知觉判断在康德先验认知理论中的地位

IF 0.9 3区 哲学 0 PHILOSOPHY KANT-STUDIEN Pub Date : 2022-09-08 DOI:10.1515/kant-2022-2026
Cheng-Hao Lin
{"title":"知觉判断在康德先验认知理论中的地位","authors":"Cheng-Hao Lin","doi":"10.1515/kant-2022-2026","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The distinction between judgments of perception and judgments of experience in Kant’s Prolegomena has long been a controversial issue in Kantian studies. On the one hand, this distinction challenges the close connection between the synthetic unity of self-consciousness and the categories. On the other hand, a distinction between the subjective and the objective is unavoidable in our cognitive life. I will show in this paper that the interpretive difficulties arise from the ambiguity of Kant’s use of the concept of perception and his misleading formulation of the judgments of perception. After clarifying these problems and adopting the regulative use of the concept of the I in Kant’s theory of perception, the place of judgments of perception in his transcendental cognitive theory can be clarified, and the consistency of his system can be observed.","PeriodicalId":45952,"journal":{"name":"KANT-STUDIEN","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Place of Judgments of Perception in Kant’s Transcendental Cognitive Theory\",\"authors\":\"Cheng-Hao Lin\",\"doi\":\"10.1515/kant-2022-2026\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract The distinction between judgments of perception and judgments of experience in Kant’s Prolegomena has long been a controversial issue in Kantian studies. On the one hand, this distinction challenges the close connection between the synthetic unity of self-consciousness and the categories. On the other hand, a distinction between the subjective and the objective is unavoidable in our cognitive life. I will show in this paper that the interpretive difficulties arise from the ambiguity of Kant’s use of the concept of perception and his misleading formulation of the judgments of perception. After clarifying these problems and adopting the regulative use of the concept of the I in Kant’s theory of perception, the place of judgments of perception in his transcendental cognitive theory can be clarified, and the consistency of his system can be observed.\",\"PeriodicalId\":45952,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"KANT-STUDIEN\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-09-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"KANT-STUDIEN\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1515/kant-2022-2026\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"PHILOSOPHY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"KANT-STUDIEN","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/kant-2022-2026","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"PHILOSOPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

摘要康德《哲学导论》中知觉判断与经验判断的区别一直是康德研究中存在争议的问题。一方面,这种区别挑战了自我意识与范畴的综合统一性之间的紧密联系。另一方面,在我们的认知生活中,主客观的区分是不可避免的。我将在本文中说明,解释的困难来自于康德对知觉概念使用的模糊性和他对知觉判断的误导性表述。在澄清了这些问题之后,采用康德知觉理论中“我”概念的规定性运用,就可以厘清知觉判断在康德先验认知理论中的地位,从而观察到康德知觉理论体系的一致性。
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
The Place of Judgments of Perception in Kant’s Transcendental Cognitive Theory
Abstract The distinction between judgments of perception and judgments of experience in Kant’s Prolegomena has long been a controversial issue in Kantian studies. On the one hand, this distinction challenges the close connection between the synthetic unity of self-consciousness and the categories. On the other hand, a distinction between the subjective and the objective is unavoidable in our cognitive life. I will show in this paper that the interpretive difficulties arise from the ambiguity of Kant’s use of the concept of perception and his misleading formulation of the judgments of perception. After clarifying these problems and adopting the regulative use of the concept of the I in Kant’s theory of perception, the place of judgments of perception in his transcendental cognitive theory can be clarified, and the consistency of his system can be observed.
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
KANT-STUDIEN
KANT-STUDIEN PHILOSOPHY-
CiteScore
0.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
44
期刊介绍: Publications in the Kant-Studien have a dual focus: firstly contributions to the interpretation, history and editorial questions of Kant"s philosophy, and secondly systematic debates on transcendental philosophy. In addition, there are investigations on Kant"s precursors and on the effects of his philosophy. The journal also contains a documentation section, in which the current state of research is indicated by means of a continually updated bibliography with reviews and references.
期刊最新文献
Statuiert Kants theoretische Philosophie eine radikale negative Theologie? Anmerkungen zu einer These aus der jüngeren Forschung im Lichte von Kants regulativem Deismus The Derivation of the Categories of Quantity The Moral Law as an A Priori Principle. Kleingeld and Willaschek on Autonomy Zwei Nachweise der beiden Ausdrücke „Feuerschätze“ und „Phönix der Natur“ in Kants Allgemeiner Naturgeschichte und Theorie des Himmels Geistersehen innerhalb der Grenzen der bloßen Vernunft: Kant über die Aufklärung dunkler Vorstellungen
×
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