Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-cb9f654ff-mwwwr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-08-29T16:10:28.633Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Kant’s Natural Philosophy

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 August 2025

Marius Stan
Affiliation:
Boston College, Massachusetts

Summary

This Element analyzes Kant's metaphysics and epistemology of the exact science of nature. It explains his theory of true motion and ontology of matter. In addition, it reconstructs the patterns of evidential reasoning behind Kant's foundational doctrines.
Get access

Information

Type
Element
Information
Online ISBN: 9781108529631
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication: 21 August 2025

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Element purchase

Temporarily unavailable

Bibliography

Bibliography

I cite canonically from the Academy Edition: Kant’s Gesammelte Schriften. G. Reimer/De Gruyter (1903–). Foundations and Prolegomena are in volume 4; Monads is in 1, and Motion in 2. Moreover, I rely on an excellent modern edition: Kant, I. 1997. Metaphysische Anfangsgründe der Naturwissenschaft, ed. K. Pollok. Felix Meiner.

Adickes, E. 1924. Kant als Naturforscher. De Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ameriks, K. 1978. Kant’s transcendental deduction as a regressive argument. Kant Studien 69: 273–287.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anstey, P. and Schuster, J. (eds.). 2005. The Science of Nature in the Seventeenth Century. Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Basile, G. P. 2013. Kants Opus postumum und seine Rezeption. De Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bennett, J. 1966. Kant’s Analytic. Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Biener, Z. and Smeenk, C.. 2012. Cotes’ queries: Newton’s empiricism and conceptions of matter. Interpreting Newton, ed. Schliesser, E. and Janiak, A., 105137. Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brading, K. and Stan, M.. 2023. Philosophical Mechanics in the Age of Reason. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Calinger, R. 1969. The Newtonian-Wolffian Controversy: 1740–1759. Journal of the History of Ideas 30: 319330.10.2307/2708560CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Caparrini, S. and Fraser, C.. 2013. Mechanics in the Eighteenth Century. The Oxford Handbook of the History of Physics, ed. Buchwald, J. Z. and Fox, R., 358405. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Cramer, K. 1985. Nicht-reine synthetische Urteile a priori. Carl Winter Universitätsverlag.Google Scholar
Earman, J. 1989. World Enough and Space-Time. MIT Press.Google Scholar
Euler, L. 1752a. Découverte d’un nouveau principe de mécanique. Mémoires de l’académie des sciences 6: 185217. Berlin.Google Scholar
Euler, L. 1752b. Recherches sur l’origine des forces. Mémoires de l’académie des sciences 6: 409447. Berlin.Google Scholar
Euler, L. 1765. Theoria motus corporum solidorum seu rigidorum, vol. I. Rostock.Google Scholar
Fox, C. 2016. The Newtonian equivalence principle: How the relativity of acceleration led Newton to the equivalence of inertial and gravitational mass. Philosophy of Science 83: 10271038.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Friedman, M. 1992. Kant and the Exact Sciences. Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Friedman, M. 2012. Quantity of matter in the Metaphysical Foundations of Natural Science. The Southern Journal of Philosophy 50: 482503.10.1111/j.2041-6962.2012.00126.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Friedman, M. 2013. Kant’s Construction of Nature. Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gaukroger, S. 1982. The metaphysics of impenetrability: Euler’s conception of force. British Journal for the History of Science 15: 132154.10.1017/S0007087400019142CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hartz, G. 2007. Leibniz’s Final System: Monads, Matter and Animals. Routledge.Google Scholar
Henrich, D. 1989. Kant’s notion of a deduction and the methodological background of the First Critique. Kant’s Transcendental Deductions: The Three ‘Critiques’ and the ‘Opus Postumum,’ ed. Förster, E., 2746. Stanford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hermann, J. 1716. Phoronomia. Amsterdam.Google Scholar
Hogan, D. 2007. Wolff on order and space. Wolff und die europäische Aufklärung, eds. Stolzenberg, J. and Rudolph, O.-P., 2942. G. Olms.Google Scholar
Hogan, D. 2020. Kant and the character of mathematical inference. Kant’s Philosophy of Mathematics. Vol. I: The Critical Philosophy and its Roots, ed. Posy, C. and Rechter, O., 126154. Cambridge University Press.10.1017/9781107337596.007CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holden, T. 2004. The Architecture of Matter: Galileo to Kant. Oxford University Press.10.1093/0199263264.001.0001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Howard, S. 2023. Kant’s Late Philosophy of Nature. Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kant, I. 1992. Theoretical Philosophy, 1755-1770, ed. and trans. D. Walford and R. Meerbote. Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511840180CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kant, I. 2004. Metaphysical Foundations of Natural Science, ed. and trans. M. Friedman. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Kant, I. 2012. Natural Science, ed. Watkins, E.. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Lagrange, J. L. 1788. Mechanique analitique. Paris.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leduc, C. 2018. La Monadologia physica de Kant et le concours sur les monades de l’Académie de Berlin. Akten des XII. Internationalen Kant-Kongresses, ed. Waibel, V., Ruffing, M., and Wagner, D., 893900. De Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leduc, C. and Dumouchel, D. (eds.) 2015. La philosophie à l’Académie de Berlin au XVIIIe siècle. Special issue of Philosophiques 42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leibniz, G. W. 1989. On body and force, against the Cartesians. Philosophical Essays, ed. Ariew, R. and Garber, D., 250256. Hackett.Google Scholar
McLear, C. 2018. Motion and the affection argument. Synthese 195: 49794995.10.1007/s11229-017-1438-4CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McNulty, M. B. 2014. Kant on chemistry and the application of mathematics in natural science. Kantian Review 19: 393418.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Messina, J. 2015. Conceptual analysis and the essence of space: Kant’s Metaphysical Exposition revisited. Archiv für Geschichte der Philosophie 97: 416457.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Messina, J. 2018. Kant’s stance on the relationalist-substantivalist debate and its justification. Journal of the History of Philosophy 56: 697726.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miller, A. and Miller, E.. 1994. Introduction and commentary. P. Plaass 1994, 1165.Google Scholar
Newton, I. 1687. Philosophiae naturalis principia mathematica. London.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Newton, I. 1999. The Principia, ed. Cohen, I. B., trans. A. Whitman. University of California Press.Google Scholar
Newton, I. 2014. De gravitatione et aequipondio fluidorum. Philosophical Writings, ed. Janiak, A., revised edition, 2658. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Parsons, C. 2012. Remarks on pure natural science. From Kant to Husserl, 6979. Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Plaass, P. 1994. Kant’s Theory of Natural Science, ed. Miller, A. and Miller, M.. Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pollok, K. 2006. Kant’s critical concepts of motion. Journal of the History of Philosophy 44: 559575.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rynasiewicz, R. 1995. ‘By their properties, causes and effects:’ Newton’s scholium on time, space, place and motion. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 26: 133153.10.1016/0039-3681(94)00035-8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shabel, L. 1998. Kant on the ‘symbolic construction’ of mathematical concepts. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 29: 589621.10.1016/S0039-3681(98)00023-5CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shabel, L. 2005. Apriority and application. Oxford Handbook of Philosophy of Mathematics and Logic, ed. Shapiro, S., 2950. Oxford University Press.10.1093/0195148770.003.0002CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, G. E. 2014. Closing the loop. Newton and Empiricism, ed. Biener, Z. and Schliesser, E., 262352. Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199337095.003.0011CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, G. E. 2019. Newton’s numerator in 1685: A year of gestation. Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics 68: 163177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, G. E. forthcoming. Experiments in the Principia. Oxford Handbook of Isaac Newton, ed. Smeenk, C. and Schliesser, E.. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Smith, S. 2013. Kant’s picture of monads in the Physical Monadology. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 44: 102111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, S. 2013. Does Kant have a pre-Newtonian picture of force in the balance argument? An account of how the balance argument works. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 44: 470480.10.1016/j.shpsa.2012.10.013CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stan, M. 2009. Kant’s early theory of motion. The Leibniz Review 19: 2961.10.5840/leibniz2009192CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stan, M. 2013. Kant’s third law of mechanics. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 44: 493504.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stan, M. 2014. Unity for Kant’s natural philosophy. Philosophy of Science 81: 423443.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stan, M. 2015. Absolute space and the riddle of rotation. Oxford Studies in Early Modern Philosophy vol. 7, ed. D. Garber and D. Rutherford, 257308. Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Stan, M. 2017. Metaphysical foundations of neoclassical mechanics. Kant and the Laws of Nature, ed. Massimi, M. and Breitenbach, A., 214234. Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stan, M. 2019. Absolute time: The limit of Kant’s idealism. Noûs 53: 433461.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stan, M. 2022. Phoronomy: Space, construction, and mathematizing motion. Kant’s Metaphysical Foundations of Natural Science: A Critical Guide, ed. McNulty, M.B., 8097. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Stan, M. 2023. Beyond Newton, Leibniz and Kant: Insufficient foundations, 1687–1786. Between Leibniz, Newton, and Kant: Philosophy and Science in the Eighteenth Century, ed. Lefèvre, W., 295310. Springer.10.1007/978-3-031-34340-7_13CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stan, M. in press. Mechanics from Galileo to Lagrange. The History and Philosophy of Science, 1450 to 1750, ed. Stan, M.. Bloomsbury.Google Scholar
Strawson, P. F. 1966. The Bounds of Sense: An Essay on Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason. Methuen.Google Scholar
Walker, R. 1971. The status of Kant’s theory of matter. Synthese 23: 121126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Watkins, E. 2006. On the necessity and nature of simples: Leibniz, Wolff, Baumgarten, and the Pre-Critical Kant. Oxford Studies in Early Modern Philosophy, vol. 3, ed. Nadler, S. and Garber, D., 261314. Clarendon Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Watkins, E. 2019. Kant on Laws. Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wolff, C. 1720. Vernünfftige Gedancken von Gott, der Welt und der Seele des Menschen. Halle.Google Scholar
Adickes, E. 1924. Kant als Naturforscher. De Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ameriks, K. 1978. Kant’s transcendental deduction as a regressive argument. Kant Studien 69: 273–287.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anstey, P. and Schuster, J. (eds.). 2005. The Science of Nature in the Seventeenth Century. Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Basile, G. P. 2013. Kants Opus postumum und seine Rezeption. De Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bennett, J. 1966. Kant’s Analytic. Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Biener, Z. and Smeenk, C.. 2012. Cotes’ queries: Newton’s empiricism and conceptions of matter. Interpreting Newton, ed. Schliesser, E. and Janiak, A., 105137. Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brading, K. and Stan, M.. 2023. Philosophical Mechanics in the Age of Reason. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Calinger, R. 1969. The Newtonian-Wolffian Controversy: 1740–1759. Journal of the History of Ideas 30: 319330.10.2307/2708560CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Caparrini, S. and Fraser, C.. 2013. Mechanics in the Eighteenth Century. The Oxford Handbook of the History of Physics, ed. Buchwald, J. Z. and Fox, R., 358405. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Cramer, K. 1985. Nicht-reine synthetische Urteile a priori. Carl Winter Universitätsverlag.Google Scholar
Earman, J. 1989. World Enough and Space-Time. MIT Press.Google Scholar
Euler, L. 1752a. Découverte d’un nouveau principe de mécanique. Mémoires de l’académie des sciences 6: 185217. Berlin.Google Scholar
Euler, L. 1752b. Recherches sur l’origine des forces. Mémoires de l’académie des sciences 6: 409447. Berlin.Google Scholar
Euler, L. 1765. Theoria motus corporum solidorum seu rigidorum, vol. I. Rostock.Google Scholar
Fox, C. 2016. The Newtonian equivalence principle: How the relativity of acceleration led Newton to the equivalence of inertial and gravitational mass. Philosophy of Science 83: 10271038.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Friedman, M. 1992. Kant and the Exact Sciences. Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Friedman, M. 2012. Quantity of matter in the Metaphysical Foundations of Natural Science. The Southern Journal of Philosophy 50: 482503.10.1111/j.2041-6962.2012.00126.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Friedman, M. 2013. Kant’s Construction of Nature. Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gaukroger, S. 1982. The metaphysics of impenetrability: Euler’s conception of force. British Journal for the History of Science 15: 132154.10.1017/S0007087400019142CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hartz, G. 2007. Leibniz’s Final System: Monads, Matter and Animals. Routledge.Google Scholar
Henrich, D. 1989. Kant’s notion of a deduction and the methodological background of the First Critique. Kant’s Transcendental Deductions: The Three ‘Critiques’ and the ‘Opus Postumum,’ ed. Förster, E., 2746. Stanford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hermann, J. 1716. Phoronomia. Amsterdam.Google Scholar
Hogan, D. 2007. Wolff on order and space. Wolff und die europäische Aufklärung, eds. Stolzenberg, J. and Rudolph, O.-P., 2942. G. Olms.Google Scholar
Hogan, D. 2020. Kant and the character of mathematical inference. Kant’s Philosophy of Mathematics. Vol. I: The Critical Philosophy and its Roots, ed. Posy, C. and Rechter, O., 126154. Cambridge University Press.10.1017/9781107337596.007CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holden, T. 2004. The Architecture of Matter: Galileo to Kant. Oxford University Press.10.1093/0199263264.001.0001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Howard, S. 2023. Kant’s Late Philosophy of Nature. Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kant, I. 1992. Theoretical Philosophy, 1755-1770, ed. and trans. D. Walford and R. Meerbote. Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511840180CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kant, I. 2004. Metaphysical Foundations of Natural Science, ed. and trans. M. Friedman. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Kant, I. 2012. Natural Science, ed. Watkins, E.. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Lagrange, J. L. 1788. Mechanique analitique. Paris.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leduc, C. 2018. La Monadologia physica de Kant et le concours sur les monades de l’Académie de Berlin. Akten des XII. Internationalen Kant-Kongresses, ed. Waibel, V., Ruffing, M., and Wagner, D., 893900. De Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leduc, C. and Dumouchel, D. (eds.) 2015. La philosophie à l’Académie de Berlin au XVIIIe siècle. Special issue of Philosophiques 42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leibniz, G. W. 1989. On body and force, against the Cartesians. Philosophical Essays, ed. Ariew, R. and Garber, D., 250256. Hackett.Google Scholar
McLear, C. 2018. Motion and the affection argument. Synthese 195: 49794995.10.1007/s11229-017-1438-4CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McNulty, M. B. 2014. Kant on chemistry and the application of mathematics in natural science. Kantian Review 19: 393418.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Messina, J. 2015. Conceptual analysis and the essence of space: Kant’s Metaphysical Exposition revisited. Archiv für Geschichte der Philosophie 97: 416457.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Messina, J. 2018. Kant’s stance on the relationalist-substantivalist debate and its justification. Journal of the History of Philosophy 56: 697726.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miller, A. and Miller, E.. 1994. Introduction and commentary. P. Plaass 1994, 1165.Google Scholar
Newton, I. 1687. Philosophiae naturalis principia mathematica. London.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Newton, I. 1999. The Principia, ed. Cohen, I. B., trans. A. Whitman. University of California Press.Google Scholar
Newton, I. 2014. De gravitatione et aequipondio fluidorum. Philosophical Writings, ed. Janiak, A., revised edition, 2658. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Parsons, C. 2012. Remarks on pure natural science. From Kant to Husserl, 6979. Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Plaass, P. 1994. Kant’s Theory of Natural Science, ed. Miller, A. and Miller, M.. Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pollok, K. 2006. Kant’s critical concepts of motion. Journal of the History of Philosophy 44: 559575.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rynasiewicz, R. 1995. ‘By their properties, causes and effects:’ Newton’s scholium on time, space, place and motion. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 26: 133153.10.1016/0039-3681(94)00035-8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shabel, L. 1998. Kant on the ‘symbolic construction’ of mathematical concepts. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 29: 589621.10.1016/S0039-3681(98)00023-5CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shabel, L. 2005. Apriority and application. Oxford Handbook of Philosophy of Mathematics and Logic, ed. Shapiro, S., 2950. Oxford University Press.10.1093/0195148770.003.0002CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, G. E. 2014. Closing the loop. Newton and Empiricism, ed. Biener, Z. and Schliesser, E., 262352. Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199337095.003.0011CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, G. E. 2019. Newton’s numerator in 1685: A year of gestation. Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics 68: 163177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, G. E. forthcoming. Experiments in the Principia. Oxford Handbook of Isaac Newton, ed. Smeenk, C. and Schliesser, E.. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Smith, S. 2013. Kant’s picture of monads in the Physical Monadology. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 44: 102111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, S. 2013. Does Kant have a pre-Newtonian picture of force in the balance argument? An account of how the balance argument works. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 44: 470480.10.1016/j.shpsa.2012.10.013CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stan, M. 2009. Kant’s early theory of motion. The Leibniz Review 19: 2961.10.5840/leibniz2009192CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stan, M. 2013. Kant’s third law of mechanics. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 44: 493504.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stan, M. 2014. Unity for Kant’s natural philosophy. Philosophy of Science 81: 423443.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stan, M. 2015. Absolute space and the riddle of rotation. Oxford Studies in Early Modern Philosophy vol. 7, ed. D. Garber and D. Rutherford, 257308. Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Stan, M. 2017. Metaphysical foundations of neoclassical mechanics. Kant and the Laws of Nature, ed. Massimi, M. and Breitenbach, A., 214234. Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stan, M. 2019. Absolute time: The limit of Kant’s idealism. Noûs 53: 433461.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stan, M. 2022. Phoronomy: Space, construction, and mathematizing motion. Kant’s Metaphysical Foundations of Natural Science: A Critical Guide, ed. McNulty, M.B., 8097. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Stan, M. 2023. Beyond Newton, Leibniz and Kant: Insufficient foundations, 1687–1786. Between Leibniz, Newton, and Kant: Philosophy and Science in the Eighteenth Century, ed. Lefèvre, W., 295310. Springer.10.1007/978-3-031-34340-7_13CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stan, M. in press. Mechanics from Galileo to Lagrange. The History and Philosophy of Science, 1450 to 1750, ed. Stan, M.. Bloomsbury.Google Scholar
Strawson, P. F. 1966. The Bounds of Sense: An Essay on Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason. Methuen.Google Scholar
Walker, R. 1971. The status of Kant’s theory of matter. Synthese 23: 121126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Watkins, E. 2006. On the necessity and nature of simples: Leibniz, Wolff, Baumgarten, and the Pre-Critical Kant. Oxford Studies in Early Modern Philosophy, vol. 3, ed. Nadler, S. and Garber, D., 261314. Clarendon Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Watkins, E. 2019. Kant on Laws. Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wolff, C. 1720. Vernünfftige Gedancken von Gott, der Welt und der Seele des Menschen. Halle.Google Scholar

Accessibility standard: WCAG 2.1 AA

The PDF of this Element complies with version 2.1 of the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG), covering newer accessibility requirements and improved user experiences and achieves the intermediate (AA) level of WCAG compliance, covering a wider range of accessibility requirements.

Content Navigation

Table of contents navigation
Allows you to navigate directly to chapters, sections, or non‐text items through a linked table of contents, reducing the need for extensive scrolling.

Reading Order & Textual Equivalents

Single logical reading order
You will encounter all content (including footnotes, captions, etc.) in a clear, sequential flow, making it easier to follow with assistive tools like screen readers.
Short alternative textual descriptions
You get concise descriptions (for images, charts, or media clips), ensuring you do not miss crucial information when visual or audio elements are not accessible.

Visual Accessibility

Use of colour is not sole means of conveying information
You will still understand key ideas or prompts without relying solely on colour, which is especially helpful if you have colour vision deficiencies.

Structural and Technical Features

ARIA roles provided
You gain clarity from ARIA (Accessible Rich Internet Applications) roles and attributes, as they help assistive technologies interpret how each part of the content functions.

Save element to Kindle

To save this element to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge-org.demo.remotlog.com is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Kant’s Natural Philosophy
  • Marius Stan, Boston College, Massachusetts
  • Online ISBN: 9781108529631
Available formats
×

Save element to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Kant’s Natural Philosophy
  • Marius Stan, Boston College, Massachusetts
  • Online ISBN: 9781108529631
Available formats
×

Save element to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Kant’s Natural Philosophy
  • Marius Stan, Boston College, Massachusetts
  • Online ISBN: 9781108529631
Available formats
×