University of Isfahan Metaphysics 2476-3276 14 33 2022 03 21 Kant on "die Züfllichkeit" in the realm of theoretical reason Kant on "die Züfllichkeit" in the realm of theoretical reason 53 70 26364 10.22108/mph.2022.127983.1281 FA Saleh Tavassoli Philosophy Department, Law, Theology and Political Sciences Faculty, Islamic Azad University, Science and Research Branch, Tehran, Iran Meisam Sefidkhosh Philosophy and Theology Department, Theology and Religious Studies, Shahid Beheshti University, Tehran, Iran Journal Article 2021 11 27 The contingent is always a kind of menace for metaphysical systems. Kant uses die Zufälligkeit, and we first must consider its implications in his theoretical philosophy in order to find his position on the menace of contingency for the system of science (Wissenschaft). Our study shows that Kant has in different occasions used this term (die Zufälligkeit) in some different but related meanings; Tracing Kant’s usage of the term through its Critique of pure Reason, this paper examines how Kant have confronted to the situation of the accidental in the necessary system of science. The conclusion is that Kant does not resolve this tension, because on the one hand he ignores contingency in favor of necessity, and claims that a system as a pure science required to avoid from the contingency in his transcendental system; and on the other hand, he gives a place to contingency in order to be able to explain how reason progresses in its series of dialectical inferences. Therefore, Kant only has dissolved and not solved the crucial tension, and its sublimation is possible only through another non-Kantian models of dialectic. The contingent is always a kind of menace for metaphysical systems. Kant uses die Zufälligkeit, and we first must consider its implications in his theoretical philosophy in order to find his position on the menace of contingency for the system of science (Wissenschaft). Our study shows that Kant has in different occasions used this term (die Zufälligkeit) in some different but related meanings; Tracing Kant’s usage of the term through its Critique of pure Reason, this paper examines how Kant have confronted to the situation of the accidental in the necessary system of science. The conclusion is that Kant does not resolve this tension, because on the one hand he ignores contingency in favor of necessity, and claims that a system as a pure science required to avoid from the contingency in his transcendental system; and on the other hand, he gives a place to contingency in order to be able to explain how reason progresses in its series of dialectical inferences. Therefore, Kant only has dissolved and not solved the crucial tension, and its sublimation is possible only through another non-Kantian models of dialectic. https://mph.ui.ac.ir/article_26364_72b446276f380921e95eaea7fe4aabc8.pdf