Instruct: Given a question, retrieve relevant documents that can help answer the question.
Query: Who developed Kantian philosophy?
Immanuel Kant (/kænt/;[15] German:[ʔɪˈmaːnu̯eːl ˈkant, -nu̯ɛl -];[16][17] 22 April 1724– 12 February 1804) was a German philosopher who is a central figure in modern philosophy.[18] In his doctrine of transcendental idealism, he argued that space, time and causation are mere sensibilities; "things-in-themselves" exist, but their nature is unknowable.[19][20] In his view, the mind shapes and structures experience, with all human experience sharing certain structural features. He drew a parallel to the Copernican revolution in his proposition that worldly objects can be intuited a priori ("beforehand"), and that intuition is therefore independent from objective reality.[21] Kant believed that reason is the source of morality, and that aesthetics arise from a faculty of disinterested judgment. Kant's views continue to have a major influence on contemporary philosophy, especially the fields of epistemology, ethics, political theory, and post-modern aesthetics.
By 1933 (after the rise of Nazism), the various Neo-Kantian circles in Germany had dispersed.
In the analytic tradition, the revival of interest in the work of Kant that has been underway since Peter Strawson's work "The Bounds of Sense" (1966) can also be viewed as effectively Neo-Kantian, not least due to its continuing emphasis on epistemology at the expense of ontology. In the 1980s, interest in Neo-Kantianism has revived in the wake of the work of Gillian Rose, who is a critic of this movement's influence on modern philosophy, and because of its influence on the work of Max Weber. The Kantian concern for the limits of perception strongly influenced the antipositivist sociological movement in late 19th-century Germany, particularly in the work of Georg Simmel (Simmel's question 'What is society?' is a direct allusion to Kant's own: 'What is nature'?). The current work of Michael Friedman is explicitly Neo-Kantian.
Like Harman, Levi Bryant opposes post-Kantian anthropocentrism and philosophies of access. From Bryant's perspective, the Kantian contention that reality is accessible to human knowledge because it is structured by human cognition limits philosophy to a self-reflexive analysis of the mechanisms and institutions through which cognition structures reality. He states:
Neo-Kantianism refers broadly to the revival of the type of philosophy explained by Immanuel Kant and of the interpretations of Kant provided by post-Kantian philosophers such as Schopenhauer, Jakob Friedrich Fries and Johann Friedrich Herbart. Major figures in the neo-Kantian movement, which began around the 1860s, include Friedrich Albert Lange and Hermann Cohen.
Neo-Kantianism refers broadly to a revived type of philosophy along the lines of that laid down by Immanuel Kant in the 18th century, or more specifically by Schopenhauer's criticism of the Kantian philosophy in his work "The World as Will and Representation" (1818), as well as by other post-Kantian philosophers such as Jakob Friedrich Fries and Johann Friedrich Herbart. It has some more specific reference in later German philosophy.
Following his teacher Xiong Shili, Mou Zongsan sought to articulate and justify a moral metaphysics. A moral metaphysics asserts the interconnectedness of ontology and morality, implying the moral value of all objects including the self. Mou's philosophy attempts to demonstrate the limits of Kant, suggesting instead the ways in which Chinese thought may surpass Kantian morality. Several of Mou's titles directly reveal his engagement with Kant – "Intellectual Intuition and Chinese Philosophy", "Phenomenon and Thing-in-Itself", and "Treatise of the Perfect Good" – a commitment that is reflected in Mou's decision to express his philosophy in Kantian terms. For example, Mou's philosophy inherits the Kantian concepts of autonomy, intellectual intuition, and Thing-in-Itself, although Confucianism inspires Mou to transform these concepts. The reason behind this decision to use Kantian terms remains unknown, but some scholars argue that Mou's use of certain terminologies aims to facilitate a dialogue between the East and West, pointing to Mou's comparison of Mencius and Kant, whereby he demonstrates the compatibility of Chinese and Western philosophies.
Paul Hoyningen-Huene (born July 31, 1946 in Pfronten, West Germany) is a German philosopher who specializes in general philosophy of science and research ethics. He is best known for his Neo-Kantian interpretation of Thomas S. Kuhn's ideas. Hoyningen-Huene holds the chair for theoretical philosophy, particularly philosophy of science at Leibniz Universität Hannover (Germany) and is director of the Center for Philosophy and Ethics of Science.
Karl Barth, who initially supported pietism, later critiqued radical pietism as creating a move towards unorthodoxy. John Milbank, speaking from the perspective of Radical Orthodoxy sees his critiques as misguided, overlooking how they were able to critique modern philosophy from a theological perspective by questioning the legitimacy of philosophy as "autonomous reason", ultimately leading to the demise of Kantianism. This is then seen by Milbank as the impetus for the quick rise and failure of defenses of critical reason by Fichte, Schelling, and Hegel. All this is seen as culminating in the especially radical pietism in Kierkegaard, especially in his critique of Hegel. Further, he sees the theological content of radical pietism as forcing post Kantian idealisms to remain somewhat theological and characterizing certain central elements of modern philosophy, including "the priority of existence over thought; the primacy of language; the 'ecstatic' character of time; the historicity of reason; the dialogical principle; the suspension of the ethical; and the ontological difference."Books and articles in German:
Idealistic Studies is a peer-reviewed academic journal for the publication of studies of idealistic themes. Both historical and contemporary statements of idealistic argumentation are published, as are also historico-philosophical studies of idealism. The journal was established in 1972 by Robert N. Beck with the assistance of the Clark University philosophy department. While it initially focused on American personalism and post-Kantian idealism, the journal's mission has broadened to include other topics, including historically earlier expressions as well as developments of the late 19th to mid-20th century. The journal has become a venue for a number of philosophical movements that share Idealism in their genealogies, including phenomenology, neo-Kantianism, historicism, hermeneutics, life philosophy, existentialism, and pragmatism. The journal is published by the Philosophy Documentation Center and the current editor-in-chief is Jennifer Bates, Professor of Philosophy, Duquesne University.
Contemporary transcendental philosophy is developed by German philosopher Harald Holz with a holistic approach. Holz liberated transcendental philosophy from the convergence of neo-Kantianism, he critically discussed transcendental pragmatism and the relation between transcendental philosophy, neo-empiricism and the so-called postmodernism.
In late modern Continental philosophy, Neo-Kantianism () was a revival of the 18th-century philosophy of Immanuel Kant. More specifically, it was influenced by Arthur Schopenhauer's critique of the Kantian philosophy in his work "The World as Will and Representation" (1818), as well as by other post-Kantian philosophers such as Jakob Friedrich Fries and Johann Friedrich Herbart.
In time, Kant's foremost Polish sympathizer would be Feliks Jaroński (1777–1827), who lectured at Kraków in 1809–18. Still, his Kantian sympathies were only partial. And this half-heartedness was typical of Polish Kantism generally. In Poland there was no actual Kantian period.
Erich Adickes (29 June 1866, Lesum – 8 July 1928, Tübingen) - German philosopher who wrote many important works on Immanuel Kant (1724-1804) and the Kantian philosophy. Adickes was a critical empiricist (moderate Kantian).
Heinrich Rickert, whom Bauch studied under, was the most important leader of the so-called Badensian, or Southwest German School of Neo-Kantianism after Wilhelm Windelband. Unlike its main rival, the Marburg School, the Badensian Neo-Kantians were more interested in practical philosophy than in the philosophy of science. They emphasized the distinction between fact and value and sought to use the concept of "value" for epistemological and ontological purposes. For example, to say that a sentence is "true" is sometimes equated with saying that it 'commands assent' (i.e., that it "ought" to be believed). Bauch, however, was a rather unorthodox scion of the Badensian school, so much so that some commentators regard him as representing a distinct variety of Neo-Kantianism. While Bauch shared an interest in the philosophy of value, he also had a much more lively interest in the philosophy of mathematics and logic than was common among the Badensian Neo-Kantians. Unlike Rickert, he was sympathetic to Gottlob Frege's logicism (which Rickert had rejected on the old-fashioned Kantian grounds that logic was analytic, mathematics synthetic), and was conciliatory toward the Marburg Neo-Kantians' belief in the unity of logic and mathematics.
"Critique of the Kantian philosophy" is a criticism Arthur Schopenhauer appended to the first volume of his "The World as Will and Representation" (1818). He wanted to show Immanuel Kant's errors so that Kant's merits would be appreciated and his achievements furthered.
German idealism (also known as post-Kantian idealism, post-Kantian philosophy, or simply post-Kantianism) was a philosophical movement that emerged in Germany in the late 18th and early 19th centuries. It began as a reaction to Immanuel Kant's "Critique of Pure Reason." German idealism was closely linked with both Romanticism and the revolutionary politics of the Enlightenment.
Dilthey's ideas should be examined in terms of his similarities and differences with Wilhelm Windelband and Heinrich Rickert, members of the Baden School of Neo-Kantianism. Dilthey was not a Neo-Kantian, but had a profound knowledge of Immanuel Kant's philosophy, which deeply influenced his thinking. But whereas Neo-Kantianism was primarily interested in epistemology on the basis of Kant's "Critique of Pure Reason", Dilthey took Kant's "Critique of Judgment" as his point of departure. An important debate between Dilthey and the Neo-Kantians concerned the "human" as opposed to "cultural" sciences, with the Neo-Kantians arguing for the exclusion of psychology from the cultural sciences and Dilthey for its inclusion as a human science.
One of the first philosophers to attempt to grapple with Kant's philosophy was Johann Gottlieb Fichte, whose development of Kantian metaphysics became a source of inspiration for the Romantics. In "Wissenschaftslehre", Fichte argues that the self posits itself and is a self-producing and changing process.
Vattimo writes: "… Bubbio’s book is an important philosophical work: not only as an excellent analysis of sacrifice in the post-Kantian tradition but also—and perhaps especially—because it confronts what is more alive in contemporary philosophy in a clear and productive way."
Fleming writes: "Bubbio’s particular talent is for re-excavating the history of Western philosophy and asking us to see anew things that we have read before."
The Warsaw Positivists—who included faithful Catholics such as Father Franciszek Krupiński (1836–98)—formed a common front against Messianism together with the Neo-Kantians. The Polish Kantians were rather loosely associated with Kant and belonged to the Positivist movement. They included Władysław Mieczysław Kozłowski (1858–1935), Piotr Chmielowski (1848–1904) and Marian Massonius (1862–1945).
The book was supposed to be a written correspondence between Hermias (Greek: "a follower of Hermes"), who believes in the Kantian critical philosophy, and Aenesidemus (Greek: "he who praises the people"), who is skeptical about that philosophy. The skepticism of David Hume's skepticism about induction, according to this book, was not disproved by Kant. As Hume had asserted, the existence of causality, the soul, or the thing-in-itself cannot be proved.
When Birt was a professor in classics at Marburg University, its philosophy department was among the most important in Europe. Hermann Cohen and Paul Natorp there developed what came to be known as Neo-Kantianism. As the name suggests, this aimed to develop Kant's philosophy and apply it to a wide range of contemporary issues. In addition to Cohen and Natorp, Marburg's philosophy department was home during Birt's career to such important figures as Martin Heidegger, Hannah Arendt, Paul Friedlander, Ernst Cassirer, and José Ortega y Gasset. Birt contributed a section to one of Natorp's books, who thanked him as a 'great friend and colleague.' A letter from Kurt Wolff, who became a well-known German publisher, to the writer Boris Pasternak shows that Birt and the philosophers were part of the same social circle: 
In the areas of ethics and religious philosophy, one of the main questions addressed by Moore is this: Is it possible for ethical thinking to be grounded in pure reason? In "Noble in Reason, Infinite in Faculty: Themes and Variations in Kant's Moral and Religious Philosophy", Moore looks at Kant’s moral and religious philosophy and uses it to arrive at a distinctive way of understanding and answering this question. Moore identifies three Kantian themes – morality, freedom and religion – and offers variations on each of these themes in turn. He concedes that there are difficulties with the Kantian view that morality can be governed by ‘pure’ reason, but defends a closely related view involving a notion of reason culturally and socially conditioned.
Kantian Review is a journal of philosophy, focusing on Immanuel Kant. It was first published in March 1997 under editor Prof. Graham Bird of the University of Manchester.
Both Kautsky and Luxemburg condemned Bernstein for his "flawed" philosophy of science for having abandoned Hegelian dialectics for Kantian philosophical dualism. Russian Marxist George Plekhanov joined Kautsky and Luxemburg in condemning Bernstein for having a neo-Kantian philosophy. Kautsky and Luxemburg contended that Bernstein's empiricist viewpoints depersonalized and dehistoricized the social observer and reducing objects down to "facts". Luxemburg associated Bernstein with "ethical socialists" who she identified as being associated with the bourgeoisie and Kantian liberalism.