https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-1-d&q=Kant+on+metaphysics
This is the first of three posts starting discussions on various issues, to become blog essays as they develop/
We bring Kant into the discussion of evolution.
We have long critiqued Darwinism here and most at this point would sacrifice their own mothers before giving up Darwin’s idiotic theory with its statistical idiocy.
In fact, the issue of evolution may be worse than we thought. We can replace Darwinism with another better theory, but can we really hope to succeed.
The resemblance of the evolution theory question to the type of metaphysical thesis Kant finds unknowable in his critique of metaphysics is unsettling.
As we examine ‘evolution’ in light of the eonic model we can see from the latter that while the high-level dynamic in world history is visible in one fragment (the ‘eonic effect’) we cannot proceed from empirical observation to an overall theory. One can argue that this would change given a larger data set as historical knowledge and we can’t rule that out. But a close look at the eonic effect shows that its dynamic is only visible on the surface and the deeper aspect is a ‘force’ in nature unknown to science, and, further, one that precipitates metaphysical speculation. We have given an example: the theory of the theory (eonic model) is, shall we say, ‘creative evolution. I am not a student of Bergson and don’t refer to his thinking as such (in fact I avoided his work in the short term to evade speculation, but it may be time to relent here) but the idea of ‘creative evolution’ is both very illuminating and at the same time obscure, as ‘speculative’ metaphysics.
The figure of Kant is neglected and the left for example ends up in the swamp created by Hegel/Marx and the metaphysical stalemate of their collision. In any case the empirical study of evolution is robust and thriving while the theory side is a form of Darwinian wild goose chase.
1848+: The End(s) of History 