As I described in a previous article, my books or authors do not have a precise timeframe. From Horace to Imanuel Kant. I was reading this book is the author who will write below struck me most. His sentence is its quintessential "the starry heavens above me The moral law within me." He has also written other books, such as "What is orientation in thinking." I remember this title 'cause I decided to give it to a friend who definitely will appreciate it.
I hope that in addition to her, to be appreciated by those who read it.
Immanuel Kant (April 22, 1724 - February 12, 1804) was a German philosopher
was one of the most important exponents of German Enlightenment, and forward - at the final stage of his speculation - the building blocks of the idealistic philosophy
In the opinion of many, one of the main merits of the Kantian doctrine is to have passed the operating dogmatic metaphysics a philosophical revolution through a critique of reason that determines the conditions and limits of human cognitive abilities in theoretical and practical aesthetic
The Critique of Pure Reason published in 1781, defines the method of philosophizing to which Kant will stick even in two later works as well as in other later works. His work as a thinker mainly concerns the epistemology ethics and art in his youth but was also scientific interests, which he cultivated until 1760
cosmogonic hypothesis of the primitive nebula, shown in 1755 in Universal History of Nature and Theory of Heaven (which he desunse by Buffon ), had much luck and gave him fame in the field of astronomy, it was taken over by the Laplace reworked and relaunched in 1796
Works:
| " 's warning that it was David Hume who, many years ago, the first I awoke from his dogmatic slumber and gave quite a different address to my research in the field of speculative philosophy " | |
| | |
The fundamental works of Kant are in the period so-called "critical" (from 1771 to 1790): The Critique of Pure Reason (1781), the Critique of Practical Reason (1788) and Critique of Judgement (1790), preceded by a considerable number of minor works at a young age. Following Kant is increasingly oriented toward the interests of theological and this time are two major works of his mature thought: Religion within the Limits of Reason Alone , 1793, and The Metaphysics of Morals, 1797. Followed in 1798 Anthropology from a pragmatic point of view and other minor works.
The pre-critical stage:
Kant's philosophy can be divided in two main phases: the pre-critical period defined, which extends to the "great light" of 1769 preparatory to the publication of Dissertatio in 1770 and the critical period, extending from Dissertatio until death and in particular sees the publication of three critical, namely Critique of Pure Reason the Critique of Practical Reason and Critique of Judgement .
During the pre-critical Kant maintains that philosophy oscillates between rationalism and empiricism of Hume, to the famous Copernican revolution, as he called it, which will open a new era in philosophy. In 1770 it publishes the dissertation De mundi sensibilis atque intellegibilis et principiis form, commonly called only Dissertation , that reveals the first original developments in the new Kantian critical philosophy. The Dissertation therefore marks a milestone for the development of his thought, and can be seen as a sort of bridge between the old and the new philosophy of Kant's critical philosophy that fully outline, twelve years later, with the Critique of Pure Reason in 1781
Critique of Pure Reason
| " Human reason, without the sting of simple vanity omniscience, is perpetually driven by a need to precisely those problems that can in no way be solved by an empirical use of reason ... and so all men in some metaphysics has always existed and will always exist, just that reason rise up for speculation " | |
| | ( Immanuel Kant, Critique of Pure Reason 1781 ) |
The main theme of Kant's Critique of Pure Reason is and knowledge of the correlation existing between metaphysics and science. The questions that arise are possible as are mathematics and physics as a science and metaphysics as a natural disposition and as a science.
rating corresponds to Kant union of a predicate and a person using a copula, thus distinguishes the analytic judgments a priori synthetic judgments a posteriori and synthetic judgments a priori.
rating synthetic rear
In summary analysis, so called because you can say in summary in union with the experience, the connection between subject and predicate is thought "without identity ": the predicate contains something new which is not included in the concept of the subject, as in" Some bodies are heavy. "In fact, some other light bodies are heavy. Remember that the example goes back to Kant for Aristotale which some bodies - land and water - are by nature heavy, while others - air and fire - are by nature light. The predicate in the summary analysis, is related to the subject under experiment, synthetic judgments are therefore to back, we can only say after this experience and being connected to the sensitivity does not have universality and necessity, but have extensive knowledge. This is the type of opinion used by empiricists.
rating
The synthetic a priori synthetic judgments a priori is an opinion that, while extending knowledge, because it adds something new in the predicate, which in this case is not implicit in the subject (as in the analytical judgments) has the characteristics of universality and necessity, because it comes from experience (it is a priori).
The Kantian example of 7 plus 5 equal 12 shows how the predicate (twelve) is not included as analytical reviews in the subject, but there is something more: the relationship of addition and that in 5 to 7 outlet if they have not. So this review does not depend on the one hand experience, and therefore it is necessary and universal, and secondly in the predicate tells something that was not contained in the subject and then the knowledge is extensive.
The universal validity and certainty that characterize the synthetic judgments a priori fact, stem from the possibility of the intellect to "come out a priori from the concept" pure intuition, turning through the "guide" a middle term, ie the produced from the transcendental schema. That is, when you move from a concept to an intuition for a synthetic a priori judgments necessary to establish a relationship with the shape of the external sense (pure space) by the inner sense (pure time) through the intellectually self-determined identity of apperception.
The synthetic judgments a priori are the foundations upon which the science because they increase the knowledge (as synthetic), but need not be re-elected every time because they are universal and necessary experience. In this case, Kant has a position quite distinct from that of the Scottish philosopher Hume as being empiricist, would find it necessary every time a confirmation as to his opinion would not be able to say that things might change in future.
Human knowledge
reached this point Kant establishes a new system for determining cognitive whence come the synthetic judgments a priori, if they do not derive from experience. This new theory of knowledge is a synthesis of material (empirical) and form (the rational and innate). The first is the chaotic and ever-changing variety of sense impressions that come from experience. The second is the set of fixed rules by which the human mind to sort these impressions. In this way, the reality does not model itself on our minds, but it is the mind that shapes reality through the forms by which the senses. The reality as it appears on the basis of a priori forms is the phenomenon, while the reality as it is independent from us and it is unknowable to us. This is called the noumenon .
Kant then defines knowledge as that which arises from three faculties: sensibility, intellect and reason. Sensitivity is the ability to perceive the phenomenon and rests on two a priori forms, space and time. The intellect is the faculty by which we think rather sensitive data through pure concepts or categories. The reason is the faculty through which we seek to explain the reality beyond the limits of experience with the three ideas of the soul, God and the world. This tripartite division of the cognitive process consists of the Critique of Pure Reason divided into teaching and learning elements of the method. The first dedicated to studying the three cognitive faculties through the transcendental aesthetic (sensibility) and the transcendental logic, in turn divided into analytic (intellect) and dialectic (reason). The division of
Critique of Pure Reason can be summarized as follows:
ethics and the categorical imperative
Kant distinguishes between hypothetical imperative and categorical imperative. The risk of a utilitarian moral as that which later came the English philosopher Bentham led to seek the foundation of morality in a command unconditionally.
Silhouette of Kant
shown that the reason that claims to speak of unconditional falling inconsistent, contradictory and not a rational foundation of morality should not exclude a conditional imperative. Kant comes to the conclusion that ethics is not fondabile rationally, but that is a categorical imperative that the will should give freely.
The foundation of ethics is the same reason that he founded, the principle of non-contradiction Aristotale discovered that before a logical law, it is an ethical law of the ego. A life in accordance with reason is tantamount to a requirement of consistency that is true in the thought that being. The ego is free to deny this principle, but merely live in world opinion (not rational) and foolishness (unethical).
is not only a free choice, ranging from I to I, Kantian ethics is part philosophical and necessary respect for the deductible as a moral necessity of the other buildings in philosophy, here is prevented by the 'exclusion of conditional statements and not.
Kant part by a desire to demonstrate that the self is linked to ethical standards, which it considers a case that the synthetic a priori reason, therefore, knows and can prove. He wants to prove he was convinced that the self is linked to ethical standards, as it is the paradox of the suffering of the righteous.
not surprising that postulates the existence of a categorical imperative or the voice of conscience, like the Socratic demon that drives worldwide in every individual to respect universal moral rules that result in different actions in different contexts. So the ethical judgments as aesthetic evaluation varies over time depending on the situation, but it is always due in any individual application of universal rules that are acting to right and contemplate the beautiful, without varying from individual to individual: the rules ethical and aesthetic are the same in every individual and also their application: provided that any rational person in the same situation, would have done the same thing and considered beautiful by some.
The reason is the scope of the universality of all judgments, ethical and aesthetic, of putting them into practical acts. The yardstick of the right may vary by no more than a human generation to another, in the sense of the regulations, the basic tenets are general enough to consider them common to human beings of all time and space, any space and transcendental every time.
As you can see the ethical choices and enjoyment of beauty that are traditionally personal matters, are traced to collective principles: Kant never spoke of the ego singular (themselves or others, eg.) When he spoke of ' I transcendental ego is always referred to Duns Scotus on the philosophy remains the limit.
ethics with principles independent of space and time (universal for both) that are implemented in the ego, the ego comes before that, a priori, and you can think of innate immunity. Instead, the application of principles depends on the space and time, the context in which the ego is to act, however, space and time are also transcendental reality, compared to individuals: ethics depends on the space-time only in a universal, common to all (intersubjectively), in dreams, which are a subjective space-time, between different people, everyone is free from ethics to some extent). If the individual does not dominate on this ethic, because the ego is subject to universal principles, even it is dominated, given that I starred in the kingdom of ends where every person is the end of the actions of others.
Confronted with the assertion of human freedom, Kantian ethics has not necessarily found to be acting on the right, has created a context, that of reason, where I entered freely agreed to "be forced "the right to respect certain rules, or risk losing the enjoyment of beauty that is denied to the brutes and a consoling universality of human action.
The categorical imperative in this system is not a postulate fondabile, that perhaps it would be elsewhere, for Kant was first and foremost a matter of fact for the German pietism, the high maternal education which led him to have a strong sense of ethics. Philosophy, however, are its consequences: the idea which is contradictory to reason that controls things that we have to reach, hence the foundation of the freedom of human will:
-
things unattainable, which controls the way that the clashes with the paradox of the suffering of the righteous, and requires an afterlife in which justice among the states I, repaying injustice by blocking the activity of the unjust, reserving the time and freedom to those who have chosen the side of right to live according to justice by which the immortality of the soul;
-
the existence of a God, stronger than the other I put in the role of compensation to the injustices of earth and the wicked to deprive of freedom, preventing the recurrence of abuses that unearthly riproporrebbero the contradiction at infinity, a deity whose action takes place mainly or exclusively in the Hereafter, which is significantly different from the traditional conceptions that never conceived a sort of "otherworldly providence."
Thus, the categorical imperative is a matter of fact, a postulate, a priori synthetic judgments, a command of rationality that is the case because it is universal. The philosophy of history
| " Every culture and art, ornament of humanity and social order are the best fruits dell'insocievolezza, which is forcing itself to discipline and to play so thoroughly with the seeds of art forced nature " | |
| | ( Immanuel Kant, Idea for a Universal History from the standpoint of cosmopolitan 1784) |
The first work of interest to the conception of philosophy of history in Kant 's Idea for a story universal in terms of cosmopolitan of 1784 appear in the title Enlightenment conceptions of history considered universal in the sense that it disregards the individual stories of individual nations, wanting to show the story as belonging to all people without distinction: then it can not be that universal and cosmopolitan as well as in his Essay on the costumes Voltaire called it which, moreover, goes back even the expression philosophy of history (in La philosophie de l'histoire of 1765
Kant's reflection on the history then you will find further discussion in the text for the perpetual peace is a philosophical project of 1795 , where he will take account of the contemporary historical situation changed radically with the outbreak of the French Revolution
discourse on the philosophy of the story eventually found its conclusion it The conflict of the faculties (1798), where he examines the clash between the universities to conquer the leadership in the academic world. This would seem alien to the subject of written philosophy of history if we do not consider what Kant said in a brief snippet: " If mankind is in constant progress towards the better. "Here begins to appear a certain vein of skepticism that Kant begins with the vision of Terror Giacobbino under the eyes, to have some doubts about the value of the French Revolution.
Idea for a Universal History ...
In particular in 'Idea for a Universal History ... Kant says that "since men, in their efforts, not simply behave instinctively, like animals, but not so pre [...] of them does not seem possible a systematic history, like that of bees or beavers for which there is a progressive history and eternal, as regulated by those same laws that govern nature because man is able to freely build his story but it is not to do it by pursuing the good. Kant adds: "You can not suppress a certain discomfort to see represented their [men] do and omit on the big stage of the world, and despite the appearance, from time to time, wisdom is [...] the do and omit interwoven with infantile vanity, "so that human actions, albeit sometimes guided by rationality, the more often seem designed to implement the bad, almost without realizing it, as children do in their simplicity. Then "For the philosopher is no other way out but to [...] groped if, in this absurd trend of human affairs, one can discover a view of nature": that is, the philosopher can not fail to have confidence in men, and then wonders if in the end, despite the childish and stupid act of men, there is a kind of secular historical providence, incarnating in nature, lead the men and their actions to the best purposes ('all natural dispositions of a creature are destined to unfold one day in a complete and conforms to an end ") . A story where people are manipulated like puppets to put in place "a story within a specific plan of nature" that pursues its own purposes, also against the will of men
0 comments:
Post a Comment