Hi
Perhaps I misread the wikipedia article, but I can’t seems to find the three forms of materialism referred to in the quotation below. I look forward to your feedback.
“Kant argued against all three forms of materialism, subjective idealism (which he contrasts with his “transcendental idealism” and dualism.”
The sentence is badly constructed and not entirely clear, but I don’t think Kant is saying that there are three forms of materialsm. Rather, Kant identifies three positions - materialism, idealism and dualism - and the writer of the sentence treats them as three forms of [I’m not sure what].
The writer is saying that Kant argued against all three [unnamed] forms of materialism, and also against (subjective) idealism and dualism – which is interesting, as most philosophers have argued for one of these against the others.
Thanks UDS. I thought the sentence looked odd, but I’ve seen it copied word for word on other websites. It does’t make sense on any of them. I think you’re right. It should have read “three positions-three positions - materialism, idealism and dualism”. That makes more sense to me. On another note, classifying materialism is no straightforward matter. There are many ways to classify it.
The cite, which is included in full on that linked page, shows that Kant isn’t talking about three forms of Materialism and that the wikipedia editor is to blame for any confusion.
Right there if you click on the (34) at the end of the sentence.
There are three main kinds of approaches to materialism in addressing consciousness - reductive, eliminative and revisionary - but that’s only related to the philosophy of the mind, not ontology in general, and is generally taken as a stance on specific questions e.g. one may be eliminativist about visions of God, revisionist about free will and reductivist about sexuality.
Thank you all. I’m still confused as to whether
Do “material idealism” and “material realism” mean the same thing as “idealism” and “realism” when it comes to discussing Kant’s argument against materialism.? I’m trying to follow some of the terminology I come across.
No. At least when it comes to idealism, Kant didn’t consider “material idealism” to be the only kind, and was quite emphatic that his own idealism was of a different sort. Good luck teasing out what he was getting at, though, entire philosophy faculties still have knife fights in their staff rooms about that 
Thanks MrDibble. Very helpful Thank you all.