The Role of Reflection in Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason
There are two prevailing interpretations of the status which Kant accorded his claims in the Critique of Pure Reason: 1) he is analyzing our concepts of cognition and experience; 2) he is making empirical claims about our cognitive faculties. I argue for a third alternative: on Kant’s account, all cognition consists in a reflective consciousness of our cognitive faculties, and in critique we analyze the content of this consciousness. Since Strawson raises a famous charge of incoherence against such a position, I begin by showing that this charge is misplaced.
No Supplementary Data
No Article Media
Document Type: Research Article
Affiliations: Department of Philosophy, University of Arizona
Publication date: 1999-06-01