Objectivity: its meaning, its limitations, its fateful omissions

In this text, we explore the guiding thread of the volume "Objectivity after Kant" by first discussing how the main question pertaining to transcendental objectivity arose at the Centre for Critical Philosophy. This exposition takes the form of a microhistorical genealogy, from which the main ideas pursued in the research conducted at this Centre can be distilled. In the second part, we briefly sketch how the different contributors have addressed this question. Its purpose is to facilitate the reader’s navigation through the variety of topics and perspectives addressed throughout this volume, and incite further reflection on the central issue it pursues

Subjectivity and Objectivity: A Matter of Life and Death?

In this paper, it is argued that the question ldquo;What is life?rdquo; time and again emergesmdash;and within the confines of an objectivistic/subjectivistic frame of thought has to emergemdash;as a symptom, a non-deciphered, cryptic message that insists on being interpreted. br /Our hypothesis is that the failure to measure up the living to the standards of objectification has been taken too frequently from an objectivistic angle, leading to a simple postponement of an objective treatment of the living, and meanwhile confining it to the domain of the subjective, the relative and the metaphorical. As a consequence, the truly important question of the co-constitutive relation between objectivity and subjectivity is thereby evaded. A critical, transcendental account can be relevant in this regard, not only because of the fact that objectivity and subjectivity are seen as co-constitutive, but also because it addresses the question of the embeddedness of objectivity and subjectivity from within the living dynamics.br /This hypothesis will be articulated on the basis of Erwin Schrouml;dingerrsquo;s famous little book on ldquo;What is life?rdquo;, in dialogue with Robert Rosenrsquo;s critical reading of it. It appears that Schrouml;dinger considered the living as a genuine challenge for classical objectification procedures. However, it is doubtful whether this brought him to a critical reading of objectivity or to the acknowledgment of a constitutive role of subjectivity in relation to objectivity. We argue that his viewpoint has the merit ofnbsp; expressing the difficulty of the living within the field of the physical sciences, but does not really transcend the objectivism/subjectivism opposition. At this point, Rosenrsquo;s relational account takes up the challenge more radically by acknowledging the need for a new epistemology and a new metaphysics in relation to living systems, and by attributing a place to classical objectivity from within this ldquo;new sciencerdquo;. In conclusion, we return to Kantrsquo;s epistemological proposal, and show its potential relevance in this debate

Wat is dat : filosofie?

Dit artikel behandelt de vraag van wat filosofie is vanuit de gelijknamige tekst van Heidegger. Het bespreekt het mogelijk onderscheid tussen continentale en analytische manieren om aan filosofie te doen, evenals het effect van de universitaire institutie op de filosofische bedrijvigheid