Thread by @andyjonesphd

I'm very excited to say my book "How #Kant Matters for #Biology" will soon be published! The thread below explains some of the key issues dealt with. I'm essentially resituating Kant in relation to biology, especially with key figures in the develop of biology in the in Britain.

Please get in touch if you want to review, I can help get the book out to journals relevant for you.
Links for the book:
University of Wales Press: tinyurl.com/yckedjks
Chicago University Press: tinyurl.com/yeyrrthe
Blackwells: tinyurl.com/yze8puhd

Chapter 1 focuses on debates about Kant's influence on biology. I push back against how #influence tends to be understood in #philosophyofscience and argue that we need to recognise the importance of #misunderstanding - especially for Kant's philosophy. 1/10

In Chapter 2 I offer an interpretation of Kant as developing from problems laid out by #Hume, but argue Kant misunderstood some key aspects of Hume. I end the chapter by presenting the #ontologies of Roy #Bhaskar and Nancy #Cartwright as a mathematical #antinomy. 2/10

Chap 2 continued: I suggest Kant offers a way to metaphysically deflate their opposition, as aspects of both philosophies go beyond possible experience. 3/10

Chapter 3 examines how Kant influenced William #Whewell, who selectively drew from Kant to develop an account of science (#consilience) that #theologised #nature. Whewell was very important for the development of science, especially the idea of the #unityofscience. 4/10

Chapter 3 continued: I consider the important role that God plays within his account, and how this brings into question the assumption of #scientificnaturalism. 5/10

Chapter 4 turns to #Darwin, neither Whewell nor Kant were significantly influential on Darwin, although Darwin appealed consilience to justify natural selection. But Kant denies that #organisms are analogous to #Machines , this is central for Darwin following #Paley. 6/10

Chapter 5 begins by arguing that there is no consensus on an all-encompassing definition of #biologicalIndividuals/organisms, then considers how assumptions about naturalism in biology are potentially misplaced. 7/10

I also consider current philosophers of biology who appeal to a naturalised version of Kant's philosophy to support their accounts of biological #agency, I argue these accounts are incompatible with Kant's original philosophy. 8/10

Instead they highlight how biology is not as committed to #naturalism as it first seems. Kant ultimately uses these ideas to show that purposes in nature corroborate our #moralduties /responsibilities. The book ends by focusing on the role of #valuesInScience. 9/10

I propose that a #Kant-inspired #philosophy can help guide us to think about developing science according to universally shared principles. But leave the question open as to whether this is desirable for science. Thank you for reading! 10/10