From Scientific Structuralism to Transcendental Structuralism | Kauark-Leite | Kriterion: Revista de Filosofia

From Scientific Structuralism to Transcendental Structuralism

Patricia Kauark-Leite, Ronaldo Penna Neves


Abstract  In the current debate between scientific realism and empiricism, both sides seem to embrace some sort of structuralism as an important component of their descriptions of science. The structural realism is generally presented in two versions: one ontic and the other epistemic. It has been argued that that epistemic structural realism (ESR) is close, if not identical, to a Kantian approach. We aim to show that this is not the case, since ESR, being fundamentally a realist position, cannot be fully consistent with a transcendental approach. Such a position is better called transcendental structuralism (TS), an alternative that we believe is worth being investigated on its own. In this paper, we will take Henry Allison’s interpretation of transcendental idealism as a starting point to establish the distinctions between ESR and TS.

Resumo  No debate atual entre realismo científico e empirismo, ambos os lados parecem abraçar algum tipo de estruturalismo como um componente importante de suas descrições sobre a ciência. O realismo estrutural é geralmente apresentado em duas versões: uma ôntica e outra epistêmica. Tem-se argumentado que o realismo estrutural epistêmico (ESR), por sua vez, é próximo, se não idêntico, a uma abordagem kantiana. Nosso objetivo neste artigo é mostrar que esse não é o caso. Sendo o ESR fundamentalmente uma posição realista, queremos defender que ele não pode ser totalmente compatível com uma abordagem transcendental. Uma posição kantiana mais coerente é aqui defendida sob o nome de estruturalismo transcendental (TS). Neste artigo, partiremos da interpretação de Henry Allison do idealismo transcendental para estabelecer as devidas distinções entre ESR e TS.


Texto completo:

PDF (English)


ALLISON, H. “Kant’s Transcendental Idealism: An Interpretation and Defense”. New Haven/London: Yale Univ., 2004.

BITBOL, M. “Anticiper l'unité : une méthode de connaissance”. In: M. Cazenave (ed.). Unité du monde, unité de l'être. Paris: Dervy, 2005.

BITBOL, M. “Reflective Metaphysics: Understanding Quantum Mechanics from a Kantian Standpoint, Philosophica, 83, 53-83, 2010.

BONJOUR, L. “In Defense of Pure Reason”. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press, 1998.

BUENO, O. “What is Structural Empiricism? Scientific Change in an Empiricist Setting”. Erkenntnis, 50, 59–85, 1999.

CASSIRER, E. “Das Erkenntnisproblem in der Philosophie und Wissenschaft der neueren Zeit”. Zweiter Band. Berlin: Verlag Bruno Cassirer, 1922.

CASSIRER, E. “Substance and Function and Einstein's Theory of Relativity”. Chicago: Open Court, 1923.

CHAPMAN, A., ELLIS, A., HANNA, R., HILDEBRAND, T., & PICKFORD, H. “In Defense of Intuitions: A New Rationalist Manifesto”. London: Palgrave MacMillan, 2013.

COHEN, H. “Kants Theorie der Erfahrung”. Berlin: Dümmlers, 1871.

EARMAN, J. “World Enough and Space-Time: Absolute Versus Relational Theories of Space and Time”. Cambridge, MA: MIT Bradford, 1989.

EINSTEIN, A. “Relativity and the Problem of Space, Appendix 5”. In: A. Einstein, Relativity: The Special and the General Theory. London/NewYork: Routledge Classics, 2001.

FRENCH, S. “On the Withering Away of Physical Objects”. In: E. Castellani (ed.). Interpreting Bodies: Classical and Quantum Objects in Modern Physics, pp. 93–113. Princeton: Princeton Univ. Press, 1998.

FRENCH, S. & LADYMAN, J. “Remodelling Structural realism: Quantum Physics and the Metaphysics of Structure”. Synthese, 136, 31–56, 2003.

FRIEDMAN, M. “Ernst Cassirer”. In E.N. Zalta (ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. 2011.

FRIEDMAN, M. “Einstein, Kant, and the A Priori”. In M. Massimi (ed.). Kant and Philosophy of Science Today, pp. 95-112. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2008.

FRIEDMAN, M. “Kant and the exact sciences”. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Univ. Press, 1992.

GREENBERG, R. “Kant’s Theory of A Priori Knowledge”. University Park: Pennsylvania State Univ. Press, 2001.

HANNA, R. “How Do We Know Necessary Truths? Kant’s Answer”. European Journal of Philosophy, 6, 115-145, 1998.

HANNA, R. “Kant, Science, and Human Nature”. Oxford: Clarendon/Oxford Univ. Press. 2006.

HANNA, R. “Mathematical Truth Regained”. In: M. Hartimo & L. Haaparanta (eds.). Essays on the Phenomenology of Mathematics, pp. 147-181. New York: Springer Verlag, 2010.

HANNA, R. “Cognition, Content, and the A Priori: A Study in the Philosophy of Mind and Knowledge”. Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press, 2015.

HANNA, R. & MAIESE, M. “Embodied Minds in Action”. Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press, 2009.

HUME, D. A Treatise of Human Nature. Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press, 1978.

KANT, I. “Critique of Pure Reason”. P. Guyer & A. Wood (trans.). Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press, 1997.

KANT, I. “Metaphysical Foundations of Natural Science”. M. Friedman (trans.). Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press, 2004.

KAUARK-LEITE, P. “The Transcendental Role of the Principle of Anticipations of Perception in Quantum Mechanics”. In: M. Bitbol, P. Kerszberg, & J. Petitot (eds.). Constituting Objectivity: Transcendental Perspectives on Modern Physics, pp. 203-213. Berlin: Springer, 2009.

KAUARK-LEITE, P. “Transcendental philosophy and quantum physics”, Manuscrito: Rev. Int. Phil., 33 (1), 243-267, 2010a.

KAUARK-LEITE, P. “Classical Reason and Quantum Rationality: Transcendental Philosophy Face Contemporary Physics”. In: W. N. Bryuschinkin (ed.). Klassische Vernunft und Herausforderungen der modernen Zivilisation, Bd. 2, pp. 237– 246. Kaliningrad: Baltische Föderale Immanuel-Kant-Universität, 2010b.

KAUARK-LEITE, P. “Théorie quantique et philosophie transcendantale: dialogues possibles”. Paris: Éditions Hermann, 2012.

KAUARK-LEITE, P. “Redefining the Curvature of the Arc: Transcendental Aspects of Quantum Racionality”. In Patricia Kauark-Leite, Giorgia Cecchinato, Virginia A. Figueiredo, Margit Ruffing, and Alice Serra (ed.). Kant and the Metaphors of Reason, pp. 561-577. Hildesheim: Olms, 2015.

LADYMAN, J. “What is Structural Realism?”. Studies in the History and Philosophy of Science, 29, 409-424, 1998.

LADYMAN, J. Structural Realism. In E. N. Zalta (ed.). The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. From the Web site:, 2009.

LANGTON, R. “Kantian Humility: Our Ignorance of Things-in-Themselves”. Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press, 2001.

LEIBNIZ, G. W. “Discourse on Metaphysics (1686)”. In R. Ariew & D. Garber (eds.). Leibniz: Philosophical Essays. Indianapolis: Hackett, 1989.

MASSIMI, M. “Structural Realism: A Neo-Kantian Perspective”. In P. Bokulich & A. Bokulich (eds.). Scientific Structuralism. Dordrecht/New York: Springer, 2011.

MORGANTI, M. “On the Preferability of Epistemic Structural Realism”. Synthese, 142, 81–107, 2004.

PRAUSS, G. “Kant und das Problem der Dinge an sich”. Bonn: Bouvier Verlag, 1974.

RYCKMAN, T. “The Reign of Relativity: Philosophy in Physics 1915-1925”. Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press, 2005.

SAUNDERS, S. “Are Quantum Particles Objects?”. Analysis, 66, 52–63, 2006.

SELLARS, W. “Science and Metaphysics: Variations on Kantian Themes”. Atascadero, CA: Ridgeview Publishing, 1992.

STRAWSON, P. F. “The Bounds of Sense: An Essay on Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason”. London: Methuen & Co. Ltd, 1966.

VAN FRAASSEN, B. “The Scientific Image”. Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press, 1980.

VAN FRAASSEN, B. “Structure: Its Shadow and Substance”. The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 57, 275–307, 2006.

VAN FRAASSEN, B. “Scientific Representation: Paradoxes of Perspective”. Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press, 2008.

WORRALL, J. “Structural Realism: The Best of Both Worlds?”. Dialectica, 43, 99–124, 1989.