Brigitte Falkenburg (TU Dortmund)
Brigitte.Falkenburg@tu-dortmund.de
1. A Created Universe: 1755/56
2. The Handed Universe: 1768
3. No Objective Universe: 1781
4. How Is Cosmology Possible?
Kant & Herschel
London, UCL, May 20, 2011
1
Brigitte.Falkenburg@tu-dortmund.de
1. A Created Universe: 1755/56
Kant & Herschel
London, UCL, May 20, 2011
2
Brigitte.Falkenburg@tu-dortmund.de
Kant’s Early Metaphysical System:
“Natural History & Theory of Heaven” (1755)
“New Elucidation of the First Principles of Metaphysical
Cognition” (1755)
“Physical Monadology” (1756)
- Do Not Stand Apart
- Form a Metaphysical System
- Try to Reconcile Newton & Leibniz
Newton’
Newton’s Physics
Leibniz’
Leibniz’ Metaphysics
Kant & Herschel
London, UCL, May 20, 2011
3
Brigitte.Falkenburg@tu-dortmund.de
System of Metaphysics (Chr.Wolff / A.Baumgarten):
General Metaphysics
(Ontology)
Principle of Sufficient Reason
Leibniz’
Leibniz’
Metaphysics
Newton’
Newton’s
Physics
Rational
Theology
God
Rational
Psychology
Soul
Rational
Cosmology
World
Specific Metaphysics
Kant & Herschel
London, UCL, May 20, 2011
4
Brigitte.Falkenburg@tu-dortmund.de
Kant’s Early Metaphysical System:
General Metaphysics
(Ontology)
Validity of Leibniz’ Principles?
Leibniz’
Leibniz’
Metaphysics
?
Newton’
Newton’s
Laws
Rational
Theology
God
Rational
Psychology
Soul
Rational
Cosmology
World
Specific Metaphysics
Kant & Herschel
Universe
of Atoms!
London, UCL, May 20, 2011
5
Brigitte.Falkenburg@tu-dortmund.de
Kant’s Early Metaphysical System:
“New Elucidation of the First Principles of Metaphysical
Cognition” (1755): Restriction of Leibniz’ Principles
“Natural History & Theory of Heaven” (1755): Universe
“Physical Monadology” (1756): Atoms
- Do Not Stand Apart
- Form a Metaphysical System
- Try to Reconcile Newton & Leibniz
Laws of Mechanics
& Principle of
Sufficient Reason
Kant & Herschel
London, UCL, May 20, 2011
6
Brigitte.Falkenburg@tu-dortmund.de
Kant’s Early Metaphysical System:
“New Elucidation of the First Principles of Metaphysical
Cognition” (1755): Restriction of Leibniz’ Principles
Criticism of Principle of Indiscernibles:
“The complete identity of two things demands the identity of all
their characteristic marks or determinations, both internal and
external.
external. Is there anyone who has excluded place from this
complete determination? Accordingly, no matter how great the
agreement of things in respect of their internal characteristic
marks, things which are distinguished at least in virtue of place
are not one and the same thing at all.”
all.”
 Atoms are possible!
Kant & Herschel
London, UCL, May 20, 2011
7
Brigitte.Falkenburg@tu-dortmund.de
Kant’s Early Metaphysical System:
“Physical Monadology” (1756): Atoms
-
pointlike atoms  ultimate parts of matter
-
attractive forces  compound systems
-
repulsive forces  matter is extended
 dynamic atomism
(similar: Boscovich 1758)
 matter theory underlying
“Theory of Heaven” (1755)
Kant & Herschel
London, UCL, May 20, 2011
8
Brigitte.Falkenburg@tu-dortmund.de
Kant’s Early Metaphysical System:
“Natural History & Theory of Heaven” (1755): Universe
-
Created by God  Finite in Time
-
Creation Goes On  Infinite in Space
-
Made Up Of Atoms  Initial Chaos
-
Obeys Newton’s Laws  Order Necessarily Arises
 Cosmology & Theology linked!
Kant & Herschel
London, UCL, May 20, 2011
9
Brigitte.Falkenburg@tu-dortmund.de
Kant’s Early Metaphysical System:
“Natural History & Theory of Heaven” (1755): Universe
Physico-Theological Proof of God’s Existence:
“The material which is the primordial stuff for all things is thus
bound by certain laws. Freely left subject to these laws, it must
necessarily bring forth beautiful combinations. It has no freedom
to deviate from this planned perfection. Since it also finds itself
subject to the loftiest wise purpose, it must of necessity be set
set in
such a harmonious relations through a First Cause which rules it.
There is a God for just this reason, that Nature, even in a chaotic
chaotic
state can develop only in an orderly and rulerule-governed manner.
 Cosmology & Theology linked!
Kant & Herschel
London, UCL, May 20, 2011
10
Brigitte.Falkenburg@tu-dortmund.de
Kant’s Early Metaphysical System:
General Metaphysics
(Ontology)
Restriction of Leibniz’ Principles
Best of
Leibniz
Best of
Newton
Rational
Theology
God
Rational
Psychology
Soul
Rational
Cosmology
Universe of Atoms
Specific Metaphysics
Kant & Herschel
All parts of
system linked!
London, UCL, May 20, 2011
11
Brigitte.Falkenburg@tu-dortmund.de
2. A Handed Universe: 1768
Kant & Herschel
London, UCL, May 20, 2011
12
Brigitte.Falkenburg@tu-dortmund.de
The Early Metaphysical System:
Why did Kant throw it away?
Universe
-
Created by God  Finite in Time
Creation Goes On  Infinite
Infinite in Space
Made Up Of Atoms  Initial Chaos
Obeys Newton’
Newton’s Laws  Order Necessarily Arises
 More than mere speculations.
 Foundations of system:
Newton’s “analytic method”!
Kant & Herschel
London, UCL, May 20, 2011
13
Brigitte.Falkenburg@tu-dortmund.de
Newton (1687), “Rules of Reasoning”:
Inference to Best Explanation
1. Phenomena  Causes Needed for Explanation
2. Same Effects  Same Causes
3. Wholes  Parts   Least Parts (Atoms)
4. Keep your laws gathered from the phenomena,
as long as they are not falsified
“Analytic-Synthetic” method:
Galileo: “resolutive-compositive” method
Descartes: rules 2 & 3 of “Discours”
Kant & Herschel
London, UCL, May 20, 2011
14
Brigitte.Falkenburg@tu-dortmund.de
Newton’s “Opticks” (1730):
“By this way of Analysis we may proceed from Compounds
to Ingredients,
Ingredients from Effects to their Causes,
Causes and from
Motions to the Forces producing them;
them and in general, from
Effects to their Causes, and from particular Causes to
more general ones, till the Argument end in the most
general.
This is the Method of Analysis: And the Method of Synthesis
in assuming the Causes discover’d, and establish’d as
Principles, and by them explaining the Phaenomena
proceeding from them, and proving the Explanations.”
Explanations
“Analytic-Synthetic” method:
Phenomena  Principles  Phenomena
”inductive”
inductive”
deductive
Kant & Herschel
London, UCL, May 20, 2011
15
Brigitte.Falkenburg@tu-dortmund.de
Newton’s “Principia” (1687) 
Method of Analysis and Synthesis:
Editor’
Editor’s Preface to 2nd Ed. (R.Cotes 1713):
“They […] proceed by a twofold method, analytic and
synthetic.
synthetic From certain selected phenomena they deduce by
analysis the forces of nature and the simpler laws of those
forces, from which they then give the rest of the phenomena
by synthesis.”
synthesis
“Analytic” method: Phenomena  Principles
“Synthetic” method: Principles  Phenomena
Kant & Herschel
London, UCL, May 20, 2011
16
Brigitte.Falkenburg@tu-dortmund.de
Metaphysical Debates:
Analytic or Synthetic Method?
Descartes, to Mersenne: “Meditationes”
= analytic method
Spinoza:
“Ethics more geometrico”
= synthetic method
Kant justifies the “analytic” method,
in his Prize Essay of 1762!
Kant & Herschel
London, UCL, May 20, 2011
17
Brigitte.Falkenburg@tu-dortmund.de
Metaphysical Debates:
Analytic or Synthetic Method?
Kant 1755/56:
Use of Newton’s “analytic method”
= analysis of phenomena
“Theory of Heavens” (1755)
= conceptual analysis
“New Elucidation” (1755) &
“Physical Monadology” (1756)
Kant & Herschel
London, UCL, May 20, 2011
18
Brigitte.Falkenburg@tu-dortmund.de
Kant’s Early Metaphysical System:
Why did Kant throw it away?
All parts of system founded by “analytic” method –
except theory of space & time!
Since 1746: Leibniz’ relational theory of space
 symmetry arguments (Leibniz-Clarke debate)
 is this foundation sufficient?
 argument of incongruent counterparts:
“Directions in Space” (1768)
Kant & Herschel
London, UCL, May 20, 2011
19
Brigitte.Falkenburg@tu-dortmund.de
Argument of Incongruent Counterparts (1768):
What if God began to create the world
with a single, isolated hand?
 Criticism of Leibniz’ analysis situs
 According to Leibniz’ relational theory,
it makes no difference!
 According to Principle of Indiscernibles,
left hand  right hand
 Orientation of hand indeterminate!?
Kant & Herschel
London, UCL, May 20, 2011
20
Brigitte.Falkenburg@tu-dortmund.de
Argument of Incongruent Counterparts (1768):
What if God began to create the world
with a single, isolated hand?
“It would follow, in the example we have adduced, that all actual
space would simply be the space occupied by this hand.
hand.
However, there is no difference in the relations of the parts of
the hand to each other, and that is so whether it be a right hand
hand
or a left hand; it would therefore follow that the hand would be
completely indeterminate in respect of such a property.
property. In other
words, the hand would fit equally well on either side of the
human body; but this is impossible.”
impossible.”
Akad. 2:383
Kant & Herschel
London, UCL, May 20, 2011
21
Brigitte.Falkenburg@tu-dortmund.de
Argument of Incongruent Counterparts (1768):
What if God began to create the world
with a single, isolated hand?
 Result of the argument:
Relational concept of space refuted!
 Leibniz-Clarke debate:
Newton’
Newton’s absolute space refuted!
refuted!
 No space!?
 Solution (1770):
Space & Time = Subjective Forms of Intuition
“Sensible”
Sensible” World  “Intelligible”
Intelligible” World
Kant & Herschel
London, UCL, May 20, 2011
22
Brigitte.Falkenburg@tu-dortmund.de
3. No Objective Universe: 1781
Kant & Herschel
London, UCL, May 20, 2011
23
Brigitte.Falkenburg@tu-dortmund.de
Metaphysics of 1770: Theory of “intelligible” world.
No cosmological antinomy!
Critique of Pure Reason (1781/87):
No separation of “sensible” & “intelligible” world
Cosmological antinomy:
spatio-temporal world as thing-in-itself
relational & empirical
relationless & nonnon-empirical
Prolegomena (1783), § 52c: contradictory concept
of a phenomenal world
that exists in itself
Kant & Herschel
London, UCL, May 20, 2011
24
Brigitte.Falkenburg@tu-dortmund.de
Critique of Pure Reason (1781/87):
No separation of “sensible” & “intelligible” world
Cosmological antinomy;
spatio-temporal world as thing-in-itself
relational & empirical
relationless & nonnon-empirical
Early Metaphysical System Refuted:
Universe neither finite nor infinite
- Paradox of Infinite World Age
- Leibniz’ Symmetry Arguments
against Beginning of World
Kant & Herschel
London, UCL, May 20, 2011
25
Brigitte.Falkenburg@tu-dortmund.de
Critique of Pure Reason (1781/87):
No separation of “sensible” & “intelligible” world
Cosmological antinomy;
spatio-temporal world as thing-in-itself
relational & empirical
relationless & nonnon-empirical
Early Metaphysical System Refuted:
Universe neither finite nor infinite
Matter neither made up of atoms
nor infinitely divisible
Kant & Herschel
London, UCL, May 20, 2011
26
Brigitte.Falkenburg@tu-dortmund.de
Critique of Pure Reason (1781/87):
No separation of “sensible” & “intelligible” world
Cosmological antinomy;
spatio-temporal world as thing-in-itself
relational & empirical
relationless & nonnon-empirical
Early Metaphysical System Refuted:
Physico-theological proof of God’s existence
objectively untenable
(but subjectively important)
Kant & Herschel
London, UCL, May 20, 2011
27
Brigitte.Falkenburg@tu-dortmund.de
Critique of Pure Reason (1781/87):
No separation of “sensible” & “intelligible” world
Cosmological antinomy;
spatio-temporal world as thing-in-itself
relational & empirical
relationless & nonnon-empirical
Relation to “incongruent counterparts” (1768):
Only phenomena are “leftleft-handed”
handed” or “rightright-handed”
handed”:
Orientation in space  property of the world !
[What about PCT theorem
from a Kantian point of view??]
Kant & Herschel
London, UCL, May 20, 2011
28
Brigitte.Falkenburg@tu-dortmund.de
4. How is Cosmology Possible?
Kant & Herschel
London, UCL, May 20, 2011
29
Brigitte.Falkenburg@tu-dortmund.de
Critique of Pure Reason (1781/87):
No separation of “sensible” & “intelligible” world
Cosmological antinomy;
spatio-temporal world as thing-in-itself
relational & empirical
relationless & nonnon-empirical
Cosmology as an Empirical Science:
Restricted to knowledge of the phenomena
 limitations of objective knowledge
 finite parts of sensible world!
Kant & Herschel
London, UCL, May 20, 2011
30
Brigitte.Falkenburg@tu-dortmund.de
Cosmology as an Empirical Science:
Restricted to knowledge of the phenomena
Phenomena
= finite parts of sensible world
the Universe  no object of knowledge
= idea of intelligible world
absolute space = idea of infinite frame
“To constitute it a real thing means confounding the
logical universality of any space, with which
I can
compare each empirical [space] as being included in it
with a physical universality of real compass, and
misunderstanding the reason in
its idea.”
Akad. 4.482
Kant & Herschel
London, UCL, May 20, 2011
31
Brigitte.Falkenburg@tu-dortmund.de
Cosmology as an Empirical Science:
Restricted to knowledge of the phenomena
Phenomena = finite parts of sensible world
the Universe = idea of intelligible world
 regulative principle:
extend empirical knowledge
of the phenomena
…and that’s what Herschel and
his followers did, in the
footsteps of Kant 1755 !
[… the “Theory of Heavens”
Heavens”]
Kant & Herschel
London, UCL, May 20, 2011
32
Literature:
Brigitte.Falkenburg@tu-dortmund.de
B.F. (2006): Intuition and Cosmology: The Puzzle of Incongruent
Counterparts. In: Intuition and the Axiomatic Method, ed. by
E.Carson and R.Huber, Western Ontario Series in the Philosophy
of Science, Dordrecht: Springer, 157-180.
B.F. (2005): Some Remarks on Cosmology and Scientific Realism. In:
Kairos 26, 229-246.
B.F. (2004): Experience and Completeness in Physical Knowledge:
Variations on a Kantian Theme. In: Philosophiegeschichte und
Logische Analyse 7, Schwerpunkt: Geschichte der Naturphilosophie
(Eds.: U.Meixner und A.Newen). Paderborn: Mentis 2004, 153-176.
B.F. (2004): Report DFG Fa 261/5-1, Hypotheses non fingo: Newtons
Methodenlehre. With K.-N. Ihmig.
B.F. (2000): Kants Kosmologie. Die wissenschaftliche Revolution der
Kosmologie im 18. Jahrhundert. Frankfurt/M.: Klostermann.
Kant & Herschel
London, UCL, May 20, 2011
33