scholarly journals Friedrich Jacobi and Immanuel Kant: The metacriticism of the nihilism of the pure reason

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sergei Volzhin
Keyword(s):  
Immanuel Kant ◽  
Pure Reason

scholarly journals KRITIK IMMANUEL KANT TERHADAP FAHAM RASIONALISME DAN EMPIRISME

2016 ◽  
Vol 8 (02) ◽  
Author(s):  
Jauhan Budiwan
Keyword(s):  
Immanuel Kant ◽  
Active Role ◽  
Western Philosophy ◽  
Pure Reason ◽  
Critique Of Pure Reason ◽  
Profound Impact ◽  
Philosophical Movement ◽  
Philosophical Background ◽  
History Of ◽  
The Mind

Immanuel Kant is one of the most influential philosophers in the history of Western philosophy. His contributions to metaphysics, epistemology, ethics, and aesthetics have had a profound impact on almost every philosophical movement that followed him. This portion will focus on his metaphysics and epistemology in one of his most important works. The Critique of Pure Reason, A large part of Kant’s work addresses the question “What can we know?” The answer, if it can be stated simply, is that our knowledge is constrained to mathematics and the science of the -natural, empirical world. It is impossible, Kant argues, to extend knowledge to the supersensible realm of speculative metaphysics. The reason that knowledge has these constraints, Kant argues, is that the mind plays an active role in constituting the features of experience and limiting the mind's access to the empirical realm of space and time. In order to understand Kant's position, we must understand the philosophical background that he was reacting to. First, 1 will present a brief overview of his predecessor's positions with a brief statement of Kant's objections, then I will return to a more detailed exposition of Kant's arguments. There are two major historical movements in the early modem period of philosophy that had a significant impact on Kant; Empiricism and Rationalism,

scholarly journals Some Remarks in Defense of Immanuel Kant's Theory of Experience

2021 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 0
Author(s):  
Balanovskiy Valentin
Keyword(s):  
Immanuel Kant ◽  
Scientific Information ◽  
Experiential Knowledge ◽  
Central Position ◽  
Pure Reason ◽  
Contemporary Philosophy ◽  
Critique Of Pure Reason ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Reliable Knowledge ◽  
Conceptual Nature

The author attempts to answer a question of whether the fact that Immanuel Kant’s theory of experience most likely has a conceptual nature decreases an importance of Kant’s ideas for contemporary philosophy, because if experience is conceptual by nature, then certain problems with the search for means to verify experiential knowledge arise. In particular, two approaches are proposed. According to the first approach, the exceptional conceptuality of Kant’s theory of experience may be a consequence of absence of some important chains in arguments contained in the Critique of Pure Reason, which could clarify a question of how the conceptual apparatus of the subject corresponds to the reality. The author puts a hypothesis that the missing chains are not a mistake, but Kant’s deliberate silence caused by the lack of accurate scientific information that could not have been available to humankind in Enlightenment epoch. According to the second approach even if Kant’s theory of experience is exclusively conceptual by nature, this cannot automatically lead to a conclusion that it is unsuitable for obtaining reliable knowledge about reality, since transcendental idealism has powerful internal tools for verifying data in the process of cognition. The central position among them is occupied by transcendental reflection.

The Remarriage of Reason and Experience in Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason

2019 ◽  
Vol 24 (1) ◽  
pp. 53-69
Author(s):  
J. Colin McQuillan ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Immanuel Kant ◽  
Final Section ◽  
Pure Reason ◽  
Critique Of Pure Reason ◽  
Critical Philosophy ◽  
Distinctive Features ◽  
Intelligible World

This article argues that Immanuel Kant recreates in his critical philosophy one of the most distinctive features of Christian Wolff’s rationalism—the marriage of reason and experience (connubium rationis et experientiae). The article begins with an overview of Wolff’s connubium and then surveys the reasons some of his contemporaries opposed the marriage of reason and experience, paying special attention to the distinctions between phenomena and noumena, sensible and intellectual cognition, and empirical and pure cognition that Kant employs in his inaugural dissertation On the Form and Principles of the Sensible and the Intelligible World (1770). The final section of the article argues that, in the Critique of Pure Reason (1781/1787), Kant rejects the anticonnubialist positions he defended in his inaugural dissertation and introduces a new account of the relation between reason and experience that recreates Wolff’s connubium within the context of his critical philosophy.

scholarly journals TINJAUAN KRITIS TERHADAP EPISTEMOLOGI IMMANUEL KANT (1724-1804)

2018 ◽  
Vol 28 (1) ◽  
pp. 74
Author(s):  
Lailiy Muthmainnah
Keyword(s):  
Immanuel Kant ◽  
Human Life ◽  
Pure Reason ◽  
Human Knowledge ◽  
Critique Of Pure Reason ◽  
Research Results ◽  
Metaphysical Problem ◽  
Hermeneutic Approach ◽  
Personal Invitation

The background of this article is a metaphysical problem that arose in Immanuel Kant's thought in his Critique of Pure Reason. Through a hermeneutic approach this article aims to analyze the metaphysical problems that arise in Immanuel Kant's epistemology of thought. Based on the research results can be concluded that the unequivocal separation between phenomena and noumena will cause humans will never come to the knowledge of the Transcendent, as well as with moral and aesthetics. This is because such knowledge can only be obtained through my participation as a Subject through the process of continuous existence and more of a personal invitation. In the end it can be concluded that the nature of analog knowledge is the meaning of multidimensional side of human life. This brings consequences to the need for intersubjective dialogue and continual openness. Knowledge is an infinite thing. Human knowledge therefore will never reach the end of the journey but only continuously expanded its horizon.

scholarly journals Critique of Pure Reason: Sebuah Pengantar

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sandy Hardian Susanto Herho
Keyword(s):  
Immanuel Kant ◽  
Pure Reason ◽  
Critique Of Pure Reason

Kaum cendikiawan umumnya memiliki sejumlah buku di lemari kerjanya. Buku – buku itu menjadi koleksi mereka yang sangat berharga. Kalau ada uang lebih, mereka akan membeli buku –buku baru. Tidak heran bila koleksi mereka bertambah dari waktu ke waktu.Persoalannya adalah, buku apa saja yang pantas dikoleksi oleh kaum yang merasa diri cendikia? Jawabannya tergantung pada minat masing-masing. Tetapi, umumnya kolektor buku akan mengoleksi buku –buku tentang bidang ilmu yang mengubah dunia. Artinya buku ini layak untuk dibaca oleh kaum cendikia.Buku ini bukan ditulis oleh tokoh yang mengubah dunia, tetapi ia bercerita tentang filsafat yang telah mengubah dunia. Buku ini membahas tentang filsafat Imanuel Kant yang diterbitkan pada 1781 didalam kesendirian kehidupannya di Konigsberg dalam mahakarya Critique of Pure Reason yang kemudian direvisi pada tahun 1787.Gagasan – gagasan filsafat yang ditawarkan Immanuel Kant dalam Critique of Pure Reason merupakan filsafat yang bersifat kritis. Kritis dalam artian, Kant menawarkan analisis kritis terhadap kekuatan dan batas nalar kita dalam kapasitas untuk memahami dunia, tempat di mana kita berpijak. Kant dengan demikian merupakan Bapak Filsafat Kritis yang kemudian mengilhami gagasan – gagasan filsuf lainnya, seperti Schopenhauer dan Wittgenstein. Buku ini merupakan pengantar untuk memahami Critique of Pure Reason yang terkenal akan kesulitannya di kalangan pelajar filsafat. Oleh karena itu buku ini, di samping bisa menjadi koleksi yang berharga, juga bisa dipakai untuk pihak – pihak yang tertarik mempelajari filsafat secara serius.

scholarly journals Freedom, ownership and copyright: why does Kant reject the concept of intellectual property?

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maria Chiara Pievatolo
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
General Theory ◽  
Immanuel Kant ◽  
Theoretical Perspective ◽  
Public Law ◽  
Pure Reason ◽  
Human Being ◽  
The Public ◽  
The World ◽  
Short Essay

In 1785 Immanuel Kant wrote a short essay, Von der Unrechtmäßigkeit des Büchernachdrucks, which is sometimes translated as Of the injustice of counterfeiting books; later, he repeated almost the same thesis in the Rechtslehre, § 31, II, within Die Metaphysik der Sitten (1797). As most scholars, in the field of humanities, take intellectual property for granted, the representation of Kant like an intellectual property forerunner is still a dangerously mistaken commonplace. According to Kant's Architectonic of Pure Reason the philosopher is closer to a lawgiver than to an artificer, if philosophy is considered in its Weltbegriff or cosmopolitan concept (AA.03: 542.23-30). Because such a lawgiving is based upon that reason with which every human being is endowed, the laws of reason should be thought as public laws and not as individual, private creations. How could a public law be consistently viewed as an object of private intellectual property? Kant avoids such a contradiction because his justification of authors' right does not rely on intellectual property, but on the meaning and the function of both authors and publishers in the world of the public use of reason. Therefore, Kant's theory of copyright is compatible with the Weltbegriff of philosophy. Furthermore, more interestingly, it is also possible to demonstrate that it is consistent with his general theory of property, as stated in the Metaphysik der Sitten. The following essay, after presenting a short sketch of Kant's authors right as personal right, will introduce Fichte's theory of intellectual property to strengthen the case of Kant's rejection of intellectual property, by comparing his ideas with the theory of an actual intellectual property advocate, like Fichte. Eventually, to read the proposed interpretation of Kant in a wider theoretical perspective, it will attempt to connect it to his general theory of property of the Metaphysik der Sitten.

FIAT IUSTITIA, PEREAT MUNDUS: IMMANUEL KANT, FRIEDRICH GENTZ, AND THE POSSIBILITY OF PRUDENTIAL ENLIGHTENMENT

2015 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
pp. 35-65 ◽  
Author(s):  
JONATHAN GREEN
Keyword(s):  
Immanuel Kant ◽  
French Revolution ◽  
Political Thought ◽  
Normative Theory ◽  
Theory And Practice ◽  
Pure Reason ◽  
German Version ◽  
Perpetual Peace ◽  
The Face ◽  
The Revolution

Since the early twentieth century, historians of political thought have read Immanuel Kant's interventions into debates over the French Revolution—his essay on “Theory and Practice” (1795), and his tract on Perpetual Peace (1793)—against Edmund Burke's Reflections on the Revolution in France (1790). Kant is said to have upheld the sovereignty of pure reason for political practice, over and against Burke's stubborn traditionalism. What this dichotomy ignores, however, is that Kant's first public comments on the Revolution were directed not against Burke's Reflections, but against a heavily edited German version of the text published in 1793 by Kant's former student, Friedrich Gentz (1764–1832). The central thrust of Gentz's translation was that while Kant's normative theory of politics was admirable, it needed to be complemented with a prudential grasp of statecraft in order to be made practicable. Without prudence, the rights of man would remain an empty ideal. In responding to Gentz, Kant entered into a debate over whether philosophical reason and political prudence are mutually compatible. His dogmatic refusal to endorse such an alliance, even in the face of the Terror, places his political thought in an unfavourable light.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document