Kant's Transcendental Metaphysics: Sellars' Cassirer Lectures Notes and Other Essays

503 Pages·2002·15.551 MB·English

by  Wilfrid Sellars, JeffreyF. Sicha (editor)

KANT'S
TRANSCENDENTAL
METAPHYSICS
SellCaarsssL'ie rcetNruo rteess
and EOstshaeyrs
Edited and Introduced by
Jeffrey F. Sicha
Ridgeview Publishing Company Atascadero, California
Copyright© 2002
by Jeffrey F. Sicha
All rights reserved.
No part of this book may be reproduced
or utilized in any form or by any means,
electrical or mechanical, including
photocopying, recording or by any
informational storage or retrieval system,
without written permission from the
copyright owner.
Paper text: ISBN 0�924922-39-7
Cloth (Library edition): ISBN 0-922924-89-3
Published in the United States of America
by Ridgeview Publishing Company
Box 686
Atascadero, California 93423
Printed in the United States of America
by Thomson-Shore, Inc.
Tom yw ife,
SadKieen dall
Contents vii
CONTENTS
Page
Acknowledgments viii
Preface ix
Editor's Foreward xii
Contents of Introduction xv
Introduction 1
Bibliography of the introduction 259
Ontology, the A Priori and Kant (OAPK, 119) 261
Some Remarks on Kant's Theory of Experience (KTE, 67) 269
Metaphysics and the Concept of a Person (MP, 68) 283
On Knowing the Better and Doing the Worse (KBDW, 75) 309
Toward a Theory of the Categories (TIC, 77) 321
" ... this I or he or it (the thing) which thinks ... " (I, 81) 341
Berkeley and Descartes: Reflections on the Theory of Ideas (BD, 95) 363
Kant's Transcendental Idealism (KTI, 98) 403
The Role of Imagination in Kant's Theory of Experience (IKTE, 103) '419
Some Reflections on Perceptual Consciousness (SPRC, 106) 431
On Accepting First Principles ( OAFP, 115) 443
Sellars' Cassirer Lectures Notes (CLN, 120) 455
The Philosophical Works of Wilfrid Sellars 485
Acknowledgments
viii
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
To The Journal of Philosophy for permission to reprint "Some Remarks on Kant's Theory of
Experience," The Journal of Philosophy 64 (1967): 633-47.
To Yale University Press for permission to reprint "Metaphysics and the Concept ofa Person;' in The
Logical Way of Doing Things, edited by Karel Lambert (Yale University Press, 1969): 219-52.
To International Philosophical Quarterly for pe1mission to reprint "On Knowing the Better and Doing
the Worse," International Philosophical Quarterly, 10 (1970): 5-19.
To University of Massachusetts Press for permission to reprint "Towards a Theory of the Categories,"
in Experience and Theory, edited by L. Foster and J. W, Swanson (University of Massachusetts Press,
1970): 55-78.
To The American Philosophical Association for permission to reprint " ... this I or he or it (the thing)
which thinks," the presidential address, American Philosophical Association (Eastern Division), for
1970, Proceedings oft he American Philosophical Association 44 (1972): 5-31.
To Ohio State University Press for permission to reprint "Berkeley and Deseartes: Reflections on the
'New Way ofideas'" in Studies in Perception: Interrelations in the Histo1y ofP hilosophy and Science,
edited by Peter K. Maehamer and Robert G. Turnbull (Ohio State University Press, 1977): 259-311.
To University of Ottawa Press for permission to reprint "Kant's Transcendental Idealism" in Proceed­
ings of the Ottawa Congress on Kant in Anglo-American and Continental Traditions edited by Piel'l'e
LaBerge (University of Ottawa Press, 1976): 165-181.
To Pennsylvania State University Press for permission to reprint "The Role ofimagination in Kant's
Theory of Experience," in Categories: A Colloquium, edited by Henry W. Johnstone, Jr. (Pennsylvania
State University Press, 1978): 231-45.
To Kluwer Academic Publishers for permission to reprint "Some Reflections on Perceptual Conscious­
ness," in Crosscurrents in Phenomenology (Selected Studies in Phenomenology and Existential
Philosophy: No. 7), edited by R. Bruzina and B. Wilshire (Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1978): 169-
185.
Preface ix
PREFACE
In one respect, this volume, now entitled Kant's Transcendental Metaphysics,
must be accounted a failure. It was intended to contain Sellars' Cassirer Lectures
(given in 1979 at Yale University). The central cause of the failure is that Sellars
died before finishing these lectures-indeed, even before really beginning the
process of re-writing them. What was left to work with is his (handwritten) notes.
When I say "notes," I do mean just that. Apparently, Sellars spoke on many
occasions with much less on paper in front of him than his audience would have
imagined as they listened to his spoken, complete (and, in many cases, quite
complex) sentences. Some paragraphs, particularly in the beginning of the Cassirer
Lecture notes, consist ofno more than a phrase stating the topic of the paragraph
and a (sometimes not very readable) diagram. Sellars used his diagrams, not only
as aids in explaining his views, but as guides for himself in delivering the paper.
So, no volume can contain Sellars' Cassirer Lectures: he never wrote them.
Perhaps, that should have been that. But I did promise Wilfrid to get the lectures
out. It is true, of course, that when I made that promise both he and I thought that
he would be writing them. I was in a position, once he had died without doing the
writing, to consider myself absolved from my promise. Yes-well, on the other
hand, there did seem to be good reason to persevere.
Sellars was quite happy with the Cassirer Lectures. In fact, he went so far as
to say that he thought he "really got Kant right this time," You need to understand
what I took him to mean by this.
Sellars read Kant and thought about Kant's views all his life. In fact, he
actually wore out two copies of The Critique of Pure Reason. (The older one,
bought in the 30's when Sellars was at Oriel College, literally fell apart and was
sent out by his wife, Susanna, for rebinding; the newer one, purchased in 1962, was
well on the way to the same fate.) Both copies contain massive underlining, copious
margin notes, and hundreds of references to other passages before and after a
marked passage. Sellars published, all in all, several hundred pages on Kant and
filled many pads (some the yellow, legal-sized he used for many years) with notes
on Kant's work. In addition, it is clear that Sellars considered himself to be a
modern defender of doctrines found in Kant. The remark that he "got it right" did
not, in light of the above considerations, suggest to me that he had come to some
entirely new construal of Kant. What he meant was that he had added refinements
and further threads to a fabric on which he had long been working.
That, then, is the short story of how this volume came to be. It does not,
however, explain some of its idiosyncrasies. For that, I must embark on a somewhat
longer story.
In June (o r, perhaps, early July) of 1990, I helped Susanna assemble the books
and papers in Wilfrid's office at Pittsburgh. It was then that I discovered that I
would not have anything more than the notes of the Cassirer Lectures ( and a few
other handwritten pads oft he same period). Perhaps there is something more among
x
Preface
his papers, but I could not find it then.
Obviously, I needed a plan. For me, part of that plan was decided before
Wilfrid's death. The Cassirer Lectures, even had Sellars added quite a bit ill re­
writing his notes, would have been too short to constitute a reasonable volume. It
9ccurred to me very early on that I should put the Cassirer Lectures together with
post-Science and Metaphysics
Sellars' other writings on Kant (and some other
related papers from the same period). I was sure Wilfrid would agree since the other
papers, written in the same period, would throw light on his developing views of
Kant and thus on the Cassirer Lectures. I do think that I am right about this.
Another part oft he plan was reached sometime shortly after that 1990 sum­
mer. The exact date is now unknown to me for the simple reason that all this is over
a decade ago. Since the Cassirer Lectures notes were, in places, so incomplete, I
concluded that the other papers would simply have to be used as a source to fill in
the notes. I have literally pulled passages out the other papers (and also from
Science and Metaphysics)
and inserted them (in smaller type and with references)
in paragraphs in the Cassirer Lectures. (This is especially the case at the beginning
oft he Cassirer Lectures where Sellars is "setting the stage" and therefore is review­
ing what, from his point ofv iew, are straightforward points.) Having confirmed that
it was possible to find helpful passages, I resolved to go forward.
Even then I was not home free. There are places in the Cassirer Lectures
where I simply had to add words, phrases and sometimes whole sentences. I have
indicated these by (what I hope) is the simple and obvious device ofu sing a san·serif
type font whose general appearance is quite noticeably different from the type font of the text.
(The Editorial Foreward explains, in more detail, all the devices that came to be'
utilized in the volume.)
Last (and perhaps least-I'll leave that to the reader), I decided to write an
introduction which would attempt to state Sellars' position on Kant reasonably
succinctly. (No doubt the reader oft his Preface will have already discovered that
I did not achieve that goal.) I also viewed it as ofi nterest to consider some conse­
quences of Seilars' account, consequences that he may, or may not, have himself
considered.
By sometime in 1993, I had sufficiently regained my mastery of Wilfrid's
hand to read all that I needed to read and to produce a working copy oft he Cassirer
Lectures notes. A few quandaries still remained, but I was confident that I could
take care ofth em. By New Years 1999, the introduction was progressing, but had
grown-what shall I say?-beyond my wildest dreams. Yes, at least that-still, I
thought I saw the end. It was not to be.
Till then, my pace had been, to be complimentary, methodical. In my defense,
from the end of1 991 to the end of1 999, I was the managing editor ofa quarterly,
Nous;
and from 1987, I was the publisher (till 1995) as well as the managing editor
Philosophical Perspectives.
(till 2002) ofan annual,
But, as the joke goes, the light at the end oft he tunnel turned out to be a train.
Pedro Amaral, Sellars' last teaching assistant at Pittsburgh, informed me that he had
transcribed (a nd recorded) Sellars' 1975 graduate lectures on Kant and other histor-
Preface xi
ical figures. No reader of that volume, Kant and Pre-Kantian Themes, can fail to
see that no small amount of work went into it. Amaral had been so assiduous that,
not only did we have the words, but we also had all the diagrams Sellars drew.
Despite the prospect of more work, I was not about to pass up such an oppor­
tunity. Yet, it did cross my mind that, never having heard Sellars' lectures on Kant,
I might be surprised. What ifl found my by now several hundred pages of intro­
duction was in substantial disagreement with the lectures? I thought that unlikely
to be so--1 proved to be correct. Even worse, I reflected, was the other extreme:
what if Wilfrid had, in effect, produced my introduction? Well, here, I was just
lucky. There is some overlap between the introduction and the lectures, but since
my introduction is directed to the papers that are in this volume, my introduction
and his lectures diverge both in the choice of topics and in their organization and
presentation. Of course, I do ( though no doubt some will disagree) hold that it is all,
at bottom, Sellars' view and so, in one way, agreement is part of the message.
I also got a gift: at one point, Amaral asks Sellars about "double affection".
In the Cassirer Lectures notes, Sellars has an entry that topic. But just an entry:
011
it says "double affection". I was still mulling over what earlier writing to insert at
that entry; his earlier remarks are to the point, but not all that long and the longest
one is from "Some Remarks on Kant's Theory ofExperience" (KTE, 67) which was
published in 1967. Sellars' answer to Amaral's question came to the rescue. And
as an extra bonus, a small part of his answer is a nearly verbatim quote from KTE
(though Amaral says that Sellars did not have that essay with him to read from it).
So, that passage from Kant and Pre-Kantian Themes appears in my introduction
and a reader of the Cassirer Lectures notes can consult it at paragraph 74 1.
Thus, in 2002, Wilfrid is publishing two more works.
My thanks are due to many people. Ofcourse, this project could not have gone
forward at all without the help and support of Sellars' widow, Susanna Downie
Felder. Charles Aston, the head of Special Collections of the Hillman Library at the
University of Pittsburgh, and his associate, Jerry Heverly, showed great patience
and restraint in allowing me the time I needed to work through Sellars' papers.
To Pedro Amaral, I owe great thanks for his work, judgment, and foresight
and his comments on my introduction. I think all who have found Sellars' work
important to them owe him thanks. Thanks go to Riitta Vepsalainen for the two
computer drawn figures in my introduction.1
To two colleagues, Daniel Sedey and Frank McGuinness, on whom I imposed
for comments, goes credit for improving this volume. To others, Ronald Mcintrye,
James E. Tomberlin, and Takashi Yagisawa, go thanks for discussions that have
helped shape my views (needless to say, not necessarily in ways they would
approve). Finally, though I should like to find someone to take the blame for the
shortcomings, I am afraid they must be laid to me.
1Those of Sellars' figures included in this volume and not from KPT, I drew by hand. I find something
appropriate in this, but there is no doubt that Riitta's artwork and Pedro's diagrams in KPT are very
elegant and clear.
xii Editorial Foreword
EDITORIAL FOREWA RD
Since most ofo rganizational and editorial features oft his volume were under­
taken because of decisions made in editing the I
Cassirer Lectures Notes (CLN),
begin there.
As I mentioned in the Preface, I simply had to add passages from other of
Sellars' works to supplement what are, in some cases, mere headings. These are
typeset in a slightly smaller type with suitable references to show their origin.
Sellars had two pads in which he wrote his notes. In a side note, he refen-ed
to one oft he pads as "I". Itis this one I call "A" and, ofc ourse, the other I call "B".
Sellars gave (not quite) each paragraph a number followed, sometimes, by a lower
case letter. I have maintained all of this that I could, given a few problems. There
are 1nissing numbers, some re-numbering, and some duplication of content in
paragraphs from the two manuscripts. Here is an example. The page ofB finishing
with (second) paragraph B20 is followed by another B page which has a note
reading "in I 1 O" (meaning that it is page 10 of the first pad). Consequently, there
is a page "lOa" in part I (what I call "A") but no "IO" and the original paragraph
numbers in B fit with the last of "page 9f' in A which has paragraph 26f.
Basically, I decided that it would be best to indicate most of these editorial
matters right where they occur in the notes. The major items needing prior notice
are duplication and re-numbering.
Duplication: the paragraphs in the B manuscript numbered
B20 (the second one) through B32
appeared earlier intennixed with the paragraphs from the A manuscript numbered
A25 through A26f.
Since the duplication is not perfect, I sometimes have a part ofa n A paragraph and
a part of B paragraph that are exact duplicates and parts that are not. At another
place, because Sellars failed to number some paragraphs in A, I have interspersed
them in B paragraphs.
Re-numbering: Sellars himself re-numbers
A26g through A26j as B33 through B36.
So, now, the next paragraph after A26f is A27. Then, in B, A26g appears re­
numbered as B33 (=A26g),
Clearly I needed some simple device for making my editorial remarks identifi­
able. This need is made greater by having sentence fragments to complete and
existing words in the manuscripts that I am not completely certain I have read
correctly. All this I solved by using the sans serif font you are presently reading for my editorial
Editorial Foreword xiii
remaanradkd sd iIsttti aoonnuqdstus. si attei sbfuiaittcns toa otosr b itlrayuos,st idhveeevr i ces
Ic onsidietnrh teiydsfp. ae ac Arrelee s foei rne tnpocae rsa igmnryi a npthrso duction.
CLN
Once I decided to use the sans serif type in CLN, I found it convenient to con­
tinue with it in the other essays in the volume. So, even in these already published
essays, you will see the occasional editorial point in sans serif type.
Besides correcting typographical en-ors in the other essays, I also numbered
all the paragraphs in the essays which did not already have paragraph numbering.
I thought of this as an easy way to solve any problems about references to the essays
in the volume.
References to Sellars' other works is through the abbreviations appearing in
the bibliography called "The Philosophical Works of Wilfrid Sellars" which is at
the very end of the volume. Reference to anything but paragraphs (e.g., pages,
sections) are so indicated. But if the work had paragraph numbers, they appear last
in the reference without the word 'paragraph' preceding them. In addition, at the
first occurrence ofa n abbreviation I append in parenthesis the number ofth at work
in the bibliography. So, at first occurrence, a reference to paragraph 5 of chapter 3
of Naturalism and Ontology reads:
NAO (104), ch. 3, 5.
Another example:
EPM (31) in SPR (53), section 10
is a reference to section 10 of"Empiricism and the Philosophy ofM ind" (31 in the
bibliography) as reprinted in Science, Perception and Reality (53 in the biblio­
graphy).
References to works ofa uthors other than Sellars are handled differently. For
authors other than Kant, full references are given. At the end of the introduction is
a bibliography of those works including works of Kant referred to in the introduc­
tion. To each of these works of Kant, I refer by a convenient abbreviation (along,
of course, with the usual marginal numbering.)
Lastly, there is the question of references, in the introduction, to the introduc­
tion itself. Originally, I had imagined that sufficient sectioning and subsectioning
would solve the problem. However, as the introduction became longer, I realized
it was not enough (it got so that I couldn't find references by section).
In addition, it became clear that my scheme of organization u11avoidably
required me to cite earlier passages. As I explain in Part I, certain points get made
in contexts which I try to make largely free of doctrines that are definitely Sellars'
own and not Kant's. Then, after that first run through, they get another one with,
shall I say, a full dose of Sellars. I didn't want to repeat the original discussion over
again each time (though, in fact, there is some of that). Moreover, many of the
earlier discussions contain many references, particularly to Kant, and I didn't want
to have to repeat those too.