LECTURE 3 NOTE D.—P. 98.
KANT ON THE TELEOLOGICAL ARGUMENT.
Kant says: “This proof deserves always to be mentioned with respect.
It is the oldest, clearest, and the most suited to the common reason of mankind.
It enlivens the study of nature, even as it derives from this its own existence,
and draws from it ever new strength. It brings ends and purposes into a region where
our observation would not of itself have discovered them, and furthers our natural
knowledge through the guiding thought of a special unity, whose principle lies outside
of nature. This knowledge reacts upon its cause, namely, on the idea which occasions
it, and raises faith in a highest Author of the universe to an irresistible conviction.
It would, therefore, be not only a thankless, but also a vain task, to attempt to
detract in any measure from the prestige of this argument.” But he goes on to say:
“Although we have nothing to object to the rationality and utility of this procedure,
but have much rather to recommend and encourage it, we are nevertheless unable to
assent to the claims which this mode of proof may make to demonstrative certainty,”
and then proceeds to state his objections to it.—Kritik, p. 436, 437 (Eng.
trans. p. 383).892892The references are to Meiklejohn’s
translation, but the translations are independent.
These, however, as observed in the text, seem more in the direction of limiting
its application, than of altogether denying its cogency. The view which obtains
in the Kritik of Judgment, that the idea of design has only regulative and not theoretic
validity,893893Cf. Caird’s Philosopy of Kant, pp. 477, 489, 526. is not
dwelt on in the Kritik or Pure Reason. It is not always noticed, besides, that,
intermediate between full theoretic demonstration and mere opinion, Kant has a form
of conviction which he calls “doctrinal faith”—distinct from moral faith,—the
characteristic of which is that it is an expression of modesty front the objective
point of view, but of assured confidence from the subjective; and that he places
the doctrine of God’s existence in this region.—Kritik, p. 561 (Eng. trans.
p. 500). On Kant’s service to this argument by his demonstration, in the
Kritik
of Judgment, of the necessity of applying the teleological conception to nature,
see Dr. Bernard’s valuable Introduction to his recent translation of this work (1892),
and cf. Professor Caird’s Philosophy of Kant, ii. pp. 406–562.
415
This book has been accessed more than 69120 times since June 1, 2005.