Kant’s Conception of Free Play in Terms of Universality Problem and Its Critical Interpretation in Derridian Philosophy. First Paper: Implications of the Theme of Universal in «Free Play of Cognitive Powers» Conception of Immanuel Kant
PDF (Українська)


free play, transcendental universality, imagination, understanding, cognition, «als ob-objectivity»

How to Cite

Ilyina, A. (2019). Kant’s Conception of Free Play in Terms of Universality Problem and Its Critical Interpretation in Derridian Philosophy. First Paper: Implications of the Theme of Universal in «Free Play of Cognitive Powers» Conception of Immanuel Kant. Multiversum. Philosophical Almanac, (3-4), 74-118. https://doi.org/10.35423/2078-8142.2019.3-4.05


Paper investigates Kantian conception of free play of cognitive powers – imagination and understanding – from the perspective of transcendental universality problem. In regard to Kant’s philosophical system generally, a universalizing capacity of third «Critique» is pointed, one of main topic of which is the free play problem. Essential characteristics of author’s thematization of transcendental universalism are explicated as such that are based on principles of relation and difference and are concerned with a constitution of the order of hyper-universality. The author uncovers and analyses the parameters of universality implicated by a conception of free play. It is demonstrated in what way the initial universality of transcendental imagination turns out to be both challenged and hyperbolized in the course of the free play. The ambivalent position of the free play towards cognition is investigated. A concept of «als ob-cognition» is introduced to grasp the universalistic implications of «cognition in general», which is pertinent to the free play cognitive mode. A certain asymmetry between imagination and understanding in terms of free play is found out, namely, priority of the latter. The author explores inherent to the free play subjective universality and lays bare its intersubjective and quasi-objective premises. A concept of «als ob-objectivity» is employed, which designates the tendency towards universalization of universality itself and marks a universal dimension on the border of subjective and objective. It is noted that the importance of the problem of free play as one of the fundamental subjects of Kantian aesthetics is not limited to the framework of Kantian transcendentalism. Thematization and analysis of important aspects of the problem of universality, implied by the concept of free play, makes it possible to assert the general (universal) significance of the latter within the constitution of the transcendental discourse of universality in general and needs further study.

PDF (Українська)


Allison, H. E. (2001). Kant’s Theory of Taste: A Reading of the Critique of Aesthetic Judgment. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Atalay, M. (2007). Kant’s Aesthetic Theory: Subjectivity vs. Universal Validity. Percipi, 1, 44-52.

Bennington, G. (2000). Interrupting Derrida. London; New York: Routledge.

Bennington, G. (2017). Kant On The Frontier: Philosophy, Politics, and the Ends of the Earth. New York: Fordham University Press.

Brandom, R. (2009). Reason in Philosophy: Animating Ideas. Cam-bridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Deleuze, G. (1984). Kant's Critical Philosophy: The Doctrine of the Faculties. London: The Athlone Press.

Elicor, P. P. E. (2016). Rethinking the Aesthetic Experience: Kant’s Sub-jective Universality. Spring Magazine on English Literature. 2016. Vol. 2, No. 1. Retrieved from http://www.springmagazine.net/kants-subjective-universality

Ginsborg, H. (1997). Lawfulness Without a Law: Kant on the Free Play of Imagination and Understanding. Philosophical Topics, 25 (1), 37-81.

Ginsborg, H. (2018). Kant's Aesthetics and Teleology. The Stanford En-cyclopedia of Philosophy. Retrieved from https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/kant-aesthetics

Guyer, P. (1977). Formalism and the Theory of Expression in Kant's Aesthetics. Kant-Studien, LXVIII (1), 46-70.

Guyer. P. (1978). Disinterestedness and Desire in Kant's Aesthetics. The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism, 36 (4), 449-460.

Guyer, P. (1997). Kant and the Claims of Taste. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Guyer, P. (2005). The Harmony of the Faculties Revisited. In P. Guyer, Values of Beauty: Historical Essays in Aesthetics. Cambridge: Cambridge Uni-versity Press (pp. 77-109).

Guyer. P. (2007). Free Play and True Well-Being: Herder’s Critique of Kant’s Aesthetics. The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism, 65 (4), 353-368.

Guyer, P., Allison, H. E. (2006). Dialogue: Paul Guyer and Henry Allison on Allison’s Kant’s Theory of Taste. In R. Kukla (Ed.), Aesthetics and Cognition in Kant's Critical Philosophy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press (pp. 111-137).

Guyer, P., Wood, A. (1998). Introduction. In I.Kant, Critique of Pure Reason (pp. 1-73) (P. Guyer, A. Wood, Trans.). Cambridge: Cambridge Unive-?sity Press.

Hanna, R. (2018). Kant’s Theory of Judgment. The Stanford Encyc-?opedia of Philosophy. Retrieved from https://plato.stanford. edu/entries/kant-judgment

Heidegger, M. (1968). Kant And the Problem of Metaphysics (J. S. Churchill, Trans.). Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1968.

Henrich, D. (1995). Aesthetic Judgment and the Moral Image of the World: Studies in Kant. Stanford, California: Stanford Univ. Press.

Henrich, D. (1994). On the Unity of Subjectivity. In D. Henrich, The Unity of Reason: Essays on Kant's Philosophy (pp. 17-54) (J. Edwards, L. Hunt et al., Trans.). Cambridge, Mass.; London: Harvard University Press.

Johnson, M. L. (1979). Kant's Unified Theory of Beauty. The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism, 38 (2), 167-178.

Kant, I. (1959). Foundations of the Metaphysics of Morals (L.W. Beck, Trans.). Indianapolis, Bobbs-Merrill: Library of Liberal Arts.

Kant, I. (1977). Einleitung in die Kritik der Urteilskraft (1. Fassung). Retrieved from http://www.zeno.org/Philosophie/M/Kant,+Immanuel/ Einlei-tung+in+die+Kritik+der+Urteilskraft+%5B1.+Fassung%5D/VIII.+Von+der+%C3%84sthetik+des+Beurteilungsverm%C3%B6gens

Kant I. (1977). Kritik der Urteilskraft. In I. Kant, Werke in zwölf Bän-den, Band 10. (W. Weischedel, Ed.). Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.

Kant, I. (1998). Critique of Pure Reason (P. Guyer, A. Wood, Trans.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Makkreel, R. A. (1994). Imagination and Interpretation in Kant: The Hermeneutical Import of the Critique of Judgment. Chicago : The University of Chicago Press.

Palmer, L. (2008). A Universality Not Based on Concepts: Kant's Key to the Critique of Taste. Kantian Review, 13 (1), 1-51.

Palmer, L. (2008). Kant and the Brain: A New Empirical Hypothesis. Review of General Psychology, 12 (2), 105-117.

Petitot, J. (2016). Choix et croyance: vers une logique de l'idéal. In H. Parret (Ed.), On Believing. De la croyance. Epistemological and Semiotic Ap-proaches (pp. 237-266). Berlin; Boston: De Gruyter.

Rogerson, K. F. (2008). The Problem of Free Harmony in Kant's Aesthetics. Albany: State University of New York Press.

Terzi, P. (2019). «Through Königsbergean Mists»: What Derrida Found in Kant’s Third Critique. In Marino, P. Terzi (Eds.), Kant’s «Critique of Aesthetic Judgment» in the Twentieth Century (Forthcoming). Berlin-New York: De Gruyter.

Wenzel, Ch. H. (2005). An introduction to Kant’s aesthetics: core concepts and problems. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing Ltd.

Wilson, D. (2013). «The Key to the Critique of Taste»: Interpreting §9 of Kant’s Critique of Judgment. Parrhesia, 18, 125-138.

Wilson, R. (2007). Subjective Universality in Kant's Aesthetics. Oxford: Peter Lang.