After an analysis of the debates surrounding Kant’s solution to the antinomy, his solution will be identified as one that applies the concept of an intuitive understanding. Then, the antinomy between the mechanical and teleological conceptions of nature, namely the antinomy of teleological judgment will be presented. The idea of the human standpoint will be characterized as both the core and the outcome of Kant’s critical philosophy. The source of antinomies will be found in the duality of cognitive powers, and the standpoint that arises from this heterogeneity will be presented as the human standpoint.
the conflict between mechanism of nature and human freedom, will be discussed as a case. After discussing the regulative status of the principle of causality (the Second Analogy of Experience) and delineating nature as an a priori concept, the question why pure reason inevitably falls into contradiction with itself will be our central concern. First of all, a presentation of the active contribution of the subject to the experience of nature, within the context of Critique of Pure Reason, will be offered. This study aims to explicate what “nature” means after Kant’s Copernican Revolution.
Strawson, concluding that these rereadings force Kant's text into an alien mold, thereby diminishing its philosophical value as a work with its own distinctive aims and methods. The article ends by considering the retrospective rereadings of the Deduction by Hermann Cohen and P. Doing so would also allow him to curb certain forms of skeptical empiricism, by showing that we cannot disprove, or rule out as unintelligible, human freedom, an afterlife, or divine providence. He wanted to achieve this result in a more theoretically satisfying manner than had skeptical authors. Rather, he wanted to sustain the skeptical claim that we cannot justify metaphysical claims about things in themselves, hence that we cannot gain metaphysical knowledge about the existence of God, the immortality of the soul, the beginning of time, and the least parts of matter. Kant was not out to save ordinary knowledge from the skeptic, at least not originally, since he did not think such knowledge was in danger. The central theoretical claims of previous metaphysics were thus rendered void. To do this, he needed to show that their proper use in attaining metaphysical knowledge was restricted to (actual and possible) experience. His primary mission (in the Deduction) was not to justify application of the categories to experience, but to show that any use beyond the domain of experience could not be justified. Instead, the article contends that Kant's aims were primarily negative. This article argues that many (often Anglophone) interpreters of the Deduction have mistakenly identified Kant's aim as vindicating ordinary knowledge of objects and as refuting Hume's (alleged) skepticism about such knowledge.
0 kommentar(er)
