Why "Kant says that people are not capable of thinking" if Kant isn't alive

Question

When I’m watching American lectures I hear all the time the problems with the grammar rule “sequence of tenses”. Some professors say, for instance: “Kant says that people are not capable of thinking...”

But it has to sound: “Kant said that people were not...”, isn’t it? (Because Kant is not alive.)

Don’t Americans know sequence of tenses? Why do they speak so? Because of the convenience, or are there any other reasons?

Charles Dickens writes: "..." - you often find such occurrences while commenting on or quoting authors. Even when you speak about newspapers you can find such sentences as: "New York Times warns that there is a danger..." (although the article was published a few hours or days ago.) — fev, Dec 29 '20 at 13:04
Does this answer your question? Great Expectations [is written vs has been written] by Charles Dickens Also “why did he use” or “why does he use” (where "he" is *a dead writer*). — FumbleFingers, Dec 29 '20 at 14:05
"Why do they speak so?". I'd ask: Why do you write like that? — Lambie, Dec 29 '20 at 14:39

rjpond · Answer 1 · 2020-12-29T13:02:24.143

1

I don't think there is anything wrong with "Kant says..." (nor is the usage only American).

Books continue to state things after their authors' deaths. "Kant says..." could be interpreted as "The works of Kant say...", "A book or paper by Kant says...", or "The argument set out by Kant says...".

(Occasionally the present tense is used to narrate past events - the "historic present". I don't think this is what is happening in the phrase "Kant says", though.)

edited Dec 29 '20 at 13:02

answered Dec 29 '20 at 12:55

rjpond

23,067
2
43
77

Certainly common in Australian English. – Sydney Dec 29 '20 at 21:32

score 1 · Accepted Answer · answered Dec 29 '20 at 14:21

This is common with writers, and you'll often see it with people like singers as well. I suppose you can think of it as putting the person's living status aside, when it's not really relevant, or if you don't want to emphasise the fact that someone's dead.

When you listen to a recording of a song, the singer is performing it for you at that moment. And when you engage with a written work, the words "speak" to you from the page. It's happening now, when you're listening or reading or whatever. The writer is expressing ideas to you in the current moment.

All books were written in the past, all songs were recorded in the past, so using the past tense isn't really giving the listener any additional information, you know? You can definitely use the past tense to emphasise the fact something was done in the past, to locate it at a specific point in history, or to highlight the fact that a person has died. But when you're just talking about a person's work, you can use past or present interchangeably.

And using the present tense for everything puts it on an equal level - all ideas for consideration, nothing is implied to be dated or superseded by later work. That's probably a reason you'll hear it in academic settings.

Why "Kant says that people are not capable of thinking" if Kant isn't alive

2 Answers2