BODY AND PRACTICE IN KANT

8
INTRODUCTION
deduce a philosophical position from this fact, but there are also passages
in the Critique that support the view that Kant himself held this position.
I also argue that Kant’s transcendental idealism is the outcome of
reflections on the facts of human embodiment. The reason why there is
no way in which we can arrive at a detached, objective perspective of the
world from which we can see it as it is in itself, as perhaps its creator sees
it, is the subjective origin of our experience due to the fact that, qua
embodied beings we are always limited to the specific perspective offered
by our bodies. This also accounts for the specific epistemic status that
Kant ascribes to objective knowledge. Objective knowledge is possible,
but not of the world as it really is, only as it appears to us.
Compared with most works on Kant published today, this one is
different. It does not concentrate on a limited part of the Critique or
other text. It is more global and examines a large number of texts he
wrote over a period covering most of his intellectual career. While there
is obviously a place for philosophical studies that focus on a limited text
and examine it in minute detail (what, following Thomas Kuhn, we
might call ‘puzzle-solving’), I think Ameriks is right, in the passage
quoted at the beginning of this introduction, that sometimes it is also
profitable to broaden the perspective. Sometimes, distance helps you see
what is missed from close up. On the other hand, such a perspective also
makes it hard or even impossible to see each and every detail in the
material studied. So, each perspective has its advantages and
disadvantages. I would maintain, however, that both perspectives are
useful and consequently that global studies like the present one should be
accepted as legitimate. I would also maintain that in the present case the
global perspective is needed in order to establish and get across the
intended message. First, throughout his career Kant reflected upon the
fact that human life is embodied and how this affects us. Secondly,
reading the Critique in this context makes it appear in a different light
from the one standard interpretations suggest.
The literature on Kant, after two hundred years of research, debate
and interpretation, is vast, and the day is long past when a scholar could
hope to have anything like a complete overview of the field. 16
Today,
even someone working on only a limited aspect of Kant’s philosophy has
this problem. It goes without saying that in the present study this
problem is even more acutely felt. I have responded to this in a number
16 Zoeller (1993), 445 comments that over the past twenty-five years, scholarship
on Kant has taken on ‘colossal proportions, effectively defying summary
assessments and manageable presentation’.