Kantinomus Verlag

---

After primary school, I attended an art school for two years, then I graduated from an industrial school (where I had very good results in mathematics and physics) and, finally, I graduated in 1986 from the Faculty of Physics at the University of Timișoara.

I did a PhD in philosophy, but for some reason I gave up on submitting my final dissertation. Instead I published on my own expenses the introductory part of my PhD thesis:

Marcel Chelba — Introducere critică. Despre posibilitatea metafizicii ca știință în perspectiva filosofiei critice kantine, Crates, 2004 — Critical Introduction. On the Possibility of Metaphysics as Science in the Perspective of Kantian Critical Philosophy (not yet translated into English).

In this book I show, among other things, that the Kantian transcendental aesthetic is in fact the epistemological paradigm of modern science and that Kant has been confirmed, not refuted by modern science.

This book is available on the Internet. The latest edition (in PDF format) can be purchased from this blog. I will soon provide an English translation.

Meanwhile, I worked as a physics teacher, librarian, graphic designer and manager of my own advertising company (Chemar Productions S.R.L.). The economic crisis that began in 2008 and unfair competition drove my company and my family into bankruptcy. That’s how we ended up in Germany, looking for work.

Through this blog, which I have done alone and at my own expense, I only wish to bring to the general public the results of a lifelong philosophical research.

My predilection for philosophy has been evident since I was a child (4 years old).

When I was 15, I had already started reading Hegel. By the end of high school, my choice for philosophy was clear, but I didn’t want to attend a philosophy faculty in Romania precisely because those were too ideologized (this was in the 80s, during the communist period). So I graduated in Physics, believing that going deeper into a fundamental science would give me a better orientation in philosophy. In short, I chose to study physics out of philosophical interests.

I have consistently followed the answer to a few questions: How is scientific knowledge possible? How does it differ from philosophical knowledge? What do they have in common? Are Compatible? What is their relationship?

My graduate thesis in physics was: Modeling in Physics and its Epistemological Significance (1986).

Then it followed:

1986, University of Timisoara, “The Idea of ​​Negativity in Hegel’s Logic” (lecture).

1986, University of Iasi, “The Negativity of Predication in Hegel’s Logic” (lecture).

1989, Culture House in Suceava, “Hegel and modern physics” (lecture).

1989, Culture House in Suceava, “The Aesthetics of Life or Life as a Work of Art” (lecture).

My subsequent studies of aesthetics eventually led me to Kant, where the term fundamentally changed. However, the idea of an aesthetics of life seemed to me to sound good together with the idea of the categorical imperative, so that a relation of these terms on the basis of a common descent from the principle of absolute freedom seemed perfectly possible.

In Kant’s view, science is the aesthetics of nature and morality is the aesthetics of our social life. Both have at their origin a principle of beauty (harmony), which derives from one and the same principle of transcendental synthetic unity.

I asked myself the following questions: If these two aesthetics (the epistemological and the ethical) are compatible, what do they have in common with the theory of artistic beauty, if they are not somehow in a complementary relationship, in other words, going to a higher level, if an ontological interpretation of semiotics and a semiotic interpretation of ontology are possible? If so, we have here a bridge that could open the way to a huge philosophical synthesis.

The Kantinomus Project is part of this philosophical program that I have been working on for over four decades.

This, I believe, is the great philosophical challenge of the 21st century: breaking down the dividing walls between ontology and semiotics and restoring the dignity of metaphysics as the legitimate queen of all sciences, because at this altitude of thought, of all the sciences, only metaphysics can rise. This was, in fact, the unfinished philosophical program of Kant, for whom (as for Galileo) science was a hermeneutics of the sacred book of nature — a mathematical interpretation of empirical experience.

In my opinion, the Kantinomus Project is the natural continuation of the old aesthetic program of German philosophy, which reached its apogee with Kant and today seems completely abandoned.