Epigenesis and its Rational Foundations in Kant’s Critical Philosophy

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.34024/prometeica.2025.32.19736

Keywords:

epigenesis, transcendental, natural end, rationality, life

Abstract

This paper offers a structured comprehension of the epigenesis in Kant’s critical philosophy, i.e., the theory that describes the generation of reason and the organisms, through which the rational motives that support and validate this theory are clarified. With these purposes, (1) this theory is reconstructed and interpreted from its first appearance in the Critique of Pure Reason of 1781 and the racial texts of the same decade; (2) it is analyzed and comprehended by means of its exposition in the Critique of the Power of Judgment of 1790; at last, (3) a three-step comprehension of this theory is proposed, which synthesizes what has been gathered from the first two sections, and subsequently the rational motives that support and validate it inside the critical limits of knowledge are clarified and articulated, namely, the Kantian comprehension of rationality and, specifically, of the reflective power of judgment. With this labor, a comprehension that can function as a point of agreement and departure is provided to the recent studies on this theory, which is done emphasizing the motives that explain its adoption by Kant to describe the rational generation.

382 248

Author Biography

  • Daniel Caballero López, National Autonomous University of Mexico

    PhD, MA, and Bachelor in philosophy, graduated with honors from the Faculty of Philosophy and Letters of the National Autonomous University of Mexico. Studies focused on metaphysics, modern philosophy and Kant's critical philosophy, on which he has written, published and reviewed specialized articles in national and international journals.

References

Caballero López, Daniel. (2020). “Hacia una crítica de la razón histórica: la historia filosofante de Kant”. Logos, s/v(134), pp. 97-115.

Caballero López, Daniel. (2021). “El proyecto arquitectónico de la filosofía crítica de Kant como reforma a la filosofía”. Theoría. Revista del Colegio de Filosofía, s/v(41), pp. 6-25.

Caballero López, Daniel. (2024). “La interpretación arquitectónica del tránsito de la Crítica del Juicio como argumento teorético y práctico”. Open Insight, XV(34), pp. 81-116.

Allison, Henry E. (2003). “Kant’s Antinomy of Teleological Judgment”. En Paul Guyer (ed.), Kant’s Critique of the Power of Judgment. Critical Essays (Cap. 12, pp. 219). Maryland: Rowman and Littlefield Publishers.

Baghai, Farshid. (2013). “The Epigenesis of Pure Reason: Systematicity in Kant’s Critical Philosophy”. (Tesis doctoral) Toronto: University of Toronto.

Bennigton, Geoffrey. (2017). Kant on the Frontier. Philosophy, Politics, and the Ends of Earth. New York: Fordham University Press.

Bouversesse, Jacques. (1991). “Le problème de l’a priori et la conception évolutionniste des lois de la pensée”. Revue de théologie et de philosophie, 123(s/n), 353-68

Cohen, Alix A. (2006). “Kant on Epigenesis, Monogenesis and Human Nature: The Biological Premises of Anthropology”. Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences, s/v(37), 675-693

Duque, Félix. (1989). “Causalidad y teleología en Kant”. En Javier Muguerza, Roberto Rodríguez Aramayo (eds.), Kant después de Kant. En el bicentenario de la Crítica de la razón pura (Cap. 18, pp. 285-307). Madrid: Tecnos.

Emundts, Dina. (2000). “Das Problem der Organismen in Kants Kritik der Urteilskraft und im Nachlasswerk”. En Volker Gerhardt (ed.), Kant und die Berliner Aufklärung. Akten des IX. Internationalen Kant Kongresses (pp. 503-512). Berlin: de Gruyter.

Ferrini, Cinzia. (2023). “The Epigenesis of Germs and Dispositions in Logic and Life: Kant’s System of Pure Reason and His Concept of Race”. SATS, 24(2), 111-128.

Fugate, Courtney D. (2014). The Teleology of Rason. A study of the Structure of Kant’s Critical Philosophy. Berlin: de Gruyter.

Genova, A. C. (1970). “Kant’s Complex Problem of Reflective Judgment”. The Review of Metaphysics, 23(3), 452-80

Genova, A. C. (1974). “Kant’s Epigenesis of Pure Reason” Kant-Studien, 65(1-4), 259-273

Guenova, Ludmilla L. (2001). “In Search of a Universal Organic Force. Kant’s Notion of Lebenskraft”. En Oliver Thorndike (ed.), Rethinking Kant. Volume 3 (Cap. 11, pp. 249-259). Cambridge: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.

Ginsborg, Hannah. (2001). “Kant on Understanding Organisms as Natural Purposes”. En Eric Watkins (ed.), Kant and the Sciences (Cap. 11, pp. 231-258). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Goy, Ina. (2014). “Epigenetic Theories: Caspar Friedrich Wolff and Immanuel Kant”. En Ina Goy y Eric Watkins (eds.), Kant’s Theory of Biology (Parte 1, pp. 43-60). Berlin: de Gruyter.

Guzmán Grez, Nicolás. (2024). “F. H. Jacobi y el problema de la afección en Kant: una solución metodológica”. Tópicos. Revista de Filosofía, s/v(69), 31-53.

Henrich, Dieter. (1989). “Kant’s Notion of a Deduction and the Methodological Background of the First Critique”. En Eckart Förster (ed.), Kant’s Transcendental Deductions. The Three Critiques and the Opus postumum (Parte 1, pp. 29-46). California: Standford University Press.

Huneman, Philippe. (2014). “Purposiveness, Necessity, and Contingency”. En Ina Goy (ed.), Kant’s Theory of Biology (pp. 185-202). Berlin: de Gruyter.

Jacobi, F. H. (1995). “David Hume sobre la creencia o idealismo y realismo”. En F. H. Jacobi, Cartas a Mendelssohn. David Hume. Carta a Fichte (pp. 291-476). Trad. José Luis Villacañas. Barcelona: Círculo de Lectores.

Kant, Immanuel. (2002) (ÜE). La polémica sobre la Crítica de la razón pura (respuesta a Eberhard). Trad. Mario Caimi. Madrid: Mínimo tránsito. A. Manchado Libros.

Kant, Immanuel. (2021) (BBMR). “Definición del concepto de raza humana”. En Immanuel Kant, La cuestión de las razas (pp. 129-152). Trad. Natalia A. Lerussi y Manuel Sánchez-Rodríguez. Madrid: Abada Editores.

Kant, Immanuel. (2014) (TP). “En torno al tópico: «eso vale para la teoría, pero no sirve de nada en la práctica»”. En Immanuel Kant, Kant II, trad. Roberto Rodríguez Aramayo. Madrid: Gredos. PP

Kant, Immanuel. (2010) (IaG). “Idea para una historia universal en clave cosmopolita”. En Immanuel Kant, Kant III. Trad. Roberto Rodríguez Aramayo. Madrid: Gredos. PP

Kant, Immanuel. (1989) (MS). La metafísica de las costumbres. Trad. Adela Cortina Orts y Jesús Conill Sancho. Madrid: Tecnos.

Kant, Immanuel. (1923) (Log). “Logik”. En Immanuel Kant, Gesammelte Schriften, Band IX (1-150), Hrsg. Königlich Preußischen Akademie der Wissenschaften. Berlín: Walter de Gruyter.

Kant, Immanuel. (2011) (FM). Los progresos de la metafísica. Trad. Mario Caimi. México: FCE, UNAM, UAM.

Kant, Immanuel. (1923) (RezHerder). “Recensionen von J. G. Herders Ideen zur Philosophie der Geschichte der Menschheit”. En Immanuel Kant, Gesammelte Schrifte. Band VIII (pp. 43-106), Hrsg. Königlich Preußischen Akademie der Wissenschaften. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.

Kant, Immanuel. (2004) (ÜGTP).“Sobre el uso de principios teleológicos en la filosofía”. LOGOS. Anales del seminario de metafísica. Trad. Nuria Sánchez Madrid. 37(s/n), 7-45

Kant, Immanuel. (2021) (VvRM). “Sobre las diversas razas humanas”. En Immanuel Kant, La cuestión de las razas (pp. 103-128). Trad. Natalia A. Lerussi y Manuel Sánchez-Rodríguez. Madrid: Abada Editores.

Kant, Immanuel. (2011) (KpV). Crítica de la razón práctica. Trad. Dulce María Granja Castro. México: FCE, UNAM, UAM.

Kant, Immanuel. (2011) (KrV). Crítica de la razón pura. Trad. Mario Caimi. México: FCE, UNAM, UAM.

Kant, Immanuel. (2003) (KU). Crítica del discernimiento. Trad., Roberto R. Aramayo y Salvador Mas. Madrid: Mínimo Tránsito Antonio Machado Libros.

Kant, Immanuel. (2014) (GMS). Fundamentación para una metafísica de las costumbres. Trad. Roberto Rodríguez Aramayo. Madrid: Gredos.

Kant, Immanuel. (2017) (EEKU). Primera Introducción de la Crítica del Juicio. Trad. Nuria Sánchez Madrid. Madrid: Escolar y Mayo.

Kant, Immanuel. (1993) (MAN). Primeros principios metafísicos de la ciencia de la naturaleza. Trad. Samuel Nemirovsky. México: UNAM, Instituto de Investigaciones Filosóficas.

Kant, Immanuel. (1999) (Prol). Prolegómenos a toda metafísica futura que haya de poder presentarse como ciencia. Trad Mario Caimi. Madrid: Ediciones Istmo.

Lebrun, Gérard. (2008). Kant y el final de la metafísica. Ensayo sobre la Crítica del Juicio. Trad. Alejandro García Mayo. Madrid: Escolar y Mayo Editores.

Longuenesse, Béatrice. (2007). “Point of View of Man of knowledge of God”. En Sally Sedgwick (ed.), The Reception of Kant’s Critical Philosophy (Cap. 12, pp. 253-272). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Longuenesse, Béatrice. (1998). Kant and the Capacity to Judge, trad. Charles T. Wolfe. New Jersey: Princeton University Press.

MacLaughlin, Peter. (2003). “Newtonian Biology and Kant’s Mechanistic Concept of Causality”. En Paul Guyer (ed.), Kant’s Critique of the Power of Judgment (Cap. 11, pp. 209-218). Maryland: Rowman and Littlefield Publishers.

Malabou, Catherine. (2014a). Avant demain. Épigenèse et rationalité. Paris. PUF.

Malabou, Catherine. (2014b). “Can we Relinquish the Transcendental?”. The Journal of Speculative Philosophy, 28(3), 242-55.

Meillassoux, Quentin. (2006). Après la finitude. Essair sur la nécessité de la contingence.Paris: Éditions du Seuil.

Mensch, Jennifer. (2013). Kant’s Organicism. Epigenesis and the Development of Critical Philosophy. Illinois: The University of Chicago Press.

Moya, Eugenio. (2019). “Fuerzas, facultades y formas a priori en Kant”. Con-Textos kantianos, s/v(9), 49-71

Órdenes Azúa, Paula. (2015). “La antinomia de la facultad de juzgar y el rol del entendimiento en su resolución”. En Paula Órdenes y Daniela Alegría (eds.), Kant y el criticismo. Pasado, presenta, ¿futuro? (Cap. 2, pp. 154-170). Porto Alegre: Editora fi, Porto Alegre.

Palermo, Sandra. (2022). “‘Razón y vida se llaman mutuamente’. Reflexiones sobre la imagen del organismo en Kant y en Hegel”. Tópicos. Revista de filosofía, s/v(63), 51-88.

Patellis, Ioli. (2007). “Kant: Sciences, Systems and Organisms”. En Goudeli, Kontos y Patellis, Kant. Making Reason Intuitive (Cap. 6, pp. 77-96). London: Palgrave Macmillan.

Roland-Rodríguez, I. A. (2020). “Can we relinquish the Transcendental?’ Malabou and Foucault on the Kantian Organism”. The Comparatist, 44(s/n), 60-82.

Sánchez Madrid, Nuria. (2011). “Contingencia y trascendentalidad. La Primera Introducción de la Crítica del Juicio y la catábasis reflexiva de la Lógica trascendental”. En Immanuel Kant, Primera Introducción de la Crítica del Juicio (pp. 9-90), trad. Nuria Sánchez Madrid. Madrid: Escolar y Mayo Editores.

Sloan, Phillip R. (2002). “Preforming the Categories: Eighteenth-Century Generation Theory and the Biological Roots of Kant’s A Priori”. Journal of the History of Philosophy, 40(2), 229-253.

Steigerwald, Joan. (2006). “Kant’s Concept of Natural Purpose and the Reflecting Power of Judgment”. Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences, 37(s/n), 712-34.

Sustar, Predrag. (2014). “Kant’s Account of Biological Causation”. En Ina Goy y Eric Watkins (eds.), Kant’s Theory of Biology (Cap. 5, pp. 99-116). Berlin: de Gruyter.

Tonelli, Giorgio. (1954). “La formazione del testo della ‘Kritk der Urteilskraft’”. Revue Internationale de Philosophie, 8(30), 423-448.

Wubging, J. (1969). “The Epigenesis of Pure Reason”. Kant Studien, 60(2), 147-52.

Zammito, John H. (2016). “Epigenesis in Kant: Recent Considerations”. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science, 58(s/n), 85-97.

Zammito, John H. (2007). “Kant’s Persistent Ambivalence toward Epigenesis, 1764-90”. En Philippe Huneman (ed.), Understanding Purpose. Kant and the Philosophy of Biology (Cap. 2, pp. 51-74). New York: University of Rochester Press.

Zöller, Günter. (1989). “From Innate to ‘A Priori’: Kant’s Radical Transformation of a Cartesian-Leibizian Legacy”. The Monist, 72(2), 222-35.

Prometeica v.32

Downloads

Published

2025-08-31

Issue

Vol. 32 (2025): Prometeica - v 32 (03/2025 - 12/2025)

Section

Articles

License

Copyright (c) 2025 Daniel Caballero López

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

Copyright: Prometeica allows the author (s) to keep their copyrights unrestricted. Prometeica allows the author (s) to retain their publication rights without restriction. Authors should ensure that the article is an original work without fabrication, fraud or plagiarism; does not infringe any copyright or right of ownership of any third party. Authors should also ensure that each one complies with the authorship requirements as recommended by the ICMJE and understand that if the article or part of it is flawed or fraudulent, each author shares responsibility.

Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY-NC 4.0)

Prometeica - Journal of Philosophy and Sciences is governed by the licencse CC-By-NC

You are free to:

  • Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material

The licensor cannot revoke these freedoms as long as you follow the license terms.

Under the following terms:

No additional restrictions — You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.

 

Copyright maintenance

Prometeica allows the author (s) to keep their copyright without restrictions.

Prometeica allows the author (s) to retain their publication rights without restriction.

Received 2024-11-16
Accepted 2025-06-24
Published 2025-08-31

How to Cite

Caballero López, D. (2025). Epigenesis and its Rational Foundations in Kant’s Critical Philosophy. Prometeica - Journal of Philosophy and Science, 32, e19736 (1-20). https://doi.org/10.34024/prometeica.2025.32.19736