CFP: «Perspectives: International Postgraduate Journal of Philosophy», volume 7, 2017, Special Issue – Kant’s Relevance and Relation to Realism

We are glad to give notice of the now open call for papers to be published in the next issue of Perspectives: International Postgraduate Journal of Philosophy. The call is also open for review proposals. The deadline for submissions is March 12th, 17:00 (GMT) 

Please find the call’s full text below.


The editorial board of the 2017 issue of Perspectives: International Postgraduate Journal of Philosophy is happy to invite submissions of high-quality original papers from a variety of philosophical approaches to the questions of the relevance and relation of Kant’s thought to contemporary forms of realism. Perspectives is a refereed open access graduate journal edited and managed by the graduate students of the School of Philosophy at University College in Dublin and published by De Gruyter Open, a leading open access publisher of academic content with 435 journals in a variety of disciplines. Articles and reviews published by Perspectives and De Gruyter Open are visible on over 300 online Databases including ProQuest and Google scholar and are fully searchable and citable. The goal of Perspectives is to present exciting research from graduate and post-graduate students, which reflects the pluralistic approaches and views of the School of Philosophy at UCD.

Kant, in the Critique of Pure Reason, attempts to ground knowledge of the natural world on the rule-governed conceptual functions of the mind explicating this as the synthetic a priori. Despite Kant’s stated goal, the history of philosophy after him broadly painted his thought as metaphysically idealistic and epistemologically anti-realist. In the last century, these criticisms gained new traction when philosophers and scientists argued that Kant’s attempt presupposes a conception of nature wedded to Newtonian mechanics and Euclidean geometry. The revolutions of scientific and philosophic thought throughout the twentieth century challenged the necessity of these very frameworks and seemed to shut the door on Kant once and for all. Quine’s decisive attack on the very notion of the a priori itself seemed to be the final nail in the coffin.

Despite these challenges, does not the very notion of a conceptual framework – Euclidean or otherwise, Newtonian or otherwise – force us to specify what constitutes these frameworks and under what conditions they operate to determine their objects? Posed in this way, our question breathes new life into the Kantian strategy for securing epistemic realism. How does it favour in comparison with other realist/anti-realist strategies or constructivist strategies? More directly, can even the most tough-minded realists completely eschew considerations of the grounds of their opinions without courting the danger of scepticism, relativism, or nihilism? Is it possible for Kant to help us be realists today? The editors of Perspectives hope that these and related questions spark interesting debate on realism in a heterodox fashion; including, but not limited to realistic approaches to the question of knowledge in analytic, continental, phenomenological, post-Kantian, and pragmatist philosophy.

Topics that may be addressed include (but are not limited to) the following:

  • Can language provide a source for synthetic a priori judgments?
  • Meanings of Transcendental Idealism?
  • Kant and forms of Scientific Realism
  • What is the nature of our conceptual purchase on the world?
  • Normativity and the natural
  • Are scientific realism and phenomenology incompatible?
  • Can phenomenologists be anything other than naïve realists?
  • What are the meta-philosophical implications to committing (or not committing) to realist approaches to philosophy?
  • What are the normative implications of realist approaches to philosophy?

The editors of Perspectives also welcome scholarly reviews of recently published books (i.e. books published within the past two years) that are related to this year’s theme of Kant, realism, and their intersections. Reviews should be between 2,000-2,500 words and conform to the journal’s ‘Book Review Style Guidelines’ which can be found on our website.

If you are interested in submitting a book review, we ask that you contact the editors before beginning the review to ensure the appropriateness of the review for the 2017 issue.

Please feel free to contact us with any questions regarding the appropriateness of a proposed papers. Submissions should be in a Word (or word compatible) format, prepared for blind refereeing, between 5,000-7,000 words and conform to the journal’s style guidelines found in our ‘Instruction for Authors’ on our website.

Please also include a brief abstract (120 words maximum) with keywords. Attach a separate brief biography for the contributor’s page should your paper be accepted. Ensure that the biography includes all relevant contact information including a permanent e-mail address.

Submissions should be e-mailed to and should bear the subject line ‘Perspectives 2017’ followed by ‘submission’ or ‘review’ as appropriate.


Printable Version