Metafisica e gnoseologismo: Bontadini interprete di Kant

Translated title of the contribution: [Autom. eng. transl.] Metaphysics and epistemology: Bontadini interprets Kant

Massimo Marassi*

*Corresponding author

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

The article analyses Gustavo Bontadini’s interpretation of modern philosophy, particularly with reference to Immanuel Kant’s critical proposal. Influenced especially by actualism and the Milano School of Amato Masnovo and Francesco Olgiati, Bontadini argues for the priority of metaphysics over gnoseology, pointing out the limitations of modern thought based on representations of reality rather than reality itself directly given to thought. His critique focuses particularly on the aesthetics and analytics of the Critique of Pure Reason, and he believes that Kant represents a breaking point with the classical metaphysical tradition, culminating in a «deflagration» of gnoseologism. Bontadini sees Kant as the culminating point of a deviation from metaphysical realism that runs throughout modernity, although he recognizes the historical importance and transformative potential of Kantian philosophy. Bontadini’s perspective contrasts with that of other philosophers, contemporary with Kant, who appreciate his innovation and influence on modern thought, and it differs from the positive historical assessment that has also been given in subsequent centuries.
Translated title of the contribution[Autom. eng. transl.] Metaphysics and epistemology: Bontadini interprets Kant
Original languageItalian
Pages (from-to)759-800
Number of pages42
JournalRivista di Filosofia Neo-Scolastica
VolumeCXV
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2024

Keywords

  • Gustavo Bontadini, Immanuel Kant, Unity of Experience, A Priori Synthesis, Transcendental Object
  • Gustavo Bontadini, Immanuel Kant, unità dell'esperienza, sintesi a priori, oggetto trascendentale

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of '[Autom. eng. transl.] Metaphysics and epistemology: Bontadini interprets Kant'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this