"我们对他的理解甚至胜过他对自己的理解":康德与柏拉图论感性、上帝与善

IF 0.3 0 PHILOSOPHY Open Philosophy Pub Date : 2024-01-10 DOI:10.1515/opphil-2022-0272
Marina Marren
{"title":"\"我们对他的理解甚至胜过他对自己的理解\":康德与柏拉图论感性、上帝与善","authors":"Marina Marren","doi":"10.1515/opphil-2022-0272","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Kant criticizes Plato for his interest in positing ideas that are entirely purified from any sensible elements, but which, nonetheless, exist in some supra-sensible reality. I argue that Kant’s criticism can be repositioned and even countered if, in our assessment of Plato, we assign a wider scope of significance and greater value to the senses. In order to lend focus to my article, I analyze Socrates’ presentation of what I translate as the “look of the Good” (τοῦ ἀγαθοῦ ἰδέαν, 508e) in the <jats:italic>Republic</jats:italic> so as to show the proximity between Plato and Kant on the question of sensibility. I also draw on the <jats:italic>Phaedo</jats:italic> and extant literature that goes against the traditional view regarding the status of Ideas or Forms, including the Idea of the Good. I further discuss an affinity between the Good that is “beyond being” (ἐπέκεινα τῆς οὐσίας, 509c) in the <jats:italic>Republic</jats:italic> and Kant’s view of God as an Ideal of Reason. Given my articulation of the importance of the sensible dimension in Plato, there is a continuity between Kant and Plato on the question of the illegitimacy of certain ideas. In other words, in my reading (and contrary to Kant’s view of Plato), Kant does not so much overturn Plato’s metaphysics, but develops further the view that is already inscribed in Plato.","PeriodicalId":36288,"journal":{"name":"Open Philosophy","volume":"61 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"“We Understand Him Even Better Than He Understood Himself”: Kant and Plato on Sensibility, God, and the Good\",\"authors\":\"Marina Marren\",\"doi\":\"10.1515/opphil-2022-0272\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Kant criticizes Plato for his interest in positing ideas that are entirely purified from any sensible elements, but which, nonetheless, exist in some supra-sensible reality. I argue that Kant’s criticism can be repositioned and even countered if, in our assessment of Plato, we assign a wider scope of significance and greater value to the senses. In order to lend focus to my article, I analyze Socrates’ presentation of what I translate as the “look of the Good” (τοῦ ἀγαθοῦ ἰδέαν, 508e) in the <jats:italic>Republic</jats:italic> so as to show the proximity between Plato and Kant on the question of sensibility. I also draw on the <jats:italic>Phaedo</jats:italic> and extant literature that goes against the traditional view regarding the status of Ideas or Forms, including the Idea of the Good. I further discuss an affinity between the Good that is “beyond being” (ἐπέκεινα τῆς οὐσίας, 509c) in the <jats:italic>Republic</jats:italic> and Kant’s view of God as an Ideal of Reason. Given my articulation of the importance of the sensible dimension in Plato, there is a continuity between Kant and Plato on the question of the illegitimacy of certain ideas. In other words, in my reading (and contrary to Kant’s view of Plato), Kant does not so much overturn Plato’s metaphysics, but develops further the view that is already inscribed in Plato.\",\"PeriodicalId\":36288,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Open Philosophy\",\"volume\":\"61 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Open Philosophy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1515/opphil-2022-0272\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"PHILOSOPHY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Open Philosophy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/opphil-2022-0272","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"PHILOSOPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

康德批评柏拉图热衷于提出完全剔除任何感性因素的理念,但这些理念却存在于某种超感性的现实之中。我认为,如果我们在评价柏拉图时赋予感官更广泛的意义和更高的价值,那么康德的批评就可以重新定位,甚至予以反驳。为了突出文章的重点,我分析了苏格拉底在《共和国》中对 "善的外观"(τοἀγαθοῦ ἰδέαν,508e)的表述,以显示柏拉图与康德在感性问题上的接近。我还借鉴了《斐多》和现存文献中关于理念或形式(包括 "善 "的理念)地位的反传统观点。我进一步讨论了《共和国》中 "超越存在 "的善(ἐπέκεινα τῆς οὐσίας,509c)与康德作为理性理想的上帝观之间的亲和性。鉴于我对柏拉图中感性维度重要性的阐述,康德与柏拉图在某些观念的非法性问题上存在着连续性。换言之,在我的解读中(与康德对柏拉图的看法相反),康德与其说是推翻了柏拉图的形而上学,不如说是进一步发展了柏拉图已有的观点。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
“We Understand Him Even Better Than He Understood Himself”: Kant and Plato on Sensibility, God, and the Good
Kant criticizes Plato for his interest in positing ideas that are entirely purified from any sensible elements, but which, nonetheless, exist in some supra-sensible reality. I argue that Kant’s criticism can be repositioned and even countered if, in our assessment of Plato, we assign a wider scope of significance and greater value to the senses. In order to lend focus to my article, I analyze Socrates’ presentation of what I translate as the “look of the Good” (τοῦ ἀγαθοῦ ἰδέαν, 508e) in the Republic so as to show the proximity between Plato and Kant on the question of sensibility. I also draw on the Phaedo and extant literature that goes against the traditional view regarding the status of Ideas or Forms, including the Idea of the Good. I further discuss an affinity between the Good that is “beyond being” (ἐπέκεινα τῆς οὐσίας, 509c) in the Republic and Kant’s view of God as an Ideal of Reason. Given my articulation of the importance of the sensible dimension in Plato, there is a continuity between Kant and Plato on the question of the illegitimacy of certain ideas. In other words, in my reading (and contrary to Kant’s view of Plato), Kant does not so much overturn Plato’s metaphysics, but develops further the view that is already inscribed in Plato.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Open Philosophy
Open Philosophy Arts and Humanities-Philosophy
CiteScore
1.40
自引率
20.00%
发文量
25
审稿时长
15 weeks
期刊最新文献
Relational or Object-Oriented? A Dialogue between Two Contemporary Ontologies On the “How” and the “Why”: Nietzsche on Happiness and the Meaningful Life Knowing Holbein’s Objects: An Object-Oriented-Ontology Analysis of The Ambassadors Calling and Responding: An Ethical-Existential Framework for Conceptualising Interactions “in-between” Self and Other Non-Existence: The Nuclear Option
×
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