The New Philosophy

B. Bergo
{"title":"The New Philosophy","authors":"B. Bergo","doi":"10.1093/oso/9780197539712.003.0002","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Kant’s transcendental revolution temporarily cut through debates between Humian skeptics and rationalists of a Leibniz-Wolffian stripe. It established reason as an immanent tribunal, judging its possibilities and errors. Through an analysis of the structure of intuition and the deduction of the categories intrinsic to judgement, largely scientific, the edifice of the first Critique raised epistemology out of metaphysics and psychologism. Together, the Antimonies and Paralogisms of pure reason indicated the contradictions and misuse of concepts into which rational speculation had hitherto fallen. The paralogisms of the erstwhile rational psychology had argued in favor of the simplicity, substantiality, and the personality of the soul, thereby following a logic of substance and accidents where passions and affects were the latter, attaching to that soul. By showing the errors of the paralogisms, Kant effectively “dispatched” virtually all affects to his “science of man and the world,” the anthropology of human practice. However, the solution to Kant’s Paralogisms of the soul opened a new circle, such that our inner sense and its logical condition, transcendental apperception preceded, but could only be thought thanks to, the categories of understanding. At stake was the intrinsic unity of consciousness within the transcendental project. Although the Critique of Practical Reason retained a crucial intellectual affect, Achtung (attention and respect), Kant’s epistemology required clear distinctions between understanding, reason, and affects. In a sense, ontology and epistemology bifurcate into the domains of a transcendental approach to experience as representation and what lays outside it (including pre-reflective sensibility and affects).","PeriodicalId":79474,"journal":{"name":"Anxiety","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-12-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Anxiety","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780197539712.003.0002","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Kant’s transcendental revolution temporarily cut through debates between Humian skeptics and rationalists of a Leibniz-Wolffian stripe. It established reason as an immanent tribunal, judging its possibilities and errors. Through an analysis of the structure of intuition and the deduction of the categories intrinsic to judgement, largely scientific, the edifice of the first Critique raised epistemology out of metaphysics and psychologism. Together, the Antimonies and Paralogisms of pure reason indicated the contradictions and misuse of concepts into which rational speculation had hitherto fallen. The paralogisms of the erstwhile rational psychology had argued in favor of the simplicity, substantiality, and the personality of the soul, thereby following a logic of substance and accidents where passions and affects were the latter, attaching to that soul. By showing the errors of the paralogisms, Kant effectively “dispatched” virtually all affects to his “science of man and the world,” the anthropology of human practice. However, the solution to Kant’s Paralogisms of the soul opened a new circle, such that our inner sense and its logical condition, transcendental apperception preceded, but could only be thought thanks to, the categories of understanding. At stake was the intrinsic unity of consciousness within the transcendental project. Although the Critique of Practical Reason retained a crucial intellectual affect, Achtung (attention and respect), Kant’s epistemology required clear distinctions between understanding, reason, and affects. In a sense, ontology and epistemology bifurcate into the domains of a transcendental approach to experience as representation and what lays outside it (including pre-reflective sensibility and affects).
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
新哲学
康德的先验革命暂时打断了胡米亚怀疑论者和莱布尼茨-沃尔夫学派理性主义者之间的争论。它将理性确立为一个内在的法庭,判断其可能性和错误。通过对直觉结构的分析和对判断本质范畴的推导,第一个批判的大厦在很大程度上是科学的,它将认识论从形而上学和心理学中提升出来。纯粹理性的反命题和Paralogism共同表明了迄今为止理性思辨所陷入的概念的矛盾和滥用。前理性心理学的副教授们主张灵魂的简单性、实质性和个性,从而遵循物质和意外的逻辑,激情和情感是后者,附属于灵魂。康德通过展示副逻辑的错误,有效地将几乎所有的影响“派遣”到他的“人与世界的科学”,即人类实践的人类学中。然而,康德灵魂Paralogism的解决打开了一个新的循环,使我们的内在感觉及其逻辑条件,先验统觉,先于理解的范畴,但只能被认为是由于理解的范畴。这关系到超越计划中意识的内在统一。尽管《实践理性批判》保留了一种至关重要的智力影响,即关注和尊重,但康德的认识论要求明确区分理解、理性和影响。从某种意义上说,本体论和认识论分为先验方法的两个领域,即经验作为表征和它之外的东西(包括反思前的情感和影响)。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Freud and the Three Anxieties From Kant to Hegel via Philippe Pinel The Universality of Emotions? The New Philosophy Emmanuel Levinas and the Anxiety of Intersubjective Origins
×
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