Teleology and Epigenesis: An Approach to Organisms in Kant’s Critique of the Power of Judgment
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.48160/18532330me5.130Keywords:
teleology, epigenesist, organism, Kant, BlumenbachAbstract
Many issues concerning the study of organisms have not come only from biology, but also from philosophical reflections. The analysis of teleology, the human races, epigenesis and Blumenbach’s Bilgungstrieb during the 18thcentury, offers an interesting landscape.Kant’s critical enterprise was shaken, particularly in the Critique of the Power of Judgment, by locating and ordering the living within the frame offered by Newtonian mechanics and causality. Thus, our proposal reflects upon a situated and concrete dialogue about the mutual influence played between philosophy and science and how this communication champions a legitimate and non-mechanically reduced way of studying organisms.
References
Berg, H. (2013), “The Wolffian Roots of Kant’s Teleology”, Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences44(4): 724-734.
Buchdahl, G.(1984),“Reduction-Realization: A Key to the Structure of Kant’s Thought”, Philosophical Topics12(2): 29-98.
Butts, R.E. (1990), “Teleology and Scientific Method in Kant’s Critique of Judgment”, Noûs24: 1-16.
Davis, C.L. (1895), “Kant’s Teleology”, Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society3(2): 65-86.
Driesch, H. (1914), The History and Theory of Vitalism, London: MacMillan &Co.
Esposito, M. (2013), Romantic Biology 1890-1945, London: Pickering & Chatto.
Forster, G. (2013), “Something More about the Human Races”, en Mikkelsen,J.(ed.), Kant and the Concept of Race, Albany: SUNY Press, pp. 146-167.
Friedman, M. (1991), “Regulative and Constitutive”, Southern Journal of Philosophy30: 73-102.
Gilbert, S. (2000), “Diachronic Biology meets Evo-Devo: CH Waddington’s Approach to Evolutionary Developmental Biology”, American Zoologist40(5): 729-737.
Gilbert, S. (2002), “The Genome in its Ecological Context”, Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences981(1): 202-218.
Gilbert, S. y S. Sarkar (2000), “Embracing Complexity: Organicism for the 21st Century”, Developmental Dynamics219(1): 1-9.
Haraway, D. (1988), “Situated Knowledges: The Science Question in Feminism and the Privilege of Partial Perspective”, Feminist Studies14(3): 575-599.
Herder, J.G. (1959), Ideas para una filosofía de la historia de la humanidad, Buenos Aires: Losada.
Huneman, P. (2006a), “From the Critique of Judgment to the Hermeneutics of Nature: Sketching the Fate of Philosophy of Nature after Kant”, Continental Philosophy Review39(1): 1-34.
Huneman, P. (2006b), “Naturalising Purpose: From Comparative Anatomy to the ‘Adventure of Reason’”, Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences37: 649-674.
Kant, I. ([1790] 1987), Critique of Judgment, Indianápolis: Hackett Publishing Co.
Kant, I. ([1786] 1993),Primeros principios metafísicos de la ciencia de la naturaleza, México: IIF-UNAM.
Kant, I. ([1790] 2003), Crítica del Discernimiento, Madrid: Antonio Machado Libros.
Kant, I. ([1777] 2007), “Of the Different Races of Human Beings”, en Zöller, G. y R.B. Lauder (eds.), Anthropology, History and Education, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 84-97.
Kant, I. ([1785] 1958), “Definición de la raza humana”, en Estiú,E. (trad.), Filosofía de la Historia, Buenos Aires: Editorial Nova, pp. 66-84.Kant, I. ([1785] 2006a), “Determinación del concepto de unaraza humana”, en Alcoriza,J. y A. Lastra (trads.), En defensa de la Ilustración, Barcelona: Alba Editorial, pp. 93-113.
Kant, I. ([1788] 2006b), “Sobre el uso de principios teleológicos en la filosofía”, en Alcoriza,J. y A. Lastra (trads.), En defensa de la Ilustración, Barcelona: Alba Editorial, pp. 183-217.
Lenoir, T. (1980), “Kant, Blumenbach, and Vital Materialism in German Biology”, Isis71, 77-108.
Lerussi, N.A. (2012), “Acerca de los esbozos para una teoría filogenética kantiana (según la Crítica de la Facultad de Juzgar§§80 y 81)”, Metatheoria3(1): 73-92.
Lerussi, N.A. (2013), “La teoría kantiana de las razas y el origen de la epigénesis”, Studia Kantiana15: 85-102.
Mensch,J. (2013), Kant’s Organiscism. Epigenesis and the Development of Critical Philosophy, Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Moscoso, J. (1995), “Experimentos de regeneración animal: 1686-1765 ¿Cómo defender la preexistencia?”, Dynamis: Acta Hispanica ad Medicinae Scientiarumque Historiam Illustrandam15: 341-373.
Oyama, S. (2000a), The Ontogeny of Information: Developmental Systems and Evolution, Durham: Duke University Press.
Oyama, S. (2000b), Evolution’s Eye: A Systems View of the Biology-Culture Divide, Durham: Duke University Press.
Quarfood, M. (2006), “Kant on Biological Teleology: Towards a Two-Level Interpretation”, Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences37(4): 735-747.
Richards, R.J. (1992), The Meaning of Evolution: The Morphological Construction and Ideological Reconstruction of Darwin's Theory, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Richards, R.J. (2000), “Kant and Blumenbach on the Bildungstrieb: A Historical Misunderstanding”, Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences31(1): 11-32.
Richards, R.J. (2002), The Romantic Conception of Life: Science and Philosophy in the Age of Goethe, Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Roe, S. (1979),“Rationalism and Embryology: Caspar Friedrich Wolff’s Theory of Epigenesis”, Journal of the History of Biology12(1): 1-43.
Sloan, P. (1981), Matter, Life, and Generation: 18th Century Embryology and the Haller-Wolff Debate, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Sloan, P. (2002), “Preforming the categories: Kant and eighteenth-century generation theory”, Journal of the History of Philosophy2: 229-253. Steigerwald, J. (2013), “Natural Purposes and the Purposiveness of Nature: The Antinomy of the Teleological Power of Judgment”, en Van de Vijver, G. yB. Demarest (eds.), Objectivity after Kant: Its Meaning, Its Limitations, Its Fateful Omissions, Hildesheim: Georg Olms Verlag, pp. 83-97.
Waddington, C.H. (1940), Organisers and Genes, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Waddington,C.H. (1957), The Strategy of The Genes. A Discussion of Some Aspects of Theoretical Biology.London: George Allen & Unwin.
Waddington, C.H. (1968), Towards a Theoretical Biology 1: Prolegomena, Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
Thompson, D.W. (1942), On Growth and Form, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Zammito, J.H. (1992), The Genesis of Kant’s Critique of Judgment, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Zammito, J.H. (2003),“This Inscrutable Principle of an Original Organization’: Epigenesis and ‘Looseness of Fit’ in Kant’s Philosophy of Science”, Studies in History and Philosophy of Science34:73-109.
Zammito, J.H. (2006), “Teleology Then and Now: The Question of Kant’s Relevance for Contemporary Controversies over Function in Biology”, Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences37: 748-70.
Zammito, J.H. (2012), “The Lenoir Thesis Revisited: Blumenbach and Kant”, Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences43(1): 120-32.
Zumbach, C. (1984), The Transcendent Science: Kant’s Conception of Biological Methodology, The Hague: Nijhoff.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2016 Metatheoria – Journal of Philosophy and History of ScienceThe documents published here are governed by the licensing criteria
Creative Commons Argentina.Atribución - No Comercial - Sin Obra Derivada 2.5 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/2.5/ar/
