Stack Exchange Network

Stack Exchange network consists of 175 Q&A communities including Stack Overflow, the largest, most trusted online community for developers to learn, share their knowledge, and build their careers.

Visit Stack Exchange

New answers tagged

2

According to Kant, analytic propositions are logical truths ( or instances of abstract logical truths). For example: A OR not-A , or any of its instances , such as the soul is mortal OR the soul is non-mortal. So, your question amounts to asking what is the status of logic in Kant's epistemology. In the Preface of the second ...


1

Maybe the best place to start is Heidegger's own commentaries on Kant : (1) What is a thing? (2) Kant and the problem of metaphysics. (3) and also Phenomenological interpretation of the Critics of pure reason. Sure there are explanations in these references about thought as representation. Not absolutely sure Heidegger explains there in which way ( ...


3

Good chart. Essentially correct but there are a few small things that are not quite on the mark (a lot of confusion often comes from Kant's spread-out presentation of his theory of experience; later on in the Critique, the full theory of experience is better presented and clarified). Empirical knowledge for Kant is conceptualized experience. So it doesn't ...


3

This is a good question! I think it is a common mistake to think that Kant is appealing to a "bad consequence" here. Universalizing the maxim "Brake a promise when it is convenient" leads to a contradiction, not a catastrophe. That is what tells us it is irrational (which is to say immoral) to break a promise. Another way of saying this is that treating the ...


2

I suggest caution in drawing out Kant's connection with the concept of the noumenon. Kant suggests that the concept of noumena can be defended on two grounds; (a) First, its logical possibility: A254-B310. "The concept of noumenon - that is, of a thing which is not to be thought as object of the senses but as a thing in itself, solely ...


2

Offering a specific advice on a specific problem does not amount to offering an ethical maxim to be followed generally. If "the individual will liberally use it" as such it is their responsibility (assuming they subscribe to Kantian ethics) to make sure that it is properly universalizable. At most, you owe them a warning that the solution offered has ...


0

Don't (try to) win at chess (with a human opponent). Don't (try to) commit suicide (for someone else). Don't (try to) steal other people's property (if they / we have rights to property). etc. the CI makes sense, you just need a little nuance to get them. There is the related question of whether we may deceive ourselves into not really following the CI, ...


0

Examining Wittgenstein's Tratatus Logico-Philosophicus in both German and English, the words "synthetic(al)" and "posteriori" do not appear when I searched for them. However, "a priori" often did. The word "analytical" was mentioned in 6.11. Wittgenstein mentioned Kant once regarding the problem of the left and right hand in 6.36111. Wikipedia describes ...


0

Kant's view and Locke's view on the foundations of epistemology are reconciled by the discoveries of Darwin. When Locke said that a human was born with a blank slate of a mind, he should have said that the first life started with a blank mind. All life acquired all its knowledge of the world through sense experience--but for a long time it didn't inscribe (...


3

Finding out whether a proposed maxim is, in fact, a valid categorical imperative goes something like this: Suppose everyone followed the maxim, x. If everyone followed the x, does a contradiction in terms result? If a contradiction results, x is not a valid maxim. Otherwise, x is a valid maxim. An Example: Suppose lying were always justified and that all ...


3

The Groundwork and the good will While the Groundwork gives pre-eminent place to the good will (guten Wille), it says nothing so far as I know about the bad or evil will. Of course, it doesn't logically follow that if there is a good will there is also a bad or evil will: apart from the good will there might only be a non-good or neutral will or indeed no ...


1

Yes, it is, but it should be noted that "in itself" has a different, more colloquial, meaning here than in the Kant's "thing in itself", where it stands for something relating to the world behind the appearances, unknowable to us. It is clear from context (see GMM 4:393-394) that Kant wants to contrast "good in itself" will to many other qualities that are ...


Top 50 recent answers are included