Darwiniana

History, Evolution, and The Darwin Debate

Darwiniana header image 2

Kant, philosophy of history, non-randomness, and Kant’s successors

May 16th, 2010 · 1 Comment

My previous post was very hard on Ruse. There is one consolation: Ruse is not the only second-rate philosopher these days.
EVERY philosopher, post-Kant is somehow second-rate, a world historical puzzle in itself.
Since Kant’s work is egregiously complex, you might read the books of Bryan Magee on Schopenhauer and/or philosophy and/or Wagner to get his take on this, an adolescent vision of Kant’s antinomies. We live in the era of Darwin, and Rorty. Rorty on Kant is a bit of a comedy. I see no problem with pygmies trying to take down Kant, but succeed, where Rorty failed completely.
In general the issue of Kant and pragmatism is a quagmire for young students. I can’t handle pragmatism, myself, why I know not, but perhaps i am fortunate.
I am also fortunate I am not philosopher, leastwise a Kantian, nor have I followed the academic tracks of Kantstudien. But I have been blessed with a kind of vision of Kant’s critique of metaphysics (Magee also describes such a thing in his life, pondering the antinomies at night in bed as a youth) which has helped me beyond measure in understanding science, and evolutionism.

If you study the eonic effect (history and evolution dot com) you will see ‘Kant in action, or applied Kant’, a spectacular insight into historical evolution and the philosophy of history, and that philosophy is a non-random field of emergence in world history (note its connection to the Axial Age, and the eonic effect in general), and what’s more Kant appears eerily at the so-called Great Divide in the eonic series as depicted by me. Study the logic or non-randomness in world history that I provide, and it might become clear why Kant overshadows those who come after him. Very strange, very very strange.

I think biologists might learn from Kant and his successors the teleomechansists. Their work is a bit old-fashioned and needs an uprade, but their basic points are of fundamental importance in the mess of current biology.

Tags: Evolution · Kant · Philosophy