Kant and the Fate of Autonomy
Problems in the Appropriation of the Critical Philosophy

Ameriks challenges the presumptions that dominate popular approaches to the concept of freedom.

Karl Ameriks (Author)

9780521786140, Cambridge University Press

Paperback, published 26 June 2000

366 pages
22.9 x 15.3 x 2.1 cm, 0.54 kg

Amerik's book is rich, rewarding, and detailed. He combines a mastery of the German and English material...with a fine historical sensibility, a gift for clear writing, and a sharp analytical mind. He also displays a scrupulous intellectual honesty, claiming clear advantages for the 'modest' approach to Kant while noting and discussing the shortcomings of that approach." Ethics

It has been argued that Kant's all-consuming efforts to place autonomy at the center of philosophy have had, in the long-run, the unintended effect of leading to the widespread discrediting of philosophy and of undermining the notion of autonomy itself. The result of this 'Copernican revolution' has seemed to many commentators the de-centring, if not the self-destruction, of the autonomous self. In this major reinterpretation of Kant and the post-Kantian response to his critical philosophy, Karl Ameriks argues that such a view of Kant rests on a series of misconceptions. By providing the first systematic study of the underlying structure of the reaction to Kant's critical philosophy in the writings of Reinhold, Fichte and Hegel, Karl Ameriks challenges the presumptions that dominate popular approaches to the concept of freedom, and to the interpretation of the relation between the Enlightenment, Kant and post-Kantian thought.

Introduction: Kant and the fate of autonomy
Part I. Kant: 1. Kant's modest system
Part II. Reinhold
2. Reinhold's contribution
Part III. Fichte
3. Kant, Fichte and short arguments to Idealism
4. Kant, Fichte and the radical primacy of the practical
5. Kant, Fichte and appreciation
Part IV. Hegel: 6. Hegel's critique of Kant's theoretical philosophy
7. The Hegelian critique of Kantian morality
8. Concluding unscientific postscript.

Subject Areas: History of ideas [JFCX]