Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-5cfd469876-wkcxx Total loading time: 0.227 Render date: 2021-06-24T16:40:09.148Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "metricsAbstractViews": false, "figures": true, "newCiteModal": false, "newCitedByModal": true, "newEcommerce": true }

Kant’s Critical Theory of the Best Possible World

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 October 2020

Maya Krishnan
Affiliation:
All Souls College, Oxford
Corresponding

Abstract

In this article I argue that the Critical Kant endorses the claim that God creates the best possible world, and that this claim is best understood as committing him to the view that God creates an infinitely valuable world. Kant’s understudied Critical theory of the best possible world differs significantly from his better-known quasi-Leibnizian pre-Critical account insofar as it uses an axiological rather than ontological metric for the goodness of worlds. The axiological metric introduces unique challenges for a Kantian account of the best possible world. These challenges are in turn resolved via an infinite value interpretation.

Type
Articles
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2020. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of Kantian Review

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below.

References

Bader, R. (2015a) ‘Kant’s Theory of the Highest Good’. In Aufderheide, J. and Bader, R. (eds), The Highest Good in Aristotle and Kant (Oxford: Oxford University Press), 183213.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bader, R. (2015b) ‘Kantian Axiology and the Dualism of Practical Reason’. In Hirose, I. and Olson, J. (eds), Oxford Handbook of Value Theory (Oxford: Oxford University Press), 175201.Google Scholar
Bader, R. (manuscript a) ‘Kant and the Conditional Intrinsic Value of Happiness’.Google Scholar
Bader, R. (manuscript b) ‘The Dignity of Humanity’.Google Scholar
Brewer, K. (manuscript). ‘Alternate Possibilities, Divine Omniscience, and Kant’s Critique of Judgment §76’.Google Scholar
Chignell, A. (2009) ‘“As Kant has Shown”: Analytic Theology and the Critical Philosophy’. In Crisp, O. and Rea, M. (eds), Analytic Theology (Oxford: Oxford University Press), 116–35.Google Scholar
Climenhaga, N. (2018) ‘Infinite Value and the Best of All Possible Worlds’. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 97(2), 367–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guyer, P. (1998) ‘The Value of Reason and the Value of Freedom’. Ethics, 109(1), 2235.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Henrich, D. (1960) Der ontologische Gottesbeweis: Sein Problem und Seine Geschichte in der Neuzeit. Tübingen: J. C. B. Mohr.Google Scholar
Kant, I. (1900–) Kants Gesammelte Schriften. Ed. Königlich Preussische Akademie der Wissenschaften (and successors). Berlin: de Gruyter (and predecessors).Google Scholar
Kant, I. (1992) Theoretical Philosophy 1755–1770. Ed. and trans. Walford, D. and Meerbote, R.. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kant, I. (1996a) Practical Philosophy. Ed. and trans. Gregor, M.. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Kant, I. (1996b) Religion and Rational Theology. Ed. and trans. Wood, A. and di Giovanni, G.. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kant, I. (1997) Lectures on Ethics. Ed. Heath, P. and Schneewind, J., trans. P. Heath. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Kant, I. (1998) Critique of Pure Reason. Ed. and trans. Guyer, P. and Wood, A.. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kanterian, E. (2017) Kant, God, and Metaphysics: The Secret Thorn. Abingdon, Oxon, and New York: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Korsgaard, C. (1986) ‘Kant’s Formula of Humanity’. Kant-Studien, 77(2), 183202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Korsgaard, C. (1996) The Sources of Normativity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krouglov, A. (2018a) ‘Kant and the Problem of Optimism: Origins of the Debate’. Kantian Journal, 37(1), 924.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krouglov, A. (2018b) ‘Kant and the Crusians in the Debate on Optimism’. Kantian Journal, 37(2), 731.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leibniz, G. W. (1951) Theodicy. Trans. Huggard, E. M.. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
Look, B. (2013) ‘Leibniz’s Modal Metaphysics’. In Edward N. Zalta (ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Spring 2013 edition). <https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2013/entries/leibniz-modal/>, accessed Sept. 2019.,+accessed+Sept.+2019.>Google Scholar
MacDonald, S. (1991) Being and Goodness: The Concept of the Good in Metaphysics and Philosophical Theology. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Pasternack, L. (2014) Kant on Religion within the Boundaries of Mere Reason. Abingdon, Oxon, and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Reath, A. (1988) ‘Two Conceptions of the Highest Good in Kant’. Journal of the History of Philosophy, 26(4), 593619.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rescher, N. (1979) Leibniz: An Introduction to His Philosophy. Totowa, NJ: Rowman & Littlefield.Google Scholar
Roinila, M. (2013) ‘Kant and Leibniz on the Singularity of the Best of All Possible Worlds’. In Bacin, S., Ferrarin, A., La Rocca, C. and Ruffing, M. (eds), Kant und die Philosophie in weltbürgerlicher Absicht: Akten des XI. Kant-Kongresses 2010 (Berlin: de Gruyter), 381–90.Google Scholar
Rutherford, D. (1995) Leibniz and the Rational Order of Nature. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stang, N. (2016) Kant’s Modal Metaphysics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Strickland, L. (2006) Leibniz Reinterpreted. London: Continuum Publishing.Google Scholar
Wolterstorff, N. (1998) ‘Is it Possible and Desirable for Theologians to Recover from Kant?Modern Theology, 14(1), 118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wood, A. (1978) Kant’s Rational Theology. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Wood, A. (1999) Kant’s Ethical Thought. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wundt, M. (1924) Kant als Metaphysiker: Ein Beitrag zur Geschichte der deutschen Philosophie im 18. Jahrhundert. Hildesheim: Georg Olms.Google Scholar
Yovel, Y. (1980) Kant and the Philosophy of History. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar

Send article to Kindle

To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org 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. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ 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.

Kant’s Critical Theory of the Best Possible World
Available formats
×

Send article to Dropbox

To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and 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 <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

Kant’s Critical Theory of the Best Possible World
Available formats
×

Send article to Google Drive

To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and 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 <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

Kant’s Critical Theory of the Best Possible World
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response

Please enter your response.

Your details

Please enter a valid email address.

Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *