Kant on incongruent counterparts

In James Van~Cleve & Robert E. Frederick (eds.), The Philosophy of Right and Left: Incongruent Counterparts and the Nature of Space. Kluwer Academic Publishers. pp. 263-313 (1991)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Consider your right hand and a mirror image duplicate of it. Kant calls such pairs incongruent counterparts. According to him they have the following puzzling features. The relation and situation of the parts of your hand with respect to one another are not sufficient to distinguish it from its mirror duplicate. Nevertheless, there is a spatial difference between the two. Turn and twist them how you will, you cannot make one of them occupy the exact boundaries now occupied by the other. In his 1768 paper, ‘Concerning the Ultimate Foundations of the Differentiation of Regions in Space’, Kant uses these claims to argue against relational accounts of space and goes on to argue that the difference between incongruent counterparts depends on a relation to absolute space as a whole. In his 1770 Inaugural Dissertation he argued that this difference could not be captured by concepts alone but required appeal to intuition. In the Prolegomena (1783) and again in the Metaphysical Foundations of Natural Science (1786) Kant appealed to these puzzling features of incongruent counterparts to support his transcendental idealism about space.

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 101,636

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-04-09

Downloads
77 (#273,740)

6 months
7 (#728,225)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

William L. Harper
University of Western Ontario

Citations of this work

Handedness, parity violation, and the reality of space.Oliver Pooley - 2002 - In Katherine Brading & Elena Castellani (eds.), Symmetries in Physics: Philosophical Reflections. New York: Cambridge University Press. pp. 250--280.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references