Hegel and Metaphysics
In 2006 I argued: Then popular self-described “non-metaphysical” interpretations should and would jettison the unconvincing idea of a “non-metaphysical” reading, and advance their non-traditional approaches in terms that do not exclude metaphysics. Meanwhile, more traditional accounts should and would pay more attention to the philosophical issues emphasized by non-traditionalists. This strand in my work continued through the reference to the “Hegel’s Metaphysics and its Philosophical Appeal” in the subtitle of my 2015 Reason in the World.
The Importance of Life in Hegel’s Philosophy
2009 - … A series of papers approaching Hegel’s philosophy by taking his treatment of life and as central: 2009 : 2013 : 2015 : 2020. Development during this time has led to a new and different reading of Hegel on life: 2024
Hegel and Spinoza
2026 Hegel and Spinoza , developing 2018, and… more to come…
Nothing Halfway: Post-Kantian System-Critique and the Systems of Fichte, Schelling and Hegel
To understand the philosophical strengths of post-Kantian system builders, Fichte, Schelling and Hegel, requires attention to engagement with post-Kantian system-critique, and seeing its strengths as well. 2025 on Jacobi and Schelling : 2025 on Jacobi and Hegel : 2024 on Schelling’s critique of Hegel. now a NEH-funded book project.
A Dialectic-First Re-Reading of Kant’s Theoretical Philosophy
2022 developing 2015. Approaches to Kant’s theoretical philosophy tend to under-rate the importance of the Transcendental Dialectic of the Critique of Pure Reason. This includes approaches to the Dialectic itself. There is a viable approach that reverses this, bringing at once reason’s interest in the unconditioned and the inevitability of transcendental illusion to the center.
Kant and the Metaphysics and Philosophy of Science
An approach to Kant on teleology and life (2005) and Kant on the laws of nature, forces, essences and kinds: 2009 : 2017 : 2026. I call my approach “restricted inflationism”; I think accounts tend to miss either the inflationism, or the narrow epistemic restriction. I try to argue that Kant’s positions are alternatives to currently popular views of these issues, and worth considering in their own right.