This article analyzes the dependencies of Donald MacKinnon on Aristotle and Immanuel Kant, particularly as regards to his ‘descriptive metaphysics’. MacKinnon remains indebted to an Aristotelian aporetics of ‘substance’ that at once emphasizes the irrepressible particularity of entities, while simultaneously not resolving the tension between specific description and universal categories of meaning. This insight was contemporaneously mediated for MacKinnon through his reception of G.E. Moore, and especially in the way that his critique of Bradleyian ‘internal relations’ attempted to retain ‘individuality’ over against the collapse of objects into relational determinations. Kant’s transcendental apriorism had a similar function for MacKinnon, although now with the added novelty of synthetic judgments which are adduced by Kant to grasp those imaginative totalities that were needed to garner ‘experience’ within the limits of reason alone. The article traces Kant’s deepening impression on MacKinnon with respect to ontological analogy, showing through a theological genealogy how MacKinnon gradually becomes disenchanted with the analogia entis – a move which is dependent on a critique of Platonic methexis. In MacKinnon’s mind, analogical metaphysics remains predicated on an intuitional account of being that transcends the critical strictures asserted by Kant, and moreover relies upon a questionable reading of ‘being‐as‐predicate’. This constitutes MacKinnon’s reception of a Kantian apophatics. The article concludes by suggesting that MacKinnon could have been better served in his attempt to collate historicity and metaphysics by retaining the analogical participation, and by supplementing his realism with a broadly Hegelian approach to the development of knowledge. Moreover, his Kantianism probably does not assist him as regards a re‐articulation of the via negativa insofar as it remains in a diastasis between anthropocentricism and a transcendentally‐formal sublime.

中文翻译：

---

论无用和无用：唐纳德·麦金农的描述形而上学

本文分析了唐纳德·麦金农对亚里士多德和伊曼纽尔·康德的依赖，特别是关于他的“描述形而上学”。麦金农仍然沉迷于亚里士多德的“物质”外交学，该学说立即强调了实体的不可遏制的特殊性，而同时又没有解决具体描述与意义的普遍范畴之间的矛盾。麦金农通过接受GE摩尔同时传达了这种见解，尤其是通过他对布拉德利主义的“内部关系”的批评试图保留“个体”，以防止对象崩溃成为关系决定。康德的先验先验主义对麦金农有着类似的作用，尽管现在有了康德提出的综合判断的新颖性，以使他们仅凭理性就可以掌握那些想获得“经验”所需的想象力。这篇文章追溯了康德对MacKinnon在本体论类比方面的加深印象，并通过神学家谱显示了MacKinnon如何逐渐对MacKinnon产生了迷惑。类比法-此举取决于对柏拉图式甲氧苄啶的批判。在麦金农的心中，类比形而上学的前提是直觉上的存在，即超越了康德所主张的批判性约束，而且还依赖于对“按谓存在”的可疑理解。这构成了麦金农对康德消融理论的接受。本文的结论是，建议麦金农​​通过保留类比参与，并用广泛的黑格尔主义知识发展方法来补充他的现实主义，从而更好地整理历史性和形而上学。此外，他的康德主义可能不会帮助他重新表达通行证，因为通行证仍保留在通行证中。以人类为中心和超越形式的崇高之间的矛盾。