Kant als metaphilosophischer Skeptizist?

Q2 Arts and Humanities Kantovskii sbornik Pub Date : 2023-01-01 DOI:10.5922/0207-6918-2023-3-5
Daniel Minkin
{"title":"Kant als metaphilosophischer Skeptizist?","authors":"Daniel Minkin","doi":"10.5922/0207-6918-2023-3-5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Throughout history, both philosophers and non-philosophers have doubted that philosophical positions qua philosophical positions are justified and that philosophy is a rational enterprise. Today, such doubts are grouped under the term “Metaphilosophical Skepticism”. Nicholas Rescher, in his book Strife of Systems, includes Kant among the proponents of this kind of skepticism. I want to argue that while Rescher is wrong, Kant has con­tributed to a new version of such skepticism. In the first step, I characterize the basic idea of metaphilosophical skepticism in more detail and identify a version of this idea, which I call “Second-Stage-Skepticism” and on which I will focus. In the following part, I reconstruct Rescher’s reading of Second-Stage-Skepticism as well as his reasons for considering Kant to represent this version. My main claim in this part will be that there is no reading of the mentioned basic idea that makes Rescher’s view reasonable. In the third step, I introduce a newer form of metaphilosophical skepticism — “Third-Stage Skepticism” — and conjecture that this form can be seen as inspired by Kant’s thought on philosophical diversity. Finally, I point out a way to reject this newer form.","PeriodicalId":53007,"journal":{"name":"Kantovskii sbornik","volume":"29 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Kantovskii sbornik","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5922/0207-6918-2023-3-5","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Throughout history, both philosophers and non-philosophers have doubted that philosophical positions qua philosophical positions are justified and that philosophy is a rational enterprise. Today, such doubts are grouped under the term “Metaphilosophical Skepticism”. Nicholas Rescher, in his book Strife of Systems, includes Kant among the proponents of this kind of skepticism. I want to argue that while Rescher is wrong, Kant has con­tributed to a new version of such skepticism. In the first step, I characterize the basic idea of metaphilosophical skepticism in more detail and identify a version of this idea, which I call “Second-Stage-Skepticism” and on which I will focus. In the following part, I reconstruct Rescher’s reading of Second-Stage-Skepticism as well as his reasons for considering Kant to represent this version. My main claim in this part will be that there is no reading of the mentioned basic idea that makes Rescher’s view reasonable. In the third step, I introduce a newer form of metaphilosophical skepticism — “Third-Stage Skepticism” — and conjecture that this form can be seen as inspired by Kant’s thought on philosophical diversity. Finally, I point out a way to reject this newer form.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
康德是形而上学的怀疑论者?
纵观历史,哲学家和非哲学家都怀疑哲学立场作为哲学立场是正当的,以及哲学是一种理性的事业。今天,这样的怀疑被归为“形而上学怀疑主义”。尼古拉斯·雷舍尔在他的著作《制度之争》中,将康德列为这种怀疑论的支持者之一。我想说的是,虽然雷舍尔是错的,但康德为这种怀疑主义的新版本做出了贡献。在第一步中,我更详细地描述了哲学怀疑主义的基本思想,并确定了这个思想的一个版本,我称之为“第二阶段怀疑主义”,我将重点讨论这个版本。在接下来的部分中,我将重构雷彻对第二阶段怀疑论的解读,以及他认为康德代表这一版本的理由。我在这一部分的主要主张是,没有对上述基本思想的阅读,使雷彻的观点合理。在第三步中,我介绍了一种较新的形而上学怀疑主义形式——“第三阶段怀疑主义”——并推测这种形式可以被视为受到康德关于哲学多样性思想的启发。最后,我指出了一种拒绝这种新形式的方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Kantovskii sbornik
Kantovskii sbornik Arts and Humanities-Philosophy
CiteScore
0.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
9
审稿时长
18 weeks
期刊最新文献
The Transcendental Deduction of Categories as Philosophical Proof Kant and Analysis Kant als metaphilosophischer Skeptizist? “Conservative Enlightenment” as “Heroisation of the Present” Pure and Impure Philosophy in Kant’s Metaphilosophy
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1