arXiv:2510.14925v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: We reinterpret Kant's Critique of Pure Reason as a theory of feedback stability, viewing reason as a regulator that keeps inference within the bounds of possible experience. We formalize this intuition via a composite instability index (H-Risk) combining spectral margin, conditioning, temporal sensitivity, and innovation amplification. In linear-Gaussian simulations, higher H-Risk predicts overconfident errors even under formal stability, revealing a gap between nominal and epistemic stability. Extending to large language models (LLMs), we find that fragile internal dynamics correlate with miscalibration and hallucination, while critique-style prompts show mixed effects on calibration and hallucination. These results suggest a structural bridge between Kantian self-limitation and feedback control, offering a principled lens for diagnosing -- and selectively reducing -- overconfidence in reasoning systems. This is a preliminary version; supplementary experiments and broader replication will be reported in a future revision.