Abstract Kant’s theory of biology in the Critique of the Power of Judgment may be rejected as obsolete and attacked from two opposite perspectives. In light of recent advances in biology one can claim contra Kant, on the one hand, that biological phenomena, which Kant held could only be explicated with the help of teleological principles, can in fact be explained in an entirely mechanical manner, or on the other, that despite the irreducibility of biology to physico-mechanical explanations, it is nonetheless proper science. I argue in response that Kant’s analysis of organisms is by no means obsolete. It reveals biology’s uniqueness in much the same way as several current theorists do. It brings to the fore the unique purposive characteristics of living phenomena, which are encapsulated in Kant’s concept of “natural end” and which must be explicated in natural terms in order for biology to become a science. I maintain that Kant’s reluctance to consider biology proper science is not a consequence of his critical philosophy but rather of his inability to complete this task. Kant lacked an appropriate theoretical framework, such as provided later by modern biology, which would enable the integration of the unique features of biology in an empirical system. Nevertheless, as I show in this paper, the conceptual problems with which Kant struggled attest more to the relevance and depth of his insights than to the shortcomings of his view. His contribution to the biological thought consists in insisting on an empirical approach to biology and in providing the essential philosophical underpinning of the autonomous status of biology.

中文翻译：

---

康德对生物学的理解有何贡献？

摘要从两个相反的角度，康德的《批判力批判》中的生物学理论可能被过时和否定了。鉴于生物学的最新进展，一方面可以与康德相反，一方面，康德所持有的生物学现象只能借助目的论原理加以解释，实际上可以完全用机械的方式来解释，也可以用完全的方式来解释。另一方面，尽管生物学对物理力学的解释具有不可还原性，但这仍然是一门正确的科学。作为回应，我认为康德对生物的分析绝不是过时的。它揭示生物学的独特性的方法与目前几位理论家所采用的方法几乎相同。它突显了生命现象的独特目的性特征，这些都封装在康德的“自然结局”概念中，并且必须用自然的术语加以说明才能使生物学成为一门科学。我坚持认为，康德不愿考虑生物学专业的原因不是他的批判哲学的结果，而是他无法完成这项任务的结果。康德缺乏适当的理论框架，例如后来由现代生物学提供的理论框架，该理论框架无法将生物学的独特特征整合到经验系统中。但是，正如我在本文中所展示的，康德所挣扎的概念性问题更多地证明了他的见解的相关性和深度，而不是他的观点的缺点。