A FORMALIZATION OF KANT’S TRANSCENDENTAL LOGIC

Although Kant (1998) envisaged a prominent role for logic in the argumentative structure of his Critique of Pure Reason , logicians and philosophers have generally judged Kant’s logic negatively. What Kant called ‘general’ or ‘formal’ logic has been dismissed as a fairly arbitrary subsystem of first-order logic, and what he called ‘transcendental logic’ is considered to be not a logic at all: no syntax, no semantics, no definition of validity. Against this, we argue that Kant’s ‘transcendental logic’ is a logic in the strict formal sense, albeit with a semantics and a definition of validity that are vastly more complex than that of first-order logic. The main technical application of the formalism developed here is a formal proof that Kant’s Table of Judgements in Section 9 of the Critique of Pure Reason , is indeed, as Kant claimed, complete for the kind of semantics he had in mind. This result implies that Kant’s ‘general’ logic is after all a distinguished subsystem of first-order logic, namely what is known as geometric logic.

[1]  Manley Thompson On Aristotle’s Square of Opposition , 1953 .

[2]  F. Bartlett Thinking: An Experimental and Social Study , 1958 .

[3]  Chen C. Chang,et al.  Model Theory: Third Edition (Dover Books On Mathematics) By C.C. Chang;H. Jerome Keisler;Mathematics , 1966 .

[4]  P. Strawson,et al.  The Bounds of Sense: An Essay on Kant's Critique of Pure Reason. , 2018 .

[5]  J. Bruner Beyond the Information Given: Studies in the Psychology of Knowing , 1973 .

[6]  Rainer Stuhlmann-Laeisz Kants Logik : eine Interpretation auf der Grundlage von Vorlesungen, veröffentlichten Werken und Nachlass , 1976 .

[7]  R. Goldblatt Topoi, the Categorial Analysis of Logic , 1979 .

[8]  A. Treisman,et al.  A feature-integration theory of attention , 1980, Cognitive Psychology.

[9]  Branislav R. Boricic On sequence-conclusion natural deduction systems , 1985, J. Philos. Log..

[10]  A. Montefiore Kant's Transcendental Psychology , 1992 .

[11]  Immanuel Kant,et al.  Lectures on Logic , 1992 .

[12]  W. Harper,et al.  Kant and the Exact Sciences , 1992 .

[13]  Wilfrid Hodges,et al.  Model Theory: The existential case , 1993 .

[14]  Valeria de Paiva,et al.  Full Intuitionistic Linear Logic (extended abstract) , 1993, Ann. Pure Appl. Log..

[15]  M. Wolff Die Vollständigkeit der kantischen Urteilstafel , 1995 .

[16]  I. Kant,et al.  Lectures on anthropology: the Cambridge edition of the works of Immanuel Kant , 1996 .

[17]  K. Westphal Kant and the Capacity to Judge , 2000 .

[18]  J. MacFarlane WHAT DOES IT MEAN TO SAY THAT LOGIC IS FORMAL , 2000 .

[19]  P. Heath,et al.  Theoretical Philosophy after 1781 , 2002 .

[20]  Erik Palmgren An Intuitionistic Axiomatisation of Real Closed Fields , 2002, Math. Log. Q..

[21]  Carl J. Posy Between Leibniz and Mill: Kant’s Logic and the Rhetoric of Psychologism , 2003 .

[22]  D. Jacquette Philosophy, Psychology, and Psychologism , 2003 .

[23]  P. Blackburn,et al.  Book Reviews: The Proper Treatment of Events, by Michiel van Lambalgen and Fritz Hamm , 2005, CL.

[24]  M. Schönfeld,et al.  Kant and the Metaphysics of Causality , 2006 .

[25]  Jeremy Avigad,et al.  A FORMAL SYSTEM FOR EUCLID’S ELEMENTS , 2008, The Review of Symbolic Logic.

[26]  Timothy Rosenkoetter Truth Criteria and the Very Project of a Transcendental Logic , 2009 .