26 Ina Goy INA GOY KANT(Concordia ON FORMATIVE University, Montreal POWER) The notion of a formative1 power is one of the most obscure in Kant’s theory of biology . Before I discuss Kant’s biological use of the term ‘formative power’, in section 1 of this paper I provide a list of all passages in which Kant uses the term, claiming that the older meaning of ‘formative power’ in Kant’s writings is an epi- stemological one, whereas the biological meaning of the term ap- pears not before the mid-1780s. I present and discuss some of thoseCriti passagesque of thein closer power detail, of jud andgment give a precise interpretation of the most central passage in Kant’s philosophy2 of biology in §65 of the . I defend the view that, for Kant, the formative power is a basic, immaterial, and intrinsic natural power in the organism belonging to an account of final causation. As a cause, it does not generate form and matter, or the matter of organisms, but only the end-directed teleological3 form of the matter of an organism. AsKant an on alternative vital force. Metaphysical to White’s concernsclaim ver- sus1 scientific practice Kants Philosophie der Natur. Ihre Entwick- lungFor imrecent inquiries seeund H. van ihre den WirkungBerg, Bildungskraft, in E.-O. und Onnasch Bildungstrieb (ed.), bei ibid. Der Baum imOpus Baum. postumumModellkörper, reproductive, Berlin Systeme- New und York, die DeDifferenzGruyterzwischen, 2009, pp. Leben 115- digem136; G.F. und Frigo, Unlebendigem bei Kant und Bonnet ibidKant, in , pp. 9-23; T. BlCheung,umenbach and Kant on mechanism and teleology in nature: the case of the formative drive The problem of animal generation in early, in modern, pp. 25philosophy-50; B.C. Look, Kant and Blumenbach, in J. onSmith the Bildungstrieb:(ed.), a historical misunderstanding , Cambridge, Cam- bridge University Press, 2006, pp. 355-372; J.R. Richards, Early theories of development: Blumenbach and Kant The, «Studiesromantic in con theception history of lifeand philosophy of biological and biomedical sciences» 31 (2000), pp. 11-32, and see also Id.,From preforma- tion to epigenesis/self-generation in philosophy:, in Kant Self-generation: biology,, Chicago philos- Lon-o- phy,don, andUniversity literature of Chic aroundago Press1800, 2002, pp. 207-237; H. Müller-Sievers, Kant, Blumenbach and vital materialism, in in German biology Vital materialism., Stanford, Blumenbach,Stanford University Kant, and Pressthe teleomechanical, 2000, pp. 26- a64;p- proachand T. toLenoir, life The strategy of life. Teleology and mechanics in nineteenth century, «Isis »Ge71r- man(1980), biologypp. 77-95, and , in 2 , DordrechtKant’s- notionBoston of- London,a purposeSpringer, 1982. 3 CPJ, 5:374.21-6. Final causality in nature and human affairs See D.A. White, , «Studies in philosophy and the history of philosophy» 30 (1997), special issue: , ed. by F.R. Hassing, p. 137. 27 Lebenswelt, 2 (2012) 4 that ‘form’ means species, and Richards’ opinion that ‘form’ is a synonym for (a mistaken notion of an) ‘archetype’, I defend the view that ‘form’ means the necessary directedness of the features of a being towards its purpose. A purpose is the unifying idea of an organism in our consciousness, and an ectype of its archetype in God’s consciousness. Reading the formative force as form-giving allows for a more careful analysis of Kant’s famous tree example in §64, which I in- vestigate in section 2. The self-generation of a tree with regards to its species, as an individual and in its parts, does not generally imply the generation of form and matter of a tree, or in particular the generation of its matter, but only the causation of the form of the matter of a tree. In section 3, I briefly outline consequences of my interpretation for a placement of Kant’s position within theo- logical and philosophical accounts of organic generation. I claim that although the formative power as a form giving capacity in the organism is a natural epigenetic power, this does not rule out a supernatural preformistic interpretation of the creation of matter, and also not a supernatural creation of the formative power. The formative power of nature can be read as a secondary cause in support of the primary cause of God’s creation, and Kant’s posi- 1tion. Kant as mediating on formative between power philosophy and theology. 1.1. Two uses of ‘formative power’ bildende(n) Kraft oeuvre The term ‘formativeCPJ power ( CPJ 5)’ appears in four- teen passages within the whole Kantian . Only two of thoseCPJ passages – 5:374.21-6 in §65 and 5:423.12-424.6 in §81 – belongCPJ to Kant’s published writings, though only passage 5:374.21-6 in §65 refers to Kant’s own account, whereas the pa- ssage 5:423.12-424.6 in §81 refers to contemporary positions of Kant’s own Kanttime, and especially Blumenbach onBlumenbach’s. the Bildungstrieb All other appearances 4 5 See J.R. Richards, cit., p. 28. Bildungs- vermögenThere are, ofCPJ course, more passages in whichCPJ Kant discusses epigenetic coZeugungskraft,nceptions of zeugendepowers under Kraft varying names, for instance a «capacityRaces for […] formationHuman [ Race ]» ( 5:371.25) inCPJ §64 of the , and a «generativeformative power drive[ Bildungs- trieb CPJ ]» in his two early writings on races ( 2:435.1-436.8, 8:98.11-99.12). In §81 of the , he mentionsBildung Blumenbach’sCPJ « [ ]» ( 5:424.34) in a review of epigenetic positions. Furthermore in §58 he talks about a chemical version of «formation [ ]» ( 5:348.11, 21, 25; 349.1; 350.1). The boundary but also the worth of the following investigation is its concentration on those selected passages where Kant precisely uses the term «formative power». Further statistics could follow up including more related passages. 28 Ina Goy – occur in lectures, notes, reflections, fragments texts which Kant himself did not authorize for publication. The notion ‘formative power’ is a rare term. Nevertheless, placed at the center of §65, the formative power might be an indispensable part of Kant’s ac- count of biological causation. Reading all fourteen passages results in a surprisingly clear picture of two different treatments of the notion ‘formative power’ in LecturesKant’s writings. on metaphysics Let us beginMet. with L1 a list of these passages: ( ) (1) 28:230-40 mid 1770s epistemology Refle(2) 28:276ctions on metaphysics mid 1770s epistemology Reflections(3) 17:736, on refl. anthropology 4811 phase τ 1775-6?, μ 1770-1? epistemology 1 1 1 (4) 15/I:95, refl. 251 phase1 ν 1771?, ρ 1773-5?, φ 1776-8, χ 1778-9 epistemology (5) 15/I:127, refl. 321 phase λ 1769-70?, ξ 1772? epistemology (6) 15/I:383, refl. 872 phase υ 1776-8 epistemology Lectures(7) 15/II:699 on moral, refl. philosophy 1484 phaseMoral σ 1775 Mrongovius-7 epistemology ( ) Reflections(8) 27/II.2:1498 on metaphysics 1782 epistemology 2 Critique(1) 18:574, of the refl power. 6302 of judgmentphase ψ 1783–4 biology (2) §65, 5:374 1790 biology Lectures(3) §81, 5:423on metaphysics-4 Met.1790 K2 biology ( ) (4) 28/II.1:761 early 1790s 29 Lebenswelt, 2 (2012) Opus postumum biology (5) 21:475 1786-98 biology (6) 21:630 1798-9 biology epistemology The earlier meaning appears in eight passages and belongs to . Seven of these passages stem from the 1770s, one of them from the early 1780s. In this early (pre-critical) view, Kant treats the notion ‘formative power’ as a source of the spontaneous production of mental representations in human beings (seven passages) and in the animal’s mind (one passage). The term ‘forma- tive power’ designates a productive force of our consciousness to spontaneously generate representations, on bothsensual the sensual and the conceptual level. InAbbildungen its most elaborate version KantNach distinguibildun- genshes six kinds of spontaneouslyVorbildungen generated reprEinesenbil- dungentations: re-formations ( Gegenbildungen), post-formations ( Aus),bil anddungen pre-formations ( ), in-formations ( ), anti-formations ( ), and ex-formations ( ) – beside two kinds of spontaneously generated con- ceptual representations: concepts (categories) and laws of under- standing. I briefly demonstrate this in Kant’s text. 6 In the lectures on metaphysics from the mid 1770s the term ‘formative power’ designates an activity of the sensual faculty of the human mind that spontaneouslyknowledge of produces the formative sensual representpower Ea-r- kenntnisse,tions: «knowledge die aus that der has Spontaneität its origin in thedes spontaneityGemüths entspringen, of the con- heißen:sciousness Erkenntnisse is called: der bildenden Kraft [ imitated knowledge of the senses nachge7 ahmte Erkenntnis der Sinne ]» . The formative power is an « [ ]», which is a capacity «to produce knowledge out of our- selves that nevertheless 8has the form according to which objects would affect our senses» . This sensual kind of formative power is a capacity of sensual re- collection or anticipation of objects of experience. It encompasses Met. L1 6 Met. L1 7 Erkenntnisse28:230 -aus40. uns selbst zu machen, die aber dennoch die Form an sich haben, nach der8 Gegenstände28:230.21 unsere-2. Sinne afficiren würden Met. L1 « » ( 28:235.17-21). 30 Ina Goy Abbildung six subordinate kinds of sensual representations,Vorste threellungen of which der gegenwärtigenare temporally distinct:Zeit the capacity of «re-formation [ Nachbil]»- dunggenerates «representations of the present time [ Vorstellun- gen der vergangenen]», Zeitthe capacity of «post-formation [ Vorbildung]» reproduces «representations of the past time [ Vor- stellungen der zukünftigen Zeit]», and the faculty of «pre-formation [ ]» anticipates «representation9 of the future time [ ]»Vermögen. Three furtherder Einbildung subordinate kinds of a spontaneous, sensual Vermögecapacityn named der Gegenbildung ‘formative power’, are the «capacity of in-formationVermögen [ der Ausbildung ]», the «ca- pacity of anti-formation [ 10]», and the «capacity of ex-formation [ ]» .