allison (incongruence and ideality).pdf

8/11/2019 ALLISON (Incongruence and Ideality).pdf

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/allison-incongruence-and-idealitypdf 1/7

Discussion:

ncongru ence and dea li ty

R e f l e c t i o n s o n J il l B u r o k e r ' s

Space and Incongruence: The Origin of Kant s Idealism He nry E. Al liso n

I n f o u r d i f f e r e n t t e x t s , s t e m m i n g f r o m v a r i o u s s t ag e s i n h i s

p h i l o so p h i c a l c a r e er , K a n t a p p e al s t o , t h e p h e n o m e n o n o f

i n c o n g r u e n t c o u n t e r p a r t s, o r i n t h e l a n g u ag e o f c o n t e m -

p o r a r y m a t h e m a t i c s , ' e n a n t i a m o r p h s ' . T h e s e a r e p ai rs o f

t h r e e - d i m e n s i o n a l o b j e c t s , e . g. , l e f t a n d r i g h t h a n d s , w h i c h

a l t h o u g h ' c o u n t e r p a r t s ' i n t h a t t h e y a re i d en t ic a l w i t h

r e s p e c t t o p r o p e r t i e s s u c h a s s i z e , p r o p o r t i o n a n d r e l a t i v e

s i t u a t i o n o f p a r t s , a re n e v e r th e l e s s ' i n c o n g r u e n t ' i n t h a t

t h e y c a n n o t b e s u p e r i m p o s e d u p o n o n e a n o t h e r , t h a t i s,

m a d e i d e n t i c a l b y a n y c o n t i n u o u s m o t i o n i n s p a c e . K a n t

o b v i o u s l y t h o u g h t t h a t t h is p h e n o m e n o n w a s o f g r e a t

r e l e v a n c e t o t h e q u e s t i o n o f t h e n a t u r e o f s p a c e . T h e

p r o b l e m , h o w e v e r , i s t h a t h e a p p e a r s t o h a v e d r a w n q u i t e

d i s t i n c t , e v e n i n c o m p a t i b l e c o n c l u s i o n s f r o m i t. I n h i s

e a r l i es t a p pe a l t o i t , i n t he 1768 e s s a y Concern i ng t he

U l t i m a t e F o u n d a t i o n o f t h e D i f fe r e n t i a ti o n o f R e g io n s i n

S p a c e

h e u s e s it t o s u p p o r t t h e N e w t o n i a n v i ew t h a t

" a b s o l u t e s p a c e h a s i t s o w n r e a l i ty i n d e p e n d e n t o f t h e e x i s-

t e n c e o f a l l m a t t e r " . Y e t j u s t t w o y e a r s la t e r , in t h e I n a u g u -

r a l D i s s e r t a t i on , he u s e s i t t o p r ove t ha t t he r e p r e s e n t a t i on

o f s p a c e is a p u r e i n t u i t i o n . T h e r e i s n o e x p l i c i t r e f e re n c e t o

t h e p h e n o m e n o n i n t h e C r i ti q u e o f P u r e R e a s o n i t s e l f , bu t

i n t h e P r o l e g o m e n a ( 1 7 8 3 ) , a n d a g a in i n t h e M e t a p h y s i c a l

F o u n d a t i o n s o f N a t u r a l S c i e n c e ( 1786 ) , he u s e s i t a s t he

ba s i s f o r t he c l a i m t ha t s pa c e is t r a n s c e n de n t a l l y i de a l .

T h i s l a s t r e s u l t i s o f g r e a t p o t e n t i a l i n t e r e s t t o t h o s e w h o

s h a r e t h e p r e v a l e n t v i e w t h a t K a n t ' s m a i n a r g u m e n t f o r t h e

i d e a l i t y o f s p a c e i s t h e w i d e l y d i s c r e d i t e d ' a r g u m e n t f r o m

g e o m e t r y ' ( t h e c l a i m t h a t t h e s u b j e c t i v it y o f s p a c e i s i n -

f e r r e d f r o m t h e s y n t h e t i c a p r i o r i c h a r a c t e r o f g e o m e t r i c a l

k n o w l e d g e ) . U n f o r t u n a t e l y , t h e i n h e r e n t o b s c u r i t y o f th e

a r g u m e n t , t h e f a c t t h a t i t is n o t f o u n d i n t h e Cri t i que o f

P u r e R e a s o n

a n d , a b o v e a l l , t h e f a c t t h a t K a n t u s e d i t t o

s u p p o r t s u c h d i v e r s e c l a im s a b o u t s p a c e h a v e p r e v e n t e d i t

f r o m b e i n g t a k e n v e r y s e r io u s l y . A ty p i c a l r e a c t i o n i s t h a t

o f J o n a t h a n B e n n e t t , w h o d i s m is s es t h e a r g u m e n t o n t h e

g r o u n d s t h a t " K a n t c o u l d n o t d e c id e w h i c h i f a n y o f h i s

d o c t r i n e s a b o u t s p a c e c a n d r a w s t r e n g t h f r o m s p e c i a l f a c t s

a b o u t t h e r i g h t / l e f t d i s t i n c t i o n " . 1

T h e s e i s su e s a r e t a k e n u p i n d i r e c t f a s h i o n b y J i ll

B u r o k e r i n h e r t i g h t l y w r i t t e n a n d e x t r e m e l y s u g g e s t i v e

m o n o g r a p h . 2 B u r o k e r a d v a n c es t w o m a i n t h e s es . ( 1 ) T h a t

t h e r e i s i n d e e d a c o h e r e n t l in e o f t h o u g h t l i n k i n g K a n t ' s

v a r i o u s d i s cu s s i o n s o f i n c o n g r u e n t c o u n t e r p a r t s : n a m e l y , a n

o n g o i n g a n d d e v e l o p i n g c r i ti q u e o f L e i b n iz . T h i s c r i t iq u e

b e g i n s w i t h t h e r e j e c t i o n o f L e i b n i z ' s r e l a t io n a l t h e o r y o f

s p a c e , m o v e s t o a c r i t i q u e o f t h e L e i b n i z i a n v e r s io n o f t h e

s e n s i b i l i t y - u n d e r s t a n d i n g d i s t i n c t i o n , a n d c u l m i n a t e s i n t h e

r e p l a c e m e n t o f t h e L e i b n iz i a n p h e n o m e n a l - m o n a d o l o g i c a l

d i s t i n c t i o n w i t h t h e ' c r i t ic a l ' d i s t i n c t i o n b e t w e e n s p a t ia l

a p p e a r a n c e s a n d n o n - s p a t i a l t h i n g s i n t h e m s e l v e s . ( 2 ) T h a t

t h e a r g u m e n t i n i t s l a t e r f o r m s i s t h e ' k e y ' t o K a n t ' s i d e al -

i s m a n d , a s t h e s u b t i tl e i n d i c a te s , t h e p l a c e t o l o o k i f w e

w i s h t o u n d e r s t a n d i ts ' o r i g i n ' . In d e f e n d i n g t h i s v e r y b o l d

c l ai m s h e n o t o n l y c o n t e n d s t h a t t h e a r g u m e n t f r o m i n c o n -

g r u e n t c o u n t e r p a r t s c o n s t i tu t e s K a n t ' s d e f m i t iv e a r g u m e n t

f o r t h e i d e a l i ty o f s p a c e , b u t a l s o a n s w e r s t h e l e g i o n o f

c r it ic s w h o h a v e w o n d e r e d h o w K a n t c o u l d j u s t if i a b ly

d e n y t h a t t h i n g s i n th e m s e l v e s a r e s p at ia l . H e r d is c u s s i o n o f

t h e l a t t e r i s s u e t a k e s t h e f o r m o t a c o r r e c t iv e t o m y o w n

e a r li e r t r e a t m e n t o f t h e s a m e p r o b l e m .

M y r e a c t i o n s t o t h e s e m a i n t h e s e s a r e q u i t e d i s t i n c t . I

f i n d h e r d e f e n s e o f t h e f i r s t o n e c o m p e l l i n g . S h e h a s g o o d

c o n t r o l o f t h e t e x t s a n d s h e p r o v i d e s a c l e a r , b a s i c a l l y

a c c u r at e a c c o u n t o f t h e c o n n e c t i o n s b e t w e e n K a n t ' s a p pe a l

t o t h e p h e n o m e n o n o f in c o n g r u e n t c o u n t e r p a r t s a n d h i s

d e v e l o p i n g p o l e m i c w i t h L e i b n i z i a n r a t io n a l i s m . A s a

r e s u l t o f t h i s w o r k i t is n o l o n g e r p o s s i b le t o a d v a n c e

s e r i o u s l y a v i e w s u c h a s B e n n e t t ' s . A l t h o u g h I d o n o t l a y

c l a im t o e x p e r t i s e i n t h i s a re a , I a m a l s o i m p r e s s e d b y t h e

c l a ri t y o f h e r a c c o u n t o f t h e r e le v a n ce o f th e p h e n o m e n o n

t o t h e d e b a t e b e t w e e n p r o p o n e n t s o f r e la t io n a l a n d ab s o -

l u t is t i c t h e o r i e s o f s p a c e . I n t h i s p a r t o f h e r a n a l y si s , w h i c h

i s r e a l ly p r o p a e d e u t i c t o h e r m a i n c o n c e r n s , s he c o n n e c t s

t h e d i s c u s s io n i n i n t e r e s t in g w a y s t o t h e w o r k o f c o n t e m -

p o r a r y w r i t e r s s u c h a s E a r m a n , N e h r l i c h a n d S k l a r. A l s o

w o r t h y o f n o t e i s h e r b r i e f f 'm a l c h a p t e r , r e a l l y a n a p p e n -

d i x , i n w h i c h s h e d i s c u s s e s t h e t e n s i o n b e t w e e n K a n t ' s

' c r i t ic a l ' t h e o r y o f s p a c e a n d h i s r e l a t io n a l t h e o r y o f m o t i o n

i n t h e M e t a p h y s i c a l F o u n d a t i o n s o f N a t u r a l S c i e n c e .

Topoi3 (1984), 169-175. 0167-7411/84/0032-0169501.05.

9 1984

by D. Reidel Publishing Com pany.

8/11/2019 ALLISON (Incongruence and Ideality).pdf

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/allison-incongruence-and-idealitypdf 2/7

170 DISCUSSION

U n f o r t u n a t e l y , I c a n n o t b e s o p o s it i ve a b o u t h e r se c o n d

ma in the s is . T o be g in w i th t h e obv ious : e ve n i f one a c c e p t s

he r e n t i r e a nalys is , i nc lud ing the soundne ss o f he r r e c on -

s t r u c t ed a r g u m e n ts f r o m i n c o n g r u e n t c o u n t e r p a r t s t o t h e

t r a nsc e nde n ta l i de a l i t y o f spac e a nd to t he non -spa t i a l i t y o f

th ings i n t he mse lve s , he r c l a im tha t t h i s a rgume n t supp l i e s

the ' ke y ' t o o r t he ' o r ig in ' o f K a n t ' s i de a l ism is a g ross

ove r s t a t e m e n t . I t c om ple t e ly igno re s , fo r e xa mple , t he

s ign i f i c a nc e o f t he A n t inomie s , t o w h ic h K a n t h imse l f

a ss igned a c e n t ra l p l a c e in t he de v e lopm e n t o f tr a nsc e nde n -

t a l i de a l ism , a nd i t ha s no a pp a re n t r e l e va nc e to t he i de a l i t y

o f t i m e , w h i c h i s at least a s impor t a n t a s t he i de a l i t y o f

spa c e fo r K a n t ' s ove ra l l ph i lo sophy . In a dd i t i on , I t h ink

tha t t he re a re s ign i fi c a n t p rob le ms w i th he r a c c ou n t o f j u s t

h o w t h e i n c o n g r u e n t c o u n t e r p a r t a r g u m e n t i s s u p p o s e d t o

y ie ld a c r i t i c ism o f t he Le ibn iz i a n the o ry o f se ns ib i l it y and

a d e m o n s t r a t i o n o f t h e i d e a li t y o f s p ac e an d t h e n o n -

spa t i a l i ty o f t h ings i n t he mse lve s .

B e fo re e xa min ing B uroke r ' s r e c ons t ruc t ion , i t w i l l be

he lp fu l t o r e c a ll t he w a y in w h ic h K a n t h im se l f c ha ra c t e r -

i z e s t he i ssue be tw e e n h i s ow n v ie w s a nd those o f t he

Le ibn iz i ans r e ga rd ing the n a tu re o f hum a n se ns ib il i ty . 3 Th e

basic c la im is tha t th e Le ibniz ians v iew sense per cep t ion as

c on fuse d in t e l l e c t ion , t ha t i s , t he y re ga rd the d i f f e re nc e

be tw e e n se ns ib l e a nd in t e l l e c tua l (non -se ns ib l e ) c ogn i t i on a s

one o f de g re e ( l og ic a l ) r a the r t ha n o f k ind ( t r a nsc e nde n ta l ) .

Since a re l iance upon sensib i l i ty (which enta i ls passiv i ty and

l imi t a t i on ) i s t he de f in ing c ha ra c t e r i s ti c o f h uma n o r f 'm i te

know le dge a nd f r e e dom f rom se ns ib i l i t y t he de f in ing c ha r -

a c t e r i s t i c o f d iv ine know le dge fo r b o t h K a n t a n d t h e

Le ibn iz i a ns , t h i s a l so me a ns tha t ( f rom K a n t ' s po in t o f

v i e w ) the Le ibn iz i a ns l oc a t e huma n know le dge on a c on t in -

uum w i th d iv ine know le dge . In o the r w ords , ac c o rd ing to

the Le ibn iz i a n the o ry , w e pe rc e ive th roug h ou r se nse s,

a lbe i t i n a g ross ly i na de qua te f a sh ion , t he sa me un ive r se

which the d iv ine mind grasps adequate ly . In a rguing aga inst

th i s v i e w K a n t c ha ra c t e r i s t i c a l ly i n s i s t s upon h i s c oun te r

c l a im th a t hum a n se ns ib i li t y ha s i t s ow n a p r io r i fo rms ,

spa c e a nd t ime , w h ic h a re sub je c t ive c ond i t i ons un de r w h ic h

a lone ob je c t s c a n be g ive n to t h e hum a n mind . I t i s , fo r

K a n t , p re c i se ly be c a use hum a n se ns ib i li t y ha s suc h fo rms o r

c ond i t i ons t ha t w e c a nn o t v i e w hum a n c ogn i t i on a s on a

c o n t i n u u m w i t h t h e d i v in e . T h i s, h o w e v e r , i s m e r e l y a n o t h e r

w a y o f sa y ing tha t ou r know le dge i s l im i t e d to ob je c t s a s

t h e y a p p e a r ( u n d e r t h e s e ' f o r m s ' o r ' c o n d i t i o n s ' ) a n d t h a t

w e c a nn~d t kno w th ings a s t he y a re i n t he mse lve s .

A l l o f t h i s sugge st s t ha t i f the a rgum e n t f rom inc on grue n t

c o u n t e r p a r t s i s t o s u p p o r t t h e K a n t i a n t h e o r y o f s en s i bi li ty

a gains t t he L e ibn iz i a n a l t e rna tive , it mus t som e how sup por t

t h e c o n t e n t i o n t h a t s p ac e is a f o r m o r c o n d i t i o n o f h u m a n

sensib i l i ty , a c la im which, in the Tr ans c e nde n ta lAe s the t i c ,

K a n t de r ive s f rom h i s ana ly s is o f t he r e p re se n ta t ion o f

spa c e a s a n a p r io r i o r pu re i n tu i t i on . B uroke r , how e ve r ,

q u i t e e x p l i c i t y b r ea k s t h e c o n n e c t i o n b e t w e e n t h e

a p r io r i t y t he s i s a nd bo th the c r i t i que o f t he Le ibn iz i a n

t h e o r y o f s e n s i b il i ty a n d t h e d o c t r i n e o f t h e i d e a l it y o f

spa c e . In f a c t , spe a k ing o f t he a rgum e n t f rom inc ongru e n t

c oun te rp a r t s , she e ve n c l a ims tha t Th e re i s no e v ide nc e to

s h o w t h a t h e a ls o m e a n t t h e a r g u m e n t t o s u p p o r t d i r e c t ly

t h e a p r i o r i n a tu r e o f t h e k n o w l e d g e o f s p a ce . ( p . 8 9 ) N o w ,

t a ke n in a na r row a nd l i t e ra l se nse , i n w h ic h ' a p r io r i '

e qua l s ' a p r io r i know le dge ' - t h i s is c e r t a in ly c o r re c t ;

b u t t h i s a m o u n t s o n l y t o t h e c l ai m t h a t K a n t d o e s n o t u s e

t h e a r g u m e n t t o s u p p o r t h i s c o n c e p t i o n o f th e s y n t h e t i c

a p r io r i na tu re o f ge o me t ry . W hil e th i s i s t rue , i t i s al so t rue

tha t K a n t i n s i s ts t ha t t he a rgum e n t e s t a b li she s t he a p r io r i

a s w e l l as t he i n tu i t i ve s t a tu s o f t he r e p re se n ta t ion o f

space .4

B u r o k e r ' s d o w n p l a y i n g o f K a n t ' s a p r i o r i t y t h es i s s ee m s

t o b e m o t i v a t e d b y h e r a c c ep t a n c e o f A d o l f G r i i n b a u m ' s

c r i ti q u e o f t h i s a s p e ct o f K a n t ' s u s e o f t h e a r g u m e n t . I n

pa r t i c u l a r , she a c c e p t s G r i inba um 's c on te n t ion tha t t he

a r g u m e n t c a n n o t e s ta b l is h a n y t h i n g a b o u t t h e a p r i o r i t y o f

spa c e be c a use i t f a i l s t o ru l e ou t t he poss ib i l i t y o f a s ye t

und i sc lo se d re g ions o f spa c e in w h ic h the c ou n te rpa r t s

m i g h t t u r n o u t t o b e c o n g r u e n t . A l t h o u g h I d o n o t w i s h t o

t a ke i s sue w i th G r i inba um 's c r i t i c i sm he re , I mus t s t rong ly

d isa gree w i th B uro ke r ' s sugge s tion tha t t h i s c r it i c i sm doe s

no t s ign i f ic a n t ly a f fe c t K a n t ' s a rgu me n t . Inde e d , I shal l t ry

t o s h o w t h a t t h e a r g u m e n t i s p r o b l e m a t i c e n o u g h i f o n e

a c c e p t s a l l o f i t s p re mise s ( i nc lud ing the a p r io r i t y t he s is ) ,

a nd w i thou t t h i s t he s i s i t i s to t a l l y i nc a pa b le o f suppor t ing

e i the r K a n t ' s t he o ry o f se ns ib i li t y o r h i s doc t r ine o f t he

idea l i ty of space s .

The e xe ge t i c a l c on to r t i ons t o w h ic h B uro ke r i s d r ive n

in he r e f fo r t s t o de r ive a s ign i fi c a n t r e su lt f rom the a rgu -

m e n t , sans t he a p r io r i t y t he s i s , a re n i c e ly i ll u s t r a t e d by he r

r e c o n s t r u c t i o n o f t h e a c c o u n t i n t h e Pr o le gom e na w 13) .

K a n t t h e r e p r e s en t s t h e p h e n o m e n o n o f i n c o n g r u e n t c o u n -

t e rpa r t s a s a ' p a ra d ox ' w h ic h c a n be r e so lve d on ly by

a d o p t i n g t h e ' c ri t ic a l ' t h e o r y o f s pa c e as a f o r m o f h u m a n

se ns ib i l i t y , w h ic h in t u rn e n t a i l s t he phe nome na l s t a tu s o f

the ob je c t s i n tu i t e d in spa c e . A c c o rd ing to he r i n t e rp re t a -

t i o n , t h e ' p a r a d o x ' t o w h i c h K a n t r e fe r s a m o u n t s t o a n

inc ohe re n c e in t he Le ibn iz i a n the o r y o f se ns ib i li t y ; so t ha t

K a n t ' s a rgume n t i s i n e f fe c t ma de in to a r e duc t io o f t h a t

8/11/2019 ALLISON (Incongruence and Ideality).pdf

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/allison-incongruence-and-idealitypdf 3/7

D I S C U S S I O N 1 7 1

t h e o r y . T h e a r g u m e n t , o n h e r i n t e r p r e t a t i o n , c o n s i s ts o f t h e

f o l l o w i n g e i g h t s t e p s :

(1 ) Two th ings a re comple te ly subs t i tu tab le i f and on ly i f

they have iden t ica l p rope r t ie s .

(Identity oflndiscernibles)

(2 ) The p rope r t ie s and rela tions o f phen om ena co r re spond

in an exac t way to the p rope r t ie s and re la tions o f noum ena .

(Leibniz s CorrespondencePrinciple)

(3 ) Space i s idea l ; pheno me na can be com ple te ly desc ribed

without referring to space.

(4) In a three-dimensional Euclidean space, objec ts L and R

are no t subs t i tu tab le and hence (by (1 ) ) they a re no t iden tica l.

(5 ) There fo re , no ume na co r re spond ing to L and R m us t

differ in some respect corresponding to their incongruence.

((2) , (3) , (4))

(6) In a four-dimensional or non-o rientab le space, L and R

are no t subs t i tu tab le an d hence (b y (1 ) ) they a re no t iden t ica l.

(7 ) There fo re , noumena co r re spond ing to L and R do no t

differ in any resp ect g iving r ise to incongruence. ((2) , (3) , (6))

(8 ) T here fo re , noum ena co r re spond ing to L and R bo th do

and do no t d i f fe r in some re spec t re levan t to the congruence o r

incongruence o f L and R. ( (5 ) , (7 ) ) (pp . 82 -8 3 )

S i n c e t h e o t h e r p r e m i s e s a r e e i t h e r d o c t r i n e s t o w h i c h t h e

L e i b n i z i a n i s a l r e a d y c o m m i t t e d o r c o n s e q u e n c e s w h i c h

f o l lo w f r o m t h e s e c o m m i t m e n t s t a k e n i n c o n j u n c t i o n w i t h

t h e ' f a c t ' o f in c o n g r u e n t c o u n t e r p a r t s ( 4 ) , it s e e m s a p p a r e n t

t h a t t h e c r u c ia l p r e m i s e in t h e a r g u m e n t i s ( 6 ) . T h i s p r e m i s e ,

h o w e v e r , is n o t f o u n d i n t h e t e x t o f th e

Prolegomena,

a n d

B u r o k e r d o e s n o t c l a i m t h a t i t i s. H e r c l a i m is r a t h e r t h a t i t

s e r v e s a s a k e y p r i n c i p l e i n K a n t ' s e a r l i e s t v e r s i o n o f t h e

a r g u m e n t i n Regions in Space a n d t h a t t h i s ju s t i f i e s t h e

t a k i n g o f i t a s a h i d d e n o r i m p l i c i t p r e m i s e i n t h e

Prolegomena.

I f t h i s p r i n c i p l e w e r e i n d e e d c l e a r l y a r t i c u l a t e d i n t h e

e a r l ie r w o r k , B u r o k e r ' s s t r a t e g y o f a p p e a l i n g t o i t i n t h e

i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f t h e

Prolegomena

w o u l d b e a r e a s o n a b l e

o n e . U n f o r t u n a t e l y , h o w e v e r , i t i s f a r f r o m o b v i o u s t h a t

t h i s i s t h e c a s e . I n h e r a n a l ys i s o f t h e a r g u m e n t i n Regions

in Space s h e s u g ge s t s t h a t t h e k e y t o t h e d i s t i n c t i o n b e t w e e n

t h o s e f e a t u r e s o f c o u n t e r p a r t s i n v i r tu e o f w h i c h t h e y a r e

i d e n t i c al a n d t h o s e i n v i r tu e o f w h i c h a r e i n c o n g r u e n t i s

t h a t t h e f o r m e r a ll s te m f r o m a c o n s i d e r a t i o n o f t h e o b -

j e c t s a s t w o - d i m e n s i o n a l p l a n e f i g u re s w h i l e t h e l a t t e r o n l y

a r is e w h e n o n e v i ew s t h e m a s t h r e e - d i m e n s i o n a l . A l t h o u g h

i t c e r t a in l y g o e s b e y o n d w h a t c a n b e g l e a n e d d i r e c t l y f r o m

t h e t e x t , t h i s s e e m s t o b e a r e a s o n a b l e a n d h e l p f u l o b s e r -

v a t i o n . S h e s t r a y s c o n s i d e r a b l y m o r e f r o m t h e t e x t , h o w -

e v e r ,

and

I t h i n k , f r o m w h a t c a n b e r e a s o n a b l y a t t r i b u t e d

t o K a n t , w h e n s h e g e n e ra l iz e s f r o m t h i s , th e r e b y a t t r i b u t i n g

t o K a n t t h e p r i n c i p le t h a t a n n - d i m e n s i o n a l a s y m m e t -

r ic a l o b j e c t c a n b e t u r n e d i n t o i t s c o u n t e r p a r t s i f i t i s

r o t a t e d i n a s p a c e o f n + 1 d i m e n s i o n s . ( p p . 5 5 - 5 6 )

T h e i d e a h e r e i s t h a t o b j e c t s t h a t a r e c o n g r u e n t w h e n

c o n s i d e r e d a s t w o - d i m e n s i o n a l a n d b e c o m e i n c o n g r u e n t

w h e n p l a c e d i n a t h r e e - d i m e n s i o n a l s p a c e w o u l d b e c o m e

c o n g r u e n t a g a i n i n a s p a c e o f f o u r ( o r m o r e ) d i m e n s i o n s .

S i m i l a r c o n s e q u e n c e s p r e s u m a b l y a l s o f o l l o w w h e n t h e

o b j e c t s a r e s h if t e d f r o m o r i e n t a b l e t o n o n - o r i e n t a b l e

s p a c e s . O n c e a g a i n , h o w e v e r , I f i n d i t i m p l a u s i b l e t o a t t r i b -

u t e s u c h a v i e w t o K a n t .

F i n a l l y , n o t o n l y i s i t f a r f r o m o b v i o u s t h a t t h e n e c e s -

s a r y p r e m i s e i s r e a l l y c o n t a i n e d i n th e e a r l i e r a c c o u n t , i t

a l s o s e e m s t h a t K a n t i s p r e c l u d e d f r o m u s in g a n y s u c h

p r e m i s e i n t h e

Prolegomena in

v i r tu e o f h is v i e w t h a t t h e

t h r e e - d i m e n s i o n a l i t y o f s p a c e i s a s y n t h e t i c a p r io r i t r u t h

( a v i e w t h a t i s e x p r e s s e d i n th e v e r y p o r t i o n o f t h e t e x t

i n w h i c h t h e i n c o n g r u e n t c o u n t e r p a r t a r g u m e n t o c c u r s ) .

O n e c a n p e r h a p s c l a im t h a t t h i s is h o w K a n t o u g h t t o h a v e

a r g u e d o r h o w h i s a r g u m e n t c a n b e re c o n s t r u c t e d s o a s t o

r e n d e r i t i n t e r e st i n g t o a c o n t e m p o r a r y p h i l o s o p h e r , b u t

o n e c a n n o t c l a im t h a t t h i s , i n f a c t , i s h o w K a n t a r g u e d .

T o m y m i n d a t l e a s t, a fa r m o r e l i k e l y ( i f l e ss in g e n i o u s )

r e a d i n g o f th e Prolegomena i n v o l ve s t a k i n g t h e ' p a r a d o x '

t o r e f e r s i m p l y t o t h e e x i s t e n c e o f o b j e c t s t h a t a r e q u al i ta -

t i v e l y i d e n t i c a l ( t h e y h a v e ' c o m p l e t e i n t e r n a l a g r e e m e n t ' )

a n d y e t c a n n o t b e s u b s t i t i t u t e d f o r o n e a n o t h e r . T h i s is ,

i n d e e d , a p a r a d o x f o r t h e L e i b n i z i a n s , a s i t p r o v i d e s a

g e n u i n e c o u n t e r - e x a m p l e t o t h e i d e n t i t y o f i n d i sc e r n i b le s .

I t a l so c o n s t i t u t e s a r e f u t a t i o n o f t h e r e l a ti o n a l t h e o r y o f

s p a c e , s in c e i t s h o w s t h a t t h e i n c o n g r u e n c e o f c o u n t e r p a r t s

c a n b e u n d e r s t o o d o n l y i n t e r m s o f t h e i r d i f f e r e n t o r ie n -

t a t i o n s i n a s i n g le , t h r e e - d i m e n s i o n a l g l o b a l s p a c e t h a t

e x i s ts i n d e p e n d e n t l y o f t h e m . M o r e o v e r , g i v e n t h e c o n c e p t -

i n t u i t i o n d i s t i n c t i o n , i t l i k e w i s e s h o w s t h a t t h e r e p r e s e n -

t a t i o n o f t h i s g l o b a l s p a c e i s a n i n t u i t i o n . F i n a l l y , s i n ce t h e

d i s t i n c t io n b e t w e e n i n c o n g r u e n t c o u n t e r p a r t s r e q u i re s a n

a p p e a l t o i n t u i t i o n ( i n d e e d p u r e i n t u i t io n ) , i t d o e s f o l l o w ,

a s K a n t m a i n t a i n s , t h a t t h e o b j e c t s p e r c e i v e d a r e n o t s u c h

a s s o m e ' m e r e u n d e r s t a n d i n g ' m i g h t c o n c e i v e t h e m ; a n d

t h i s s u f f i c e s t o r e f u t e t h e L e i b n i z i a n b e c a u s e i t s h o w s

t h a t w e c a n n o t r e g a r d s u c h o b j e c t s as c o n f u s e d l y t h o u g h t

L e i b n i z i a n m o n a d s .

T h e r e a l p r o b l e m , h o w e v e r , i s t h a t t h i s a r g u m e n t , i n

e i t h e r i ts o r t h o d o x f o r m a s s k e t c h e d a b o v e o r i n B u r o k e r ' s

r e c o n s t r u c t i o n , i s s i m p l y n o t c a p a b l e o f g e n e ra t i n g th e

p o s i t iv e o n t o l o g i c a l r e s u l ts t h a t b o t h K a n t a n d B u r o k e r

c l a im f o r i t. T o s o m e e x t e n t t h i s is d u e t o a l i m i t a t i o n w h i c h

i t s h a re s w i t h t h e n o t o r i o u s ' a r g u m e n t f r o m g e o m e t r y ' :

n a m e l y , i t p r o v e s ( a t m o s t ) o n l y t h a t t h e r e p r e s e n t a t i o n o f

s p a c e is a n a p r io r i i n t u i t i o n , w h i c h i s p re c i s e l y w h a t K a n t

c l a im s t o h a v e e s t a b l i s h e d i n t h e f o u r b r i e f p a r a g r a p h s o f

8/11/2019 ALLISON (Incongruence and Ideality).pdf

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/allison-incongruence-and-idealitypdf 4/7

1 7 2 D I S C U S S I O N

t he M et aph ys i ca l E xpos i t i on . Bu t ev en g i ven t h i s , i t is s ti ll

n e c e s s a ry t o p r o v e t h a t s p a c e it s e l f ( t h e c o n t e n t o f th e

r e p r e s e n t a ti o n ) i s a f o r m o f h u m a n s e n s ib i li ty a n d t h a t a s

such i s no t a p r o pe r t y o f th i ngs in themse l ves . I n shor t , t he

i d e a l i t y a r g u m e n t t u r n s u l t i m a t e l y o n a m o v e f r o m t h e n a -

t u r e o f t h e representation o f s p a c e t o t h e o n t o l o g i c a l s t a t u s

of space i t s e l f . As I have a r gued e l s ewher e , t he cen t r a l t a sk

f o r a n y i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f th e

Transcendental esthetic

i s t o

f i n d s u c h a n a r g u m e n t , a n d i f o n e d o e s n o t f i n d i t t h e r e ,

one w i ll ce r t a i n l y no t f i nd i t i n an appea l t o i ncong r uen t

coun t e r pa r t s . ~

T he s i t ua t i on i s f u r t he r compl i ca t ed by t he f ac t , co r r ec t -

l y e m p h a s i z e d b y B u r o k e r , t h a t t h e i n c o n g r u e n t c o u n t e r -

pa r t a r gum ent ( i n a l l i t s phases ) i s d i rec t ed spec i f ica l l y

aga i ns t t he L e i bn i z i an t heor y . T h i s i s a p r ob l em because

K a n t o p p o s e s h is d o c t r i n e o f t h e t r a n s c e n d e n t a l i d e a li t y o f

s p a c e t o b o t h t h e L e i b n iz i a n a n d N e w t o n i a n t h e o ri e s , e a c h

of w hi ch i n i t s ow n wa y is deem ed gu i l t y o f a ss ign ing sp ace

or spa t i a l p r ope r t i e s t o t he r ea l m o f t h i ngs i n t hemse l ves .

N o t o n l y , h o w e v e r , d o e s th e p h e n o m e n o n o f i n c o n g r u e n t

c o u n t e r p a r t s n o t s e e m t o c u t a g a i n s t t h e N e w t o n i a n t h e o r y ,

b u t , a s al r e a d y n o t e d , i t w a s a c t u a l ly a p p e a l e d t o b y K a n t

i n s u p p o r t o f t h a t t h e o r y . T h u s , i t w o u l d s e e m i n c u m b e n t

o n a n y o n e w h o w i s he s t o f i n d a c o n v in c i n g a r g u m e n t f o r

t he t r anscende n t a l i dea l i t y o f space i n t he app ea l t o i ncon-

g r u e n t c o u n t e r p a r t s t o s h o w h o w i t c a n y i e ld m o r e t h a n

me r e l y a c r i t ique o f t he L e i bn i z i an t heor y .

M o r e o v e r , th e p r o b l e m i s e x a c e r b a t e d b y B u r o k e r ' s

i n t e r p r e t a t i on o f t he a r gum ent . L eav i ng as i de wha t I t ake

t o b e h e r r a t h e r f a n c i fu l re c o n s t r u c t i o n o f t h e Prolegomena

a c c o u n t , h e r b a s i c cl a i m s e e m s t o b e t h a t t h e a r g u m e n t

t u r n s o n a d e m o n s t r a t i o n o f t h e i n c o m p a t i b i l i t y b e t w e e n

t he na t u r e o f space an d spa t i a l r e l a t i ons ( a s i l l us t ra t ed by

t h e p h e n o m e n o n o f i n c o n g r u e n t c o u n t e r p a r t s ) a n d t h e

L e i bn i z i an t h eor y o f r e l a t i ons . I t is c l ea r , how ever , t ha t t he

m o s t t h a t f o l lo w s f r o m t h i s i s t h a t w e c a n n o t c o n c e i v e o f

L e i bn i z i an monads ( mer e l y ' i n t e l l i g i b l e ' subs t ances ) a s

s t and i ng i n r e l a t i ons t ha t a r e e i t he r spa t i a l o r ana l ogous t o

t h e s p a t ia l r e la t io n s o f p h e n o m e n a . A l t h o u g h t h i s m a y s u f-

f i ce a s a c r i t i que o f L e i bn i z , i t mo s t a s sur ed l y does no t

a m o u n t t o a d e m o n s t r a t i o n o f t h e t ra n s c e n d e n t a l id e a l it y

o f s p a ce . C e r ta i n l y a N e w t o n i a n w o u l d n o t b e c o n v i n c e d b y

i t . W hy, a f t e r a l l, can we no t s i mpl y aban don t he L e i bn i z i an

t h e o r y o f r e l a t io n s ?

Bur ok er , o f co ur se , i s qu i t e awar e o f t he nagg i ng p r ob -

l e m o f t h e N e w t o n i a n a l te r n a ti v e , b u t h e r b r i e f a t t e m p t t o

dea l w i t h i t i s no t ve r y conv i nc i ng . I n add i t i on t o an appea l

t o K a n t ' s w e l l k n o w n c l a im r e ga r d in g t h e m e t a p h y s i c a l

a b s u r d it i es t o w h i c h t h e N e w t o n i a n s a r e c o m m i t t e d in

v i r tu e o f t h e i r t h e o r y o f s p a c e ( B 7 0 ) , w h i c h h a s n o t h i n g

p a r t i c u l a r l y t o d o w i t h t h e i n c o n g n , e n t c o u n t e r p a r t a r g u -

me nt , i t cons i s t s e s sen ti a l ly i n t he f o l l owi ng c l a i m:

The Newtonians and the Leibnizians made com plementary mis-

takes. The latter thinkers understood the im possibility of rela-

t ions independent of r eal relata, but fai led to recognize the

independence o f sp ace from spatial objects. Newton and his

followers, by contrast, correctly grasp ed the on tological inde-

pendence of space, but mistakenly too k spa ce for a thing in

itself . Th us they al lowed the existence of relat ions (among the

parts o f space) which are not based solely on the non-relat ional

properties of real things. The theory o f absolute space is meta-

physically bankrup t bec aus e it violates the theory of relations.

Kant 's Crit ical Theory of sp ace rejects the N ewtonian view,

then, insofar as it misrepresen ts the relation betwee n sp ace and

sensibility, bu t not as it con ceives the indepen dence of space

from spatial objects. (p. 114)

T h e o p e r a t iv e a s s u m p t i o n h e r e i s c l e ar l y th a t K a n t h i m -

se l f adhe r es t o t he L e i bn i z i an t heo r y o f r e l a ti ons , whi ch

Bur oker i n t e r p r e t s a s t he doc t r i ne t ha t a l l r e l a t i ona l p r op-

e r t i e s o f t h ings a r e r educ i b l e t o no n- r e l a t i ona l , mona d i c

pr ope r t i e s . 7 G i ven t h i s a s sum pt i on , she can t hen d i smi ss

o u t o f h a n d t h e N e w t o n i a n p o s i t io n ( a l t h o u g h o n l y o n t h e

b a s is o f a t he s i s t h a t i s p r e s u p p o s e d b y r a t h e r t h a n a r g u e d

f o r i n th e i n c o n g r u e n t c o u n t e r p a r t a r g u m e n t ) , w h i l e a t t h e

s a m e t i m e t r e a ti n g t h e r e d u c t i o o f th e L e i b n iz i an p o s i t i o n

a s e q u i v a le n t t o t h e d e m o n s t r a t i o n o f th e K a n t i a n a l t e rn a -

t i ve . T h i s i s a s tr ange a s sump t i on on t he f ace o f i t . Bur ok e r ' s

j u s t if i c a ti o n f o r i t s e e m s t o s t e m f r o m h e r r e a d in g o f th e

Amphi bo l y chap t e r i n whi ch , no t su r pr i s i ng l y , she c l a i ms

t o f i n d a c o m p r e s s e d v e r s io n o f t h e i n c o n g r u e n t c o u n t e r -

p a r t a r g u m e n t . ( p . 8 7 ) A d m i t t e d l y , K a n t d o e s a r gu e t h e r e

t ha t i f one i gnor es t he co nd i t i on o f s ens i b i l it y and cons i de r s

t h in g s a c c o r d i n g t o t h e i r ' m e r e c o n c e p t ' o n e w i ll b e l e d t o

conce i ve o f r ea l i t y i n accor dance w i t h t he mo de l o f t he

L e i b n iz i a n m o n a d o l o g y . T h e w h o l e p o i n t o f t h e e x e rc i se ,

how ever , i s t o show wha t ha ppen s i f , a s t he r e su l t o f a

f a i l u r e t o engage i n t r anscenden t a l r e f l ec t i on , we i gnor e

t h e c o n d i t i o n s o f h u m a n s e n s i b il it y . I n o t h e r w o r d s , t h e

L e i b n iz i a n m o n a d o l o g y i s p r e se n t e d b y K a n t in t h e A m p h i -

bo l y chap t e r and e l s ewher e a s t he log i ca l ou t com e of a ce r -

t a i n f o r m o f ' t r a n s c e n d e n t a l i l l u si o n ', n o t , a s B u r o k e r s e e m s

t o a s s u m e , a s a b as i c a ll y c o r r e c t a c c o u n t o f t h e n o u m e n a l

r e a lm , w h i c h t h e n n e e d s o n l y to b e b r o u g h t i n t o p r o p e r

conn ec t i on w i t h t he ' c r i t i ca l ' t he or y o f s ens ib i l i ty .

T h i s ge t s us to t he hea r t o f the bas i c d i f f i cu l t y w i t h

B u r o k e r ' s a p p r o a c h , a d if f ic u l t y t h a t s e e m s u n a v o i d a b l e

g i v e n t h e p r o j e c t o f a t t e m p t i n g t o d e r i v e K a n t ' s i d e a l i s m

f r o m t h e i n c o n g r u e n t c o u n t e r p a r t a r g u m e n t . T r a n s c e n d e n t a l

8/11/2019 ALLISON (Incongruence and Ideality).pdf

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/allison-incongruence-and-idealitypdf 5/7

D I S C U S S I O N 1 7 3

i dea l i sm on t h i s v i ew i s s een a s a r ev i s i on o f L e i bn i z i an

n o u m e n a l i s m , b r o u g h t a b o u t b y t h e r e c o g n i t io n o f t h e

i n c o m p a t i b i l it y o f t h i s n o u m e n a l i s m w i t h c e r t a i n a n o m a l i e s

i n t h e e p i s t e m o l o g y o f s p a c e a s i l lu s t r a te d b y t h e p h e n o m -

e n o n o f i n c o n g r u e n t c o u n t e r p a r t s . T h e r e i s p e r h a p s a g ra i n

o f t r u t h i n t h is , b u t n o m o r e . M o r e o v e r , b y a s s u m in g , a s

I t h i n k s h e d o e s , t h a t i t s o m e h o w c a p t u r e s t h e e s s e nc e o f

t r anscenden t a l i dea l i sm, Bur oke r i s l ed i n t o some se r i ous

mi s r ep r esen t a t i on s o f t he Kan t i an pos i t i on . T h i s i s pa r t i cu -

l a r ly t r u e o f h e r a t t e m p t t o d e a l w i t h th e n o n - s p a t i a l i ty

i s sue ; and s i nce th i s a t t e m pt i s i n t i ma t e l y connec t ed w i t h

h e r c r i ti q u e o f m y o w n e a r li e r t r e a t m e n t o f th i s to p i c , I

s h al l c o n si d e r t h e m b o t h t o g e t h e r .

I n m y o w n a n a l y s i s I h a d a r g u e d t h a t t h e n o n - s p a t i a l i t y

t hes i s f o l l ows ana l y t i ca l l y f r om t he c l a i m t ha t space i s a

f o r m o f h u m a n s e n s ib i l it y a n d t h e ' c r i t ic a l ' c o n c e p t i o n o f

a thing in i t se l f , s In a ef for t to sh ow this I f i r s t di s t in-

g u i sh e d b e t w e e n t h e t w o s e n se s i n w h i c h K a n t u s e s t h e

expr es s i on ' t h i ng i n i t s e l f ' and i t s va r i an t s: ( 1 ) a s t he nam e

f or a ' non- sens i b l e ' ob j ec t on t o l og i ca l l y d i s t i nc t f r om t he

sens i b l e ob j ec t s t ha t appea r i n human expe r i ence , e .g . God ,

a n d ( 2 ) a s t h e c h a r a c t e r i z a t io n o f t h e o b j e c t th a t a p p e a r s

( a n o r d i n a r y e m p i r i c a l o b j e c t ) c o n s id e r e d a p a r t f r o m t h e

cond i t i ons und e r w hi ch i t appea r s . I n t he s econd sense ,

whi ch i s t he o ne usua l l y f oun d i n the Cr i t i que t he t h i ng

i n i t s e l f i s mo r e ap pr op r i a t e l y t o be desc r i bed a s t he t h i ng

as i t i s in i t se l f or , bet te r s t i l l, consid ered as i t is in i t se l f .

G i ven t h i s d i s t i nc t ion , I t hen a r gued t ha t i n ne i t he r s ense o f

t he t e r m i s t he c l a i m t ha t t h i ngs in them se l ves a r e spa t i a l

c o m p a t i b l e w i t h t h e a s s u m p t i o n t h a t s p a c e i s a f o r m o f

sens i b i li t y . S i nce t he no n- spa t i a l i t y o f t h i ngs i n them se l ves

i n t he f i r st s ense s eems obv i ous ( t hey a r e de f i ned a s non-

sens i b le ob j ec t s ) I con cen t r a t e d on t he non- spa t i a l i ty o f

t h i ngs

c o n s i d e r e d

as t hey a r e i n t hemse l ves . M y c l a i m, i n

br i e f , was t ha t t h e r e i s a con t r ad i c t i on i n t he a s sum pt i on

t h a t t h in g s q u a c o n s i d e r e d i n t h is w a y m i g h t b e s u b j e c t to

t he cond i t i ons o f s ens i b il i ty because t o con s i de r th i ngs i n t h i s

w a y j u s t m e a n s t o c o n s i d e r t h e m i n a b s t r a c t i o n f r o m s u c h

condi t i ons . T h i s s t r a t egy was j us t i f i ed on t he g r ounds t ha t

t he t r ad i t i ona l ob j ec t i o n aga i ns t Ka n t i s s i mpl y t ha t i n

a r gu i ng f r o m t he c l a i m t ha t space i s a f o r m o f s ens ib i l i ty t o

i t s t r anscenden t a l i dea l i t y he neg l ec t ed a poss i b l e a l t e r na -

t i ve : namel y , t ha t space i s a f o r m of s ens i b i l i t y a n d t h a t

t h i ngs a s t hey a r e i n t hemse l ve s a r e none t he l e s s e i t he r ac t u -

a l l y spa t i a l o r , a s a weaker a l t e r na t i ve , t ha t t hey s t and i n

r e l a t i ons ana l ogous t o t he sp a t i a l r e l a t i ons o f phe nom ena .

7 h e g o a l o f th e a r g u m e n t , t h e n , i s n o t t o p r o v e t h a t s p a c e

i s a f o r m of s ens i b i l i ty ( t h i s i s p r e sup posed ) , bu t mer e l y t o

show t ha t t h i s i s i ncom pa t i b l e w i t h t he sp a t i a l i t y o f t h i ngs

as t hey a r e i n t hemse l v es i n e i t he r t he s t r ong o r t he we ak

sense. O n t he bas i s o f t h i s ana l ys i s , I a lso a r gued t ha t t he

as se r t i on o f the n on- spa t i a l i t y o f t h i ngs cons i de r ed a s t hey

a r e i n t h e m s e l v e s d o e s n o t v i o l a t e th e n o u m e n a l i g n o r a n c e

t hes i s , because i t i s an ana l y t i c c l a i m abou t how t h i ngs a r e

c o n s i d e r e d i n

t r a n s c e n d e n t a l r e f l e c t i o n n o t a n u n g r o u n d e d

s y n t h e t i c a p r i o r i c l a i m a b o u t h o w t h i n g s real ly are i nde -

p e n d e n t l y o f o u r c a p a c i ty t o k n o w t h e m .

Bur o ker advances t w o c r i t ic i sms o f t h i s ana lys i s , whi ch

s h e c la i m s t o b e o n t h e r i g h t t r a c k b u t n o t t o g o f a r e n o u g h .

F o r o n e t h i n g i t d o e s n o t g e t a t t h e f u n d a m e n t a l b a s is o f

t he no n- spa t i a l i t y o f t h i ngs i n themse l ves . And second , it

s u g ge s ts a m i s t a k e n v i e w o f t r a n s c e n d e n t a l p h i l o s o p h y

( p .93) . W i t h rega r d t o t he f i rs t po i n t , she sugges t s t ha t m y

ana l ys i s su f f e r s f r om a f a i l u r e t o d i s t i ngu i sh be t ween

num er i ca l and qua l i t a t ive i den t i t y . I f space i s a f o r m o f

sens i b i li t y , i t ce r t a i n l y f o l l ows t ha t t he r e can no t be a nu-

mer i ca l l y i den ti c~ il space t ha t i s no t such a f o r m; bu t t h i s

ha r d l y su f f i ces t o r u l e o u t t he poss i b i l i t y o f a qua l i t a t i ve l y

i den t i ca l ( o r s i mi l a r space ) . I be l ieve t ha t t he r e i s cons i de r -

ab l e mer i t t o t h i s c r i t i c i sm, and I have subsequen t l y r ev i sed

m y ana l ys i s subs t an t i a l ly i n l i gh t o f i t . 9 M y pr esen t c once r n ,

h o w e v e r i s n o t t o d e f e n d m y o w n r e v i s e d a n a l y s i s , b u t

ra the r to suggest tha t there are ser ious di f f icul t ies in

Bur ok er ' s , a s we l l a s i n he r ex t r em e l y ske t chy a l t e rna t i ve

a c c o u n t o f t ra n s c e n d e n t a l p h i l o s o p h y .

A s o n e m i g h t s u s p e c t , B u r o k e r a t t e m p t s t o d e r i v e t h e

non- spa t i a l i t y t hes i s d i r ec t l y f r om t he i ncongr uen t coun-

t e r p a r t a r g u m e n t , w i t h o u t i n t r o d u c in g a n y f u r t h e r p re m i s e s

o r c o n s i d e ra t io n s . I n a s u m m a r y s t a t e m e n t o f h e r p o s i ti o n

she wr i tes :

The real ba sis for these claim s, then, is the incomp atibility

between the nature o f space, as demonstrated b y incongruent

counterparts, and the analysis of relations. By showing how the

formal features of sensible phenomena are in conflict with the

formal features of things in themselves as defined by reaso n, the

incongruent cou nterpart argu ment provides the required direct

support for the non-spatiality of things in themselves that was

lacking in Allison's defense. (p.101 )

A l t h o u g h p e r h a p s ' d i r e c t ' , t h e b a s i c p r o b l e m w i t h t h i s

l i ne o f a r gument i s t ha t i t i s much t oo r e s t r i c t ed . I t wor ks

o n l y i f t h e o n l y v i a b l e a lt e r n at i v e t o K a n t ' s t h e o r y is t h e

L e i bn i z i an , and i f t h i ngs a s t hey a r e i n t hemse l ves a r e v i rt u -

a l l y i den t i f i ed w i t h L e i bn i z i an mo nads . Ad mi t t ed l y , th i s r e s-

t r i c t i on mi gh t s eem t o be jus t i f i ed i n t he p r es en t case , s i nce

t he ph i l osophe r s who o r i g i na ll y r a is ed t h i s ob j ec t i on aga i ns t

Kan t wer e L e i bn i z i ans . T he f ac t r ema i ns , however , t ha t

e s sen t i al l y t he s am e ob j ec t i on cou l d eas i l y be r a i sed by a

de f end e r o f a r ea l is t ic , non- r e l a t i ona l t heo r y o f space , wh o

8/11/2019 ALLISON (Incongruence and Ideality).pdf

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/allison-incongruence-and-idealitypdf 6/7

174 DISCUSSION

is no t a t a ll conce rn ed about the com pa t ib i l i ty o f space

wi th the Le ibn iz ian theory o f re la t ions . In fac t , the p rob-

lem i s sugges ted b y the no tor ious co lored spec tac le ana logy

i n t e r m s o f w h i c h t h e a r g u m e n t o f t h e

Transcendental

A e s t h e t i c i s gene ra l ly in te rpre ted . As S tephan K6rne r

wri tes :

I t i s a l w a y s l o g i c a l l y p o s s i b l e t h a t w h a t w e p e r c e i v e u n d e r t h e

f o r m o f s p a c e a n d t i m e i s s o o r d e r e d i n d e p e n d e n t l y o f o u r

p e r c e p t i o n . I t i s q u i t e p o s s i b le t h a t w h a t a p e r s o n s e e s t h r o u g h

h i s i r r e m o v a b l e s p e c t a c l e s a s , l e t u s s a y p i n k , is a ls o p i n k i n f a c t ,

a n d w o u l d b e s e e n s o e v e n i f p e r i m p o s s i b i le t h e s p e c t a c l e s w e r e

r e m o v e d ) ~

I can f red no th ing in the incongruen t counte rpa r t a rgu-

m en t to ru le ou t th i s pos s ib i l ity . I f it can be ru led ou t a t a l l,

i t can on ly done by showing tha t the re i s som eth ing funda-

m en ta l ly w rong w i th th i s ana logy as a dev ice fo r in te rpre t ing

the Kant ian conc ep t ion of a f rom o f sens ib il i ty . Al thoug h I

be l ieve tha t th i s i s indeed the case , I do no t p ropo se to a rgue

for i t he re . Qui te apa r t f rom tha t , ho wever , it shou ld a t

l eas t be c lea r tha t Buroker ' s approach does no th ing to

chal lenge this analogy.

F ina l ly , we com e to Buroker ' s a t t em pted reconc i l i a t ion

of the non-spa t i a l i ty wi th the noum ena l ignorance thes i s ,

which i s a l so p resen ted a s a cor rec t ive to m y own ea r l i e r

analys is . T he prob lem i s to exp la in how K ant can ru le ou t

the pos s ib i l ity tha t th ings in them se lves m igh t be spa t i a l

Without v iola t ing the ' cr i t ical ' s t r ic tures regarding t i le un-

know abi l i ty o f th ings a s they a re in them se lves . Her s t ra te -

gy is to argue that the non-spat ia l i ty thes is is actual ly a

presuppos i t ion o f the noum ena l ignorance thes i s and ,

the re fo re , com pa t ib le w i th i t . T he bas is fo r the c la im i s

h i s to r ica l . Her m a in po in t i s tha t Kant f i r s t a r r ived a t the

non-spa t i a l i ty thes i s in the Inaugura l Dis se r ta t ion and on ly

l a t er , w i t h t h e d e v e l o p m e n t o f t h e ' c ri t ic a l ' t h e o r y o f t h e

unders tand ing , accord ing to which know ledge requ i re s tha t

concep t s be re la ted to s ens ib le in tu i t ion , d id Kant a r r ive a t

t h e d o c t r i n e o f t h e u n k n o w a b i l i ty o f t hi n g s i n t h e m se l v es

( p p . 1 1 0 - 1 1 ) . A l t h o u g h t h e h i st o r y i s c o r r e c t , i t h a r d l y

helps to resolve the issue. The problem is s imply that i t

l eaves com ple te ly unexpla ined ho w the ' c r i t ica l ' Kant

cou ld s ti ll c l a im to kno w som eth ing ( the non-spa t i a l i ty and

tem pora l i ty o f th ings a s they a re in them se lves ) tha t was

a f f i rm ed b y the ' p re -c r it i ca l ' Kan t on the basi s o f qu i t e

d i f fe ren t ep i s tem olog ica l a s sum pt ions .

Buroker s eem s to have a t l ea s t an im pl ic i t re sponse to

t h i s l i n e o f a t t a c k a n d t h i s t u r n s o n h e r c o n c e p t i o n o f

t ranscendenta l ph i losophy . Bas ica l ly , she wants to d i s t in -

gu i sh be tween f i r s t o rde r knowledge of ob jec t s and s econd

orde r re f l ec t ion on the condi t ion s o f the pos s ib i l ity o f such

knowledge . Th e d i s t inc t ion i s qu i t e app ropr ia te , i f ha rd ly

nove l , and she i s ce r ta in ly cor re c t in he r ins is t ence tha t the

Critique

i s conce rned wi th the l a t t e r t a sk and tha t i t s cha rac-

te r i s t i c c la im s about fo rm s of s ens ib i l i ty , th ings in them -

selves , e tc . m ust be reg arded in this l ight . By this means she

hopes to s t r ike ou t a m idd le g round be tw een the unpa la tab le

v iew tha t Kant ' s m a in c la im s in the Critique cons i s t o f syn-

t h e t i c a p r i o r i j u d g m e n t s t h a t a r e r u l ed o u t b y t h e v e r y

theory they a re des igned to e s tab l i sh and the ( supposed ly)

equa l ly unsa t i s fac to ry thes i s , a t t r ibu te d to Ben ne t t and m y-

sel f, tha t these c laim s a re ana ly t i c o r m e re ly conce p tua l

t ru th s . (p . 111) Al l o f th i s is we l l and goo d , bu t one i s

sure ly t em pt ed to a sk how such t ranscendenta l c laim s a re

to be unde rs tood . H er d i scus s ion a t th i s po in t i s ve ry ske tchy ,

bu t the sugges tion s eem s to be tha t the c la im s of t ranscen-

den ta l re f l ec t ion a re sui generis ne i the r ana ly t i c nor syn-

t h e t i c ( p p . 1 1 1 - 1 1 3 ) . T h i s c a l l s t o m i n d t h e F i c h t e a n

n o t i o n o f a ' t h e t ic j u d g m e n t ' ; b u t B u r o k e r h e r s e lf f ai ls t o

cha rac te r i ze such c la im s or to exp la in how, on Kant ian

grounds , they m igh t be pos s ib le . In shor t , she l eaves com -

p l e t e l y u n t o u c h e d t h e n o t o r i o u s p r o b l e m o f t h e ' m e t a-

c r i t ique ' . Wha teve r the l im i ta t ions o f m y ow n account ,

which I do no t th in k bea rs m ore than a ve rba l re sem blance

to Benn e t t ' s , it i s a t l ea s t m ot iv a ted by a conce rn to addres s

th i s p rob lem , which i s o f cen t ra l im por tan ce to Kant ian

ideal ism.

In con c lus ion , then , I fee l tha t B uroker m ak es a s ign if i-

can t con t r ibu t io n to Ka nt s cho la rship by showing tha t

the re i s, indeed , a cohe ren t l ine o f thou ght un i t ing Kant ' s

va r ious t rea tm e nts o f the incongruen t counte rpa r t a rgum ent .

F rom f i r s t to l a s t the t a rge t i s Le ibn iz . In add i t ion , she

m akes som e as tu te po in t s abo ut the s ign if i cance o f the

p h e n o m e n o n o f i n c o n g r u e n t c o u n t e r p a r t s f o r t h e o n g o i ng

d e b a t e b e t w e e n p r o p o n e n t s o f t h e r e l a t io n a l a n d n o n -

re la t iona l theor ie s o f space . By no s t re tch o f the im agina -

t ion , however , does she succeed on showing tha t the a rgu-

m ent p rov ides e i the r the ' o r ig in ' o r the ' key ' to Kant ' s

idea li sm . S he does no t succeed in do ing th i s because i t can-

no t be done . Th i s idea l ism has m a ny sources and m ot iva -

t i o n b e y o n d t h e f a m i l y q ua r r e l w i th L e i b n i z o n w h i c h s h e

p laces v i r tua l ly a l l o f the we igh t . In fac t , the qua r re l wi th

L e i b n iz m u s t i t s e l f b e u n d e r s t o o d i n t e r m s o f a m o r e f u n d a -

m en ta l c r i t ique o f t ransc endenta l rea li sm , o f which the

Le ibn iz ian ph i losophy i s on ly one va r ie ty .

8/11/2019 ALLISON (Incongruence and Ideality).pdf

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/allison-incongruence-and-idealitypdf 7/7

D I S C U S S I O N 1 7 5

N o t e s

i J o n a t h a n B e n n e t t , T h e D i f f e r e n c e b e t w e e n R i g h t a n d L e f t ,

American Philosophical Quarterly 7 ( 1 9 7 0 ) , 7 6 ( c i t e d b y B u r o k e r ,

p . 4 ) .

2 J i l l V a n c e B u ro k e r , Spaceandlncongruence: The Origin o f Kan t s

Idealism, D . R e i d e l , D o rd re c h t , 1 9 8 1 .

3 I h a v e d isc u sse d t h i s t o p i c a t l e n g t h i n m y o w n , The K ant-Eber-

hard Cdntroversy, J o h n s H o p k i n s U n i v e r s i ty P r e ss , B a l t i m o r e , 1 9 7 3 ,

e s p . p p . 6 7 - 9 5 , a n d a g a i n i n Kan t s Transcendental Idealism: An

Interpretation a nd Defense, Y a l e U n i v e rs i t y Pre s s , N e w H a v e n a n d

L o n d o n , 1 9 8 3 , p p . 2 0 - 2 2 , a n d , in p as s in g , 8 2 - 9 8 .

4 Se e In a u g u ra l D i s se r t a t i o n w 1 5 , and Prolegomena w 1 3 .

s I t s h o u l d p e r h a p s b e n o t e d t h a t B u r o k e r h e r s e l f s e e m s t o l e a n t o

t h i s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n a t t i m e s . F o r e x a m p l e , s h e e m p h a s iz e s ( p. 1 1 7 )

t h e s i g n if i c a n ce f o r K a n t s a r g u m e n t o f t h e c l ai m t h a t s p a c e is a

fo rm o f se n s i b i l i t y . B u t t h i s c l a i m i s i n se p a ra b l e f ro m t h e a p r i o r i t y

thesis .

6 See

Kant s Transcendental Idealism,

p p . 9 8 - 1 1 1 .

7 S e e e s p e ci a ll y p p . 3 3 - 3 4 . S h e h e r e a c k n o w l e d g e s t h e a r g u m e n t s

b r o u g h t f o r t h a g a i n s t t h e s t a n d a r d i n t e r p r e t a t i o n b y H i d e I s h i g u r o ,

b u t c l a im s t o f i n d t h e m u n c o n v i n c i n g . I t d o e s s e em , h o w e v e r , t h a t

m u c h o f h e r a r g u m e n t r e s t s n o t o n l y o n t h e c o r r e ct n e s s o f t h e s t a n -

d a r d i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f L e i b n i z o n r e l a t i o n s , b u t a l s o o n t h e m u c h

m o r e q u e s t i o n a b l e a s s u m p t i o n t h a t t h i s i s a l so h o w K a n t u n d e r s t o o d

t h e s i t u a ti o n . H e r e I t h i n k t h a t a m o r e d e t a i l e d a c c o u n t w o u l d h a v e

b e e n i n o r d e r .

8 S e e T h e N o n - S p a t i a l i ty o f T h i n g s in T h e m s e l v e s f o r K a n t ,

Journal o f the His tory o f Phi losophy 1 4 (1 9 7 6 ) , 3 1 3 - 2 1 .

9 See Kan t s Transcendental Idealism, p p . 1 1 1 - 1 4 .

10 S t e p h a n K 6 rn e r , Kant, P e n g u i n B o o k s, L o n d o n , 1 9 6 5 , p . 1 7 .

D e p t . o f P h i l o s o p h y ,

Un i v e r s i t y o f Ca l i f o r n i a ,

San Diego La Jolla CA 92093 U.S.A.