The Architectonic Form of Kant's Copernican System Human reason is by nature architectonic. That is to say, it regards all our knowledge as belonging to a possible system. [Kt1:502]1. The Copernican TurnThe previous chapter provided not only concrete evidence that Kant's System is based on the principle of perspective [II.2-3], but also a general outline of its perspectival structure [II.4]. The task this sets for the interpreter is to establish in greater detail the extent to which the System actually does unfold according to this pattern. This will be undertaken primarily in Parts Two and Three. But before concluding Part One, it will be helpful to examine in more detail the logical structure of the relationships between the various parts of Kant's System, and how they fit together to compose what we have called Kant's 'Copernican Perspective'.Kant rather boldly compares the contribution made to philosophy by Kt1 with that which Copernicus made to astronomy. Copernicus explained 'the movements of heavenly bodies' (i.e., of the planets, stars and sun) by denying 'that they all revolved round the spectator' (i.e., the earth), as they indeed appear to do, and suggesting instead that the earth and other planets revolve around the sun while the stars remain at rest. Likewise, Kant attempts to explain our knowledge of objects in general by denying 'that all our knowledge must conform to objects', as it indeed appears to do, and suggesting instead 'that objects must conform to our knowledge' [Kt1:xvi; cf. Kt65:83]. This metaphor, expressing the difference between appearance and reality in the theories of both Copernicus and Kant, suggests the following two models: (a) Appearance (b) RealityFigure III.1: The Two Aspects of a Copernican RevolutionThese diagrams can be used to represent Kant's Copernican revolution simply by replacing 'earth' with 'subject' and 'sun' with 'object', and by stipulating that motion...
