Talk:Immanuel Kant

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

integration of material from sub-article on "Kantian ethics"[edit]

As described here <Talk:Kantian_ethics#reintegration_of_Outline_into_main_Kant_page>, I propose to merge the treatment of Kant's moral philosophy from that article into this one. Please discuss there to keep everything in one place. I'm tagging top editors of this page who have contributed in the past couple years. Please add anyone I have overlooked. Omnipaedista, Freeknowledgecreator, TonyClarke, JimWae, Drevolt.

Thanks, Patrick J. Welsh (talk) 16:18, 24 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Per discussion on that Talk page, I am copying over some material from the child page on Kantian Ethics, but I am not deleting it from that page. If there are issues with this duplication, please raise them here.
Most of what I am copying is my own work, and, if it is an either-or situation, I prefer it to be on the main Kant page.
I expect, though, that even just in the course of my own near-future edits, the text will change considerably in both articles (even if the sources remain largely the same).
(See the discussion on the other Talk page for details.)
Cheers, Patrick J. Welsh (talk) 01:08, 2 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]


I recently picked up Paul Guyer’s 2014 Kant, and intended to update this page as appropriate over the course of my reading.

Unfortunately, aside from being largely unsourced, the article is much too disordered to admit of that kind of incremental improvement. Major parts of Kant's philosophy are missing completely, while other parts are treated only in a highly scattered way, sometimes repetitively, usually without any kind of references.

To begin to remedy this situation, I am going to edit what is there now to remove redundancies, obvious errors, and to get everything into an appropriate section.

Then I will flesh out the TOC, probably relying mostly on the SEP and IEP entries. Just having a coherent and reasonably comprehensive outline will make it much easier for other editors to productively contribute. I will not insert anything that is "merely" a placeholder, as the article needs to readable at all times; I may, however, insert some short sections that the article needs, but which will require fleshing out.

In terms of content, what this page most needs is to have good coverage of Kant's project in the three Critiques and a more robust treatment of his moral thought. It should be obvious, which it is not from the article in its present state, that Kant is a systematic thinker.

Please bear with me during the process of reordering and integrating redundant copy in the existing article (and, absent strong arguments of objection, at least one child article). I am just doing my best to preserve the work of previous editors before making my own additions.

In particular, the lead to the Philosophy section is currently its own free-floating thing. After integrating its contents into the appropriate sections below, I will be following the good Wikipedia policy of working backwards from the body of the section or article up to the lead, which should just briefly announce what is elaborated below.

Suggestions most welcome; collaboration, of course, encouraged —

Cheers, Patrick J. Welsh (talk) 16:51, 25 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Bravo! (i.e. you're a brave fellow!) Errantios (talk) 00:01, 26 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Okay, so my strategy of working backwards did not work on the material covering the first Critique. Sections supposedly devoted to parts of the Transcendental Doctrine of the Elements were mostly occupied with defining terms from the introductory sections of the book. I have now done this first part, which should make possible a more focused and accurate account of what Kant is doing in the body of the text in the two sections that follow.
I should also note that, if the work of Paul Guyer looms large, that is just because it is his book I happen to be reading. It's not my intent to impose any interpretative bias on the article. I just don't know that much of the recent scholarship on this part of Kant's philosophy. So I am just trusting that others will step in and make any necessary changes to ensure neutrality. If appropriate, please tag me here to bring any issues to my attention. Patrick J. Welsh (talk) 17:20, 5 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
My overview of the first Critique, or at least my first pass, is complete. It currently reads too much like a summary of the TOC for my taste, but I think it is an improvement over the previous coverage. My hope is that once the rest of the article is more complete it will be possible to better frame and synthesize material into a more accessibly encyclopedic format. Patrick J. Welsh (talk) 19:54, 7 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Kant's views on women[edit]

The subsection on this under Anthropology was literally just this:


Many authors have criticized Kant's negative views on women.[1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8]


I've removed it from the article because it is a single sentence in the passive voice. I preserve it here, however, in hopes someone might use some of these sources to compose something with content and restore it to the article. Patrick J. Welsh (talk) 23:14, 1 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]


  1. ^ Hay, Carol (9 December 2013). "A Feminist Kant". Opinionator.
  2. ^ Huseyinzadegan, Dilek; Pascoe, Jordan (7 April 2021). "Dismantling Kantian Frames: Notes toward a Feminist Politics of Location and Accountability".
  3. ^ Gould, Timothy (1990). "Intensity and Its Audiences: Notes towards a Feminist Perspective on the Kantian Sublime". The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism. 48 (4): 305–315. doi:10.2307/431568. JSTOR 431568 – via JSTOR.
  4. ^
  5. ^
  6. ^ Hay, Carol (27 January 2013). Hay, Carol (ed.). Kantianism, Liberalism, and Feminism: Resisting Oppression. Palgrave Macmillan UK. pp. 50–88. doi:10.1057/9781137003904_2 – via Springer Link.
  7. ^
  8. ^ "A Feminist Defence of Kant".

scholarly resources online[edit]

This post is just to call to the attention of editors the many topic-specific peer-reviewed articles on Kant at the IEP and the SEP. Even more than I expected! You can now find all of them that are directly about Kant listed at Immanuel Kant#External links. These are a great scholarly sources for anyone interested in improving this article or branching it out into a child article.

Cheers, Patrick J. Welsh (talk) 16:42, 7 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Influence and legacy[edit]

It seems to me this section may need a rewrite. The lead is mostly a list that appears to have been just invented by an editor. The Historical Influence section is uneven in its coverage and not well-organized. The Influence on Modern Thinkers is completely arbitrary.

What do others think? Is this material worth saving, or should it be replaced?

My proposal would be to have a brief discussion of Kant's reception by his immediate successors, and then to describe his influence as dividing into the camps of the German Idealists and the neo-Kantians, prefiguring the Continental-Analytic division in the practice of philosophy throughout the twentieth century. The idea would be to keep it short and rely on Wikilinks.

Kant has probably exerted more influence on subsequent philosophy than anyone since Plato and Aristotle. We can convey this without cataloguing names. Any singling out of individuals beyond the early nineteenth century is going to be arbitrary (and only encourage other editors to add mention of their favorite philosophers).

Or are there other suggestions? Patrick J. Welsh (talk) 19:46, 7 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]


A section "Criticism" Synotia (moan) 14:55, 9 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]