Kant's Critique of Pure Reason - Video 56: The Meaning of Transcendental Idealism

We take the time to reflect -- with Gardner as our guide -- on the meaning of transcendental idealism. Can we enter into the Kantian system and can we remain within it? We pay special attention to the differences between Kant and Berkeley, and to the relation between things in themselves and appearances.

Required reading: Sebastian Gardner, "Kant and the Critique of Pure Reason", Chapter 8.

[warrenbeardall]

Your videos have been awesome across this most difficult of texts to read. I am very grateful to you for sharing these publicly.

[a_b]

Great video as always! I particularly liked how you re-explained ‘The Thing In Itself’ in context of various interpretations. I’ve found reading the first Critique to be an amazing experience, but sometimes I’ve found dipping into secondary literature to be even more daunting as everyone has their own way of reading Kant, with assumptions/things they take for granted that are often not fully explained; so it’s very helpful to be able to recognise, for example, when someone is basing their analysis on a certain view of what the thing in itself means for Kant’s philosophy.

[lbjvg]

In the book “On Philosophy and Philosophers Unpublished Papers, 1960–2000 (Richard Rorty, W. P. Małecki ed.)” there is a chapter “Kant as a Critical Philosopher” where Rorty concludes: “It seems to me that contemporary linguistic philosophy may properly claim to be Kant’s proper heir. ”