Formalism and Logicism in the reception of kantian philosophy: the oblivion of Kant anthropology in a brief overview on the 19^th and 20^th centuries.

ABSTRACT

Although Kant inaugurated his critical philosophy treating about formal conditions for the possibilities to solve problems (Critical Philosophy) he advanced in the 1790s to stablish anthropology as the aim of his philosophy. Considering this, our aim is to show that the reception of Kantian philosophy in the 19^th and 20^th centuries was formalistic and logicist in a way that it has underlined its transcendental aspect when rather it ought to focus on the moral and the pragmatic (in Kantian sense). Thus, the return to Kant promoted by Neokantianism contributed to the forgetfulness and non-thematising the centrality of his Anthropology. It allowed Neokantianism to focus on the conditions for the possibilities of consolidating sciences in the half of 19^th century, which has bequeathed to the Kantianism of the 20^th century interpretative models of logicist and analytical biases; this left aside any deep reflection on the empirical part of Kant’s philosophy as well because it was considered impure. Also, we will point out that the Ethnographic science does not consider for its constitution any heritage from Kant. Finally, it will be statistically proved by means of analysing the centenary historic of Kant Studien Journal that there has been a very low quantity of papers concerned about pragmatic themes. Kant’s Anthropology has been forgotten by critical fortune when it should have been treated as central.

Keywords:
Logicism; Formalism; Neokantianism; forgetfulness of anthropology