Martin Hammer

Kant intended the Inauguraldissertation (1770) as a propaedeutic to a future metaphysics with the help of a critique of metaphysical prejudice. Kant, already then, is committed to the spirit of criticism by questioning which faculty a cognition belongs to. The distinction between sensibility and understanding, and the doctrine of space and time, reconfigure the notion of empirical knowledge, which was no longer deemed confused per se and only gradually differentiated from clear and distinct rational knowledge, as rationalism had erroneously taught. Yet, determining the sensibility’s subjectivity delineates what is to be kept away from scientific metaphysics by the critique of metaphysical prejudice. Despite the elevation of sensibility, a dogmatic asymmetry between a lower (sensibility) and upper faculty of knowledge (understanding/reason) remains. The objectivity of the real use of reason goes hand in hand with the epistemic hubris that the ideas of pure reason could be recognised symbolically (Lambert’s symbolische Erkenntnis) if only the laws of sensibility were not falsely involved in this cognition as false principles (Meier’s unechte Gründe).

Durch den Fokus auf die epistemische Negativität kann Kants Transzendentalphilosophie noch einmal aus einem anderen Blickwinkel begriffen werden. Die Autor:innen leuchten in ihren Beiträgen wesentliche Facetten der komplexen Strukturen falschen Denkens aus und schaffen damit eine Grundlage, von der aus sich Negativität als erkenntnistheoretischer Grundzug von Kants Systematik verstehen lässt. Dabei widmen sich die Beiträge selten diskutierten Quellen, wie etwa Kants Inauguraldissertation, der Amphibolie der Reflexionsbegriffe, den handschriftlichen,,Reflexionen" und den Vorlesungsnachschriften, da Kant hier seine Theorien des Vorurteils, Irrtums und Scheins entwickelt. So eröffnet dieser Band einen sowohl historischen als auch systematischen Zugang zu Kants Theorie der epistemischen Negativität und lässt Kants,,Revolution der Denkungsart", die die Klassische Deutsche Philosophie einleitet, auch in Bezug zu Vorläufern und zu ihrem Nachwirken in einem neuen Licht erscheinen.

The aim is to examine Alois Riehl’s contribution to the “culture war” (Kulturkampf) in the second half of the nineteenth century. We show that he used Kant’s autonomy principle to argue against the idea that religious dogmatism is a fundament of morality. We prove this thesis by focusing on the forgotten historical background, which is important for an understanding of Morals und Dogma. Originally this essay was an expert opinion for the court case of the socialist H. Tauschinski who was accused of blasphemy. Tauschinski wrote an article in which he doubted the immortality of the soul and the existence of a personal God. These two dogmas of the Catholic Church were considered bу the Austrian authorities to be the foundations of public order. Riehl questioned not only the charge but also the validity of religious dogmas for morality. Based on Kant’s ethics, he argued for a moral indifferentism of religious dogmas. His career was significantly influenced by this essay, because of its anti-clerical content. During the culture war, Riehl repeatedly had problems with the authorities, especially in the Austro-Hungarian monarchy. The “Neurath-Haller Thesis” argues that in Austria the appointment of professorships was controlled and monitored by the state, with the goal of installing a philosophy which was beneficial to the interests of the state, and a strong anti-Kantianism in Austrian Philosophy as a consequence. We can agree with this thesis insofar as Riehl in the period of the “Catholic Renaissance” in Austria was not allowed to succeed Ernst Mach. The analysis of Riehl’s arguments allows us furthermore to understand Riehl as a neo-Kantian as early as 1871/1872, which has been questioned by many authors who think the early Riehl was no Kantian.

Lambert’s theory of postulates plays a crucial role in the development of Kant’s concept of synthesis. Laywine (2010) has put forward this thesis, which is developed further in this essay. I will first provide some evidence for Lambert’s influence on Kant in general (1). Secondly, I will show that Lambert’s theory of postulates, which involves a radical revision of Wolff’s mathematical method, influenced Kant’s concept of synthesis (2.1). These methodological improvements enabled Kant to findaway to solve the problem of the transcendental deduction of the categories (2.2). Thirdly, I will analyse the extent to which Lambert’s theory of postulates is crucial to his own reform of metaphysics, in particular through his new concept of generality („Allgemeinheit“) (3) and his new concept of the a priori (4). Both innovations are rooted in Lambert’s theory of postulates and shed new light on Kant’s revolution.

I propose a method of assessing the degree of enlightenment of a society based on its discourses. My hypothesis is that the more objectivity prevails in a society’s spheres of discourse, the more enlightened it is; the more subjectivity dominates, the more unenlightened. This relationship can be made evident through the reconstruction of Kant’s Theory of Prejudice by taking into account the handwritten notes and fragments and the lectures on logic. First, I will discuss some key aspects of Kant’s concept of prejudice. Secondly, I will address the epistemological function of the public sphere in order to show what conditions it must satisfy to fulfil its function. Thirdly, I will argue that not only Selbstdenken but also participatory reason, and therefore the public sphere itself, are both fundamental elements of enlightenment in that they function as counter-maxims against prejudice.