Reason: A Critical Guide (Cambridge University Press, 2010), pp. 145–67.
Watkins, E., and Fisher, M., Kant and the Metaphysics of Causality (Cambridge University Press, 2005).
Watkins, E., and Fisher, M., “Kant on the Material Ground of Possibility: From The Only Possible Argument to the Critique of Pure Reason,” The Review of Metaphysics 52 (1998), pp. 369–95.
Way, J., “Defending the Wide Scope Approach to Instrumental Reason,” Philosophical Studies 147 (2010), pp. 213–33.
Wieland, W., Urteil und Gefühl: Kants Theorie der Urteilskraft (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck und Ruprecht, 2001).
Wittgenstein, L., Logisch-philosophische Abhandlung, in Ostwald, W. (ed.), Annalen der Naturphilosophie, 14 (1921), pp. 185262.
Wolff, C., Grundsätze des Natur- und Völkerrechts (Halle: Renger, 2 1769).
Wolff, C., Philosophia Moralis, sive Ethica (1750/53), in Ecole, J. (ed.), Gesammelte Werke, (Hildesheim: Olms, 1977) vol. II/XVI.
Wolff, C., Philosophia practica universalis methodo scientifica pertractata. Pars posterior (1738), in Ecole, J. (ed.), Gesammelte Werke (Hildesheim: Olms, 1979), vol II/XI.
Wolff, C., Philosophia prima, sive Ontologia, methodo scientifica pertractata, qua omnis cognitionis humanae principia continentur (Frankfurt und Leipzig: Renger, 2 1736).
Wolff, C., Philosophia Rationalis sive Logica Methodo Scientifica Pertractata (Leipzig: Renger, 2 1732).
Wolff, C., Vernünfftige Gedancken von den Kräfften des menschlichen Verstandes und ihrem richtigen Gebrauche in Erkäntnis der Wahrheit (Halle: Renger, 1713).
Wolff, C., Vernünfftige Gedancken von Gott, der Welt und der Seele des Menschen (Halle: Hemmerde, 1720).
Wolff, M., “Die Analyse der Erfahrung in Kants Prolegomena,” in Lyre, H. and Schliemann, O. (ed.), Kants Prolegomena: Ein kooperativer Kommentar (Frankfurt/M: Klostermann, 2012), pp. 127–68.
Wolff, M., “Erwiderung auf die Einwände von Ansgar Beckermann und Ulrich Nortmann,” Zeitschrift für philosophische Forschung 52 (1998), pp. 435–59.
Wolff, M., “Kants Urteilstafel: Nicht nur eine Replik,” in Doyé, S., Heinz, M., Rameil, U. (eds.), Metaphysik und Kritik: Festschrift für Manfred Baum zum 65. Geburtstag (Berlin: DeGruyter, 2004), pp. 109–36.
Wolff, M., Die Vollständigkeit der kantischen Urteilstafel. Mit einem Essay über Freges ‘Begriffsschrift’ (Frankfurt/M: Klostermann, 1995).
Wood, A.W., “Comments on Guyer,” Inquiry 50 (2007), pp. 465–79.
Wood, A.W., The Free Development of Each: Studies on Freedom, Right and Ethics in Classical German Philosophy (Oxford University Press, 2014).
Wood, A.W., Kant’s Ethical Thought (Cambridge University Press, 1999).
Wood, A.W., Kant’s Moral Religion (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1970).
Wood, A.W., Kant’s Rational Theology (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1978).
Zöller, G., Theoretische Gegenstandsbeziehung bei Kant: Zur systematischen Bedeutung der Termini ‘objektive Realität’ und ‘objektive Gültigkeit’ in der ‘Kritik der reinen Vernunft’ (Berlin: DeGruyter, 1984).
Zuckert, R., Kant on Beauty and Biology: An Interpretation of the Critique of Judgment (Cambridge University Press, 2007).


Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Book summary page views

Total views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between #date#. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed