K ant's O pus P ostumum and M c D owell's C ritique of K ant

In this article, I have a modest goal: (1) to sketch how K ant can avoid the charge of “subjective idealism” advanced against him by J ohn M c D owell and (2) to do so with reference to K ant's last work, the so‐called O pus P ostumum . I am interested in defending K ant on this point because doing so not only (a) shows how we need not—at least not because of this point about idealism—jump ship from K ant to H egel (as M c D owell and others think), but also (b) suggests that the O pus P ostumum is a text that ought to be explored more by K antians and those interested in K ant. A subsidiary, implicit point is that (c) we need not shy away from M c D owell's reading of K ant in order to oppose M c D owell's criticism of K ant. In order to defend against M c D owell's charge, I focus on the argument of the R efutation of I dealism, showing how this argument evolves in K ant's later works, especially the O pus P ostumum .