Boundaries and Possibilities of the Constellation Research Method
Keywords:Kant, research of constellations, Dieter Henrich, methodology, anthroponomy, anthropology, human models
AbstractThe study of Kant’s anthropology, proposed by Viktor Kozlovskyi in its original and thorough monograph, is an entirely new interpretation of Kant’s answer to the fundamental question “What is man?”. On the basis of the philosopher’s heritage and taking into account the large body of research literature, Kozlovskyi reconstructs five conceptual “human models” in Kant’s anthropological discourse. However, this study contains a number of problematic statements and conclusions. I argue first, that there is some inconsistency between Kant’s understanding of the concept of “anthropology” and Kozlovskyi’s explanation. Second, the model of man as intelligible being, made explicit through the concepts of “freedom” and “spontaneity”, is a justified construction within the limits of criticism, but not quite correct with regard to the place and function of “anthropology” in it. Third, we can see a dissonance between Kozlovskyi’s explanation of the constellations as “chronotopes-events” and interpretation of this concept by Dieter Henrich’s school, where the methodology of “research constellations” was used to elucidate the early phase of German idealism. However, this leads to the cardinal question of how far this methodology is applicable for the analysis of Kant’s philosophy.
Gutschmidt, H. (2007). Vernunfteinsicht und Glaube. Hegels These zum Bewusstsein von etwas “Höherem” zwischen 1794 und 1801. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck, & Ruprecht.
Henrich, D. (1991). Konstellationen. Probleme und Debatten am Ursprung der idealistischen Phi-losophie (1789-1795). Stuttgart: Klett-Cotta.
Kant, I. (1900 sqq.). Gesammelte Schriften: Hrsg. von der Preußischen (Deutschen) Akademie der Wissenschaften. Berlin: Reimer, & De Gruyter.
Kant, I. (1998). Kritik der reinen Vernunft (J. Timmermann, Hrsg.). Hamburg: Meiner.
Kozlovsky, V. (2014). Kant’s Anthropology: sources, constellations, models. [In Ukrainian]. Kyiv: Kyiv-Mohyla Academy Press.
Muslow, M., & Stamm, M. (Hrsg.). (2005). Konstellationsforschung. Frankfurt am Main: Suhr-kamp.
Pietsch, L.-H. (2010). Topik der Kritik. Die Auseinandersetzung um die Kantische Philosophie (1781-1788) und ihre Metaphern. Berlin, & New York: De Gruyter. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110233681
Terletsky, V. (2015). Ukrainian Point of View on Kant’s Anthropology. [In Ukrainian]. Filosofska dumka, (2), 67-71.
Wenzel, U. J. (1992). Anthroponomie. Kants Archäologie der Autonomie. Berlin: Akademie Verlag.
How to Cite
Copyright (c) 2016 Sententiae
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
- Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgment of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).