You're Here:
Home > Chapter 4 > Section 4.1
Immanuel Kant (1732-1804), being one of the important German Idealists, had an important influence on some of the British Idealists. He also influenced Hegel, about whom I will write in the next section. In this section, I will discuss the influence Kant’s philosophy had on the British Idealists.
Immanuel Kant (1732-1804), in his Critique of Pure Reason, reacted to both Rationalist and Empiricist philosophies, that had been prevalent in respectively the continental and British philosophy. This can be seen as an epistemological debate (see 3.3), but Van der Biest (2004) uses the term “metaphysics” in describing the contradictio in terminis Rationalism leads to and the scepticism Empiricism leads to.
In the Critique of Pure Reason, Kant examines two philosophical movements – Empiricism (Locke, Hume) and Rationalism (Descartes, Leibniz). There is a problem with both of these ideas: if all is fictional but reason (and God, for Descartes), we still find our reason limited by for example time. Empiricism, on the other hand, leads to scepticism, such as in Hume: we can see that one thing “always” follows another, but we cannot see the causal relationship between these two things, so we can’t be sure if it really exists.
Kant tried to settle the problems with epistemology and metaphysics set forth by the two movements. He therefore determined our reason and perception to be limited by the “categories”, such as space, time, quantity, causality, etc. These are, according to him, a priori existent in our minds, and – whether reality is existent and we can perceive it or not – we’re always looking through the mirror of the categories.
In Van der Biest (2004) the allegory of the blind men and the elephant is used in introducing Kant’s metaphysics: a group of blind men each examine a part of the elephant in detail, believing that what they examine is the total thing. None of them, as a result, can identify the elephant, and, having been told that they all examined the same, they keep arguing over what is correct. Kant, according to Van der Biest, finds himself part of this group, also blind and trying to examine metaphysics.
Firstly, Kant can be noted o have been a leader in the German Idealist movement, which also included Fichte, Schelling and Hegel, about whom I will write in section 4.2. Secondly, the philosophy of Kant has had noticeable influence on later philosophers, notably Transcendentalists in France, Germany and Italy, such as the Marburg School and the Heidelberg School. And, of course, the British Idealists also commented on Kant.
Kant’s epistemology had a great influence on other areas of philosophy. One in which Green was actively involved, was religion. Kant separated reason from faith by stating that the finite thing (humans included) can only know finite things. We cannot know for sure if there is such thing as God, but we can act as if there were, because humans have the ability to set determined moral laws - which may be viewed as connected to God. Kant was not quite fond of metaphysics, and hence separated practical and theoretical reason: in theoretical reason, we may think that there are infinite beings (like God), but we’re limited by the categories to know for sure. However, we do have the capability to apply ethics in practical situations, which is then viewed as practical reason.
Kantians and Hegelians have greatly debated over the separation or unity between religion and reason.
Green was also influenced by Kant on the topic of free will. He says that acts are grounded in desires, but that humans have the ability to “conceive” desires, ie. to see themselves as separate from the desire, and hence to freely take action on the grounds of their desires. The “conceived” desire is what Green calls (following Kant) “free cause” or “self-cause”, namely, it is the capacity to choose to determine actions. (70)
Caird wrote several important works on the philosophy of Immanuel Kant. He honoured Kant’s integrating a priori and a posteriori in his epistemology, but he found Kant to be the first step in a new era. Kant’s ideas, so to speak, had opened the doors for a worthwhile philosophy, which Caird was going to continue. He wanted to make clear how the mind should always return to one unifying centre, which he illustrated in both his writings on Kant and Hegel (see 4.2).
In the introduction to the second edition of Philosophical Theory of the State, Bosanquet reacts to criticism that his work is too negative, referring to Kant, in stating that this assumption goes against his principle on freedom and state action, which are also adopted by Green. Bosanquet further writes in chapter IX of Philosophical Theory of the State about the philosophy of right, and as a result gets to speak about social contracts. He views that in this context, Kant’s philosophy – and Hegel’s and Fichte’s - is based on the principle of freedom as the essence of man. In this respect, Bosanquet views that Kant was greatly influenced by Rousseau. He quotes statements made in Kant’s early notes that show this, and concludes, after assessing the relation Kant sees between Newton’s discoveries, Rousseau’s philosophy and the Pope’s doctrine:
It is all the more interesting to see Kant retracing, on a very different scale, the development which Rousseau had initiated, from natural to social and ethical freedom.
Kant’s philosophy – both related to his epistemology (as in Green’s comments on religion and Caird’s honour for Kant’s transcendentalism) and on other subjects (Bosanquet’s ideas on social contract) – was actively studied by British Idealists. Caird favours Kant, while Green only partly agrees with his epistemology.