Kant's Synthetic and Analytic Method in theCritique of Pure Reasonand the Distinction between Philosophical and Mathematical Syntheses

Abstract

This article addresses Kant's distinction between a synthetic and an analytic method in philosophy. I will first consider how some commentators have accounted for Kant's distinction and analyze some passages in which Kant defined the analytic and the synthetic method. I will suggest that confusion about Kant's distinction arises because he uses it in at least two different senses. I will then identify a specific way in which Kant accounts for this distinction when he is differentiating between mathematical and philosophical syntheses. I will examine Kant's arguments in the Critique of Pure Reason with the latter sense of the distinction in mind. I will evaluate if he uses the analytic or the synthetic method and if the synthetic method is able to identify, without a previous consideration of some sort of given knowledge, sufficient conditions for deriving some aspects of our knowledge.

Kant, the Third Antinomy and Transcendental Arguments

“…8 The question regarding Kant's philosophical method cannot of course be reduced to the problem of transcendental arguments. On some other aspects of Kant's philosophical method, see Gava (2015), Gava (2018a), and Gava (2018b). 9 References to Kant's works will be given according to the standard edition (Kant, 1900-), indicating volume and page number.…”

“…The question regarding Kant's philosophical method cannot of course be reduced to the problem of transcendental arguments. On some other aspects of Kant's philosophical method, see Gava (), Gava (), and Gava ().…”