Kant, the Third Antinomy and Transcendental Arguments

In this paper, I consider whether a reading of Kant's solution to the Third Antinomy can offer material for devising a new model of transcendental argument. The problem that this form of argument is meant to address is an antinomy between two apparently contradictory claims, q and ¬ q , where we seem equally justified in holding both. The model has the following form: p ; q is a necessary condition of p ; the only justification we have for q is that it is a necessary condition of p ; p is justified only in domain X (where X is a domain of objects of cognition); therefore, q is justified only in domain X . Because the argument shows that our justification for q is valid only in X , it also establishes that there is conceptual space to hold ¬ q outside of X .