Determinism And Free Will In Kant's Third Antinomy

Whilst reading Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, one will encounter The Third Antinomy. In The Third Antinomy, Kant addresses difficult metaphysical conundrums in a way many have refused and dismissed as impractical (Metaphysics, Critique, and Utopia, 1988). However, Kant may have argued, to do so is important because humans cannot be cured of their metaphysical impulses. While reading, one will eventually encounter Kant’s discussion of free will and determinism. However, after serious analyzation, one may find this section of the text problematic - a main issue being Kant’s attempt to reconcile two seemingly mutually exclusive concepts: determinism and free will. Ultimately, the result of his attempt is unsatisfying and seems incomplete. Because of the nature of transcendental realism, Kant leaves his reader with a conclusion that he, nor we, can fully digest.

Free will is the most familiar sounding concept. For human beings, free will is an important idea. If a human being wants to consider himself more than a machine, he must think of himself as free in some sense. In Kant’s definition, he focuses on the ability of one to act according to one’s noumenal self. In the text, Kant literally defines free will as a "choice which can be determined by pure reason" (Kant et al., 1955). Kant goes on to say, if a human does not act upon some a priori and universally shared sense of rationality, he is not acting freely. Kant’s standard of freedom is quite high. It seems, according to his standard, many actions are not freely willed. The idea is further complicated once Kant introduces the idea of