Antinomy In Kant's Critique Of Pure Reason

The antinomies of pure reason are among the most important sections in Kant's Critique of Pure Reason, and transcendental philosophy in general. Among the antinomies, none were more well-recognized or well known than the third antinomy, which concerns the nature of freedom and determinism. This antinomy went on to pave the way for the rest of German Idealism, along with signaling a general shift in metaphysics that Kant himself would be engaged with for the rest of his life. As an indication of its impact, despite the Critique being published over 300 years ago, the nature of the their antinomy is still being discussed today. Most notably, there seems to be a conflict in regards to the antithesis of the third antinomy: most notably, the antithesis of this antinomy seems to be regarded as arbitrary and trivial, merely expressing what was already said in the second analogy. This accusation is unfounded, …show more content…
To most important distinction between the two is that paralogisms are only a one-sided mistake, while the antinomies is a dialectical and irreconcilable error. The reason for this difference depends on their objects of reason: God, the soul and the world. The paralogisms of pure reason are directed towards a pure, rational soul behind appearances, while the antinomies are situated towards a rational comprehension of the world: The totality of all appearances in which nothing is left behind. While it is simply incorrect to posit the existence of a persistent subject outside of space and time, any answer at all to a transcendental antinomy is bound to lead us into contradiction. Just as the paralogism focuses on the soul just to deny its premises, the antinomies aim to demonstrate that both conclusions, although inevitable are either both true or both false. Pure reason leads to the antinomies precisely when it takes this notion of "the world" as its