• PhilPapers
  • PhilPeople
  • PhilArchive
  • PhilEvents
  • PhilJobs
  • Sign in
PhilPeople
 
  • Sign in
  • News Feed
  • Find Philosophers
  • Departments
  • Radar
  • Help
 
profile-cover
Drag to reposition
profile picture

Hein Van Den Berg

University of Amsterdam
  •  Home
  •  Publications
    34
    • Most Recent
    • Most Downloaded
    • Topics
  •  Events
    3
  •  News and Updates
    17

 More details
  • University of Amsterdam
    ILLC / Department Of Philosophy
    Assistant Professor
Vrije University
Department of Philosophy
PhD, 2011
Homepage
Areas of Specialization
Science, Logic, and Mathematics
17th/18th Century German Philosophy
Computational Philosophy
History of Biology
Conceptual Change in Science
Christian Wolff
Kant: Science, Logic, and Mathematics
Kant: Teleology
Kant: Metaphysics and Epistemology
Christian August Crusius
5 more
Areas of Interest
Science, Logic, and Mathematics
17th/18th Century German Philosophy
Computational Philosophy
History of Biology
Philosophy of Psychiatry
Conceptual Change in Science
1 more
  • All publications (34)
  •  35
    Kant on Vital Forces: Metaphysical concerns versus Scientific Practice
    In Ernst-Otto Onnasch (ed.), Kants Philosophie der Natur: Ihre Entwicklung Im Opus Postumum Und Ihre Wirkung, Walter De Gruyter. pp. 115-135. 2009.
    Kant's Scientific Work, MiscKant: Teleology in ScienceKant: Metaphysics, Misc
  •  886
    Kant’s conception of proper science
    Synthese 183 (1): 7-26. 2011.
    Kant is well known for his restrictive conception of proper science. In the present paper I will try to explain why Kant adopted this conception. I will identify three core conditions which Kant thinks a proper science must satisfy: systematicity, objective grounding, and apodictic certainty. These conditions conform to conditions codified in the Classical Model of Science. Kant’s infamous claim that any proper natural science must be mathematical should be understood on the basis of these condi…Read more
    Kant is well known for his restrictive conception of proper science. In the present paper I will try to explain why Kant adopted this conception. I will identify three core conditions which Kant thinks a proper science must satisfy: systematicity, objective grounding, and apodictic certainty. These conditions conform to conditions codified in the Classical Model of Science. Kant’s infamous claim that any proper natural science must be mathematical should be understood on the basis of these conditions. In order to substantiate this reading, I will show that only in this way it can be explained why Kant thought (1) that mathematics has a particular foundational function with respect to the natural sciences and (2) as such secures their scientific status
    Kant: Philosophy of ScienceKant: Philosophy of MathematicsKant: Science, Logic, and Mathematics, Mis…Read more
    Kant: Philosophy of ScienceKant: Philosophy of MathematicsKant: Science, Logic, and Mathematics, Misc
  •  1549
    The Wolffian roots of Kant’s teleology
    Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C: Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences 44 (4): 724-734. 2013.
    Kant’s teleology as presented in the Critique of Judgment is commonly interpreted in relation to the late eighteenth-century biological research of Johann Friedrich Blumenbach. In the present paper, I show that this interpretative perspective is incomplete. Understanding Kant’s views on teleology and biology requires a consideration of the teleological and biological views of Christian Wolff and his rationalist successors. By reconstructing the Wolffian roots of Kant’s teleology, I identify seve…Read more
    Kant’s teleology as presented in the Critique of Judgment is commonly interpreted in relation to the late eighteenth-century biological research of Johann Friedrich Blumenbach. In the present paper, I show that this interpretative perspective is incomplete. Understanding Kant’s views on teleology and biology requires a consideration of the teleological and biological views of Christian Wolff and his rationalist successors. By reconstructing the Wolffian roots of Kant’s teleology, I identify several little known sources of Kant’s views on biology. I argue that one of Kant’s main contributions to eighteenth-century debates on biology consisted in demarcating biology from metaphysics. Kant rejected Wolffian views on the hierarchy of sciences, according to which propositions specifying the functions of organisms are derived from theological truths. In addition, Kant argued that organic self-organization necessitates a teleological description in order to show that self-organization does not support materialism. By demarcating biology and metaphysics, Kant made a small yet important contribution to establishing biology as a science
    Christian WolffKant: Teleology in ScienceKant's Scientific WorkKant: Philosophy of ScienceKant: Tele…Read more
    Christian WolffKant: Teleology in ScienceKant's Scientific WorkKant: Philosophy of ScienceKant: Teleology in Religion
  •  193
    Kant's Organicism: Epigenesis and the Development of Critical Philosophy (review)
    International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 28 (1): 99-101. 2014.
    No abstract
    Science, Logic, and MathematicsKant's Scientific Work, Misc
  • Prev.
  • 1
  • 2
  • Next
PhilPeople logo

On this site

  • Find a philosopher
  • Find a department
  • The Radar
  • Index of professional philosophers
  • Index of departments
  • Help
  • Acknowledgments
  • Careers
  • Contact us
  • Terms and conditions

Brought to you by

  • The PhilPapers Foundation
  • The American Philosophical Association
  • Centre for Digital Philosophy, Western University
PhilPeople is currently in Beta Sponsored by the PhilPapers Foundation and the American Philosophical Association
Feedback