Kant 's Philosophy Of Philosophy

Before uncovering Immanuel Kant's work in Grounding for the Metaphysics of Morals , let it be known that he claims to be a rationalist who purely seeks the truth and only the truth. Kant's beliefs are consistent of the idea of true knowledge which exists separate from ones sensation. True knowledge exists a priori within a separate body of sensation. Kant exclaims how sensation can tamper with true knowledge due to the fact

There is very little question as to what action a strict deontologist would do in the scenario for this assignment he or she would unequivocally adhere to his or her duty. The more pressing question, of course, revolves around just where that duty lies. For a deontologist, that duty would lie with the job at hand and its responsibilities. As one who took an oath to only program software in accordance to the company that he or she works for which is essentially operating as an extension of the government that wishes the programmer to 'push the button' and destroy millions of innocent lives in World War II it would strongly appear that such an individuals would consider it his or her duty to effectively start World War III.

Immanuel Kant was a famous philosopher whose philosophical influences impacted almost every new philosophical idea, theory, concept etc. In a sense, he was considered the central face of contemporary philosophy. Kant spent his whole life in Russia. Starting out as a tutor, to then a professor, he lectured about everything; from geography to obviously philosophy. In his early life, he was raised to emphasize faith and religious feelings over reason and theological principles. As he got older though, that position changed. It then became that knowledge is necessarily confided and within the bounds of reason. Now with this in mind, Kant claims many different things that derive from this. There are many different parts and aspects to it which is why it relates to almost every philosophical idea out there. Kant referred his epistemology as “critical philosophy” since all he wanted to do was critique reason and sort our legitimate claims of reasons from illegitimate ones. His epistemology says that we can have an objective, universal, and necessary knowledge of the world, and that science cannot tell us about reality. He claims science cannot tell us anything because it only tells us about the world as it is perceived, whether it’s based on measures, manipulations, experiments and so on. Kant says that we all have knowledge; that the mind and experience work together and that we construct and gain this knowledge by both reason and experience.

In 1724, in the Prussian city of Konigsberg Immanuel Kant was born and spent most of his life at the university. Kant was recognized as a noble philosopher and scientist specializing in many areas. Kant wrote several difficult to read books, but included influential context regarding to practical morality, science, history, politics, and metaphysics. Along with many scholars and philosopher of Kant’s era the published works about nature of reality, free will. Although, the books were commended at the time, they are currently influential in terms of ethics. Kant’s most remarkable books are Groundwork in the Metaphysics of Morals (1785), Critique of Practical Reason (1788), and Metaphysics of Morals (1798) contributing to Kant’s foundation of

While metaphysics questions the notion of reality, Kant questions the possibility of metaphysics. Is it reasonable to assume human mind as a capable tool of knowing the world, if its capacities of knowledge are limited? The idea of metaphysics relies on the premise that knowledge can be derived purely from reason, but Kant does not agree with it. He claims that the human mind cannot know pure reality because of the unavoidable subjectivity of any knowledge, and thus, vanquishes the concept of metaphysics. I personally agree with Kant in his distinction of phenomenal and noumenal realities and the gap between them. The human mind is only one tool for describing and understanding the world, and its capabilities are limited by its definition. In any case, we cannot transcend the physical restrictions of our senses, and that alone already draws a distinction between the world we perceive and the world that exists.

I appreciate how Kant (n.d.) defines nonage as, “the inability to use one’s own understanding without another guidance” (Kant (n.d. para.1). Kant’s main point to think for yourself, particularly in religious matters, is well made. Allowing other people tell you what to think and believe without thinking through the issues for yourself is no way to live. I do not believe, however, that Kant is suggesting that we throw off all guidance, instruction, or correction. Rather, he is saying to think critically, gain insight from other wise people, and then decide for yourself what to believe. Martin Luther is an ideal example of Kant’s definition of enlightenment. Luther thought independently and stood on his conscious before God. Therefore, I believe

In 1755 Kant returned to the University of Konigsberg, that year he successfully completed his study and finally attained his doctorate degree in philosophy. In 1781 Kant published one of the most important works on philosophical thought in western thought the ‘critique of pure reason’, through this Kant focused on ethics and the philosophical study of moral actions he believed that all morality was derived from rationality and all moral judgements are rationally supported through the moral law he proposed ‘the categorical imperative’ he also proposed many other moral laws and ethics such as the ‘hypothetical imperative’ and the ‘good will’. He spent 15 years being a metaphysics lecturer thus to publish the first part of critique of pure reason’, as the years went of more and more of his work

The truth behind metaphysics is a consistent stream of changing ideas which involves thoughts on what existence really is. Kant, unlike many metaphysicians tries to not include an outside aspect that is intrinsically linked to existence, leading to patterns of this form of thinking that continues even to contemporary philosophers. As a transcendental idealist, he molds two schools of thought into one, expanding the capability of what metaphysics is able to ponder, while also eliminating nonscientific approaches to these questions, because those explanations are always lacking empirical substance. On the surface of Kantian metaphysics, it seems as though all hope is lost in respect to the evaluation of the impact metaphysics has on objective thought. However, this is not the case, by using synthetic a priori knowledge one will be able to jettison oneself from the spectacles

Kant opens with discussion of how philosophy contains three sciences; logic, ethics, and physics. Throughout the entire section of reading, I found myself to be struggling quite a lot (which is not such a surprise since we were told in advance that Kant can be very difficult to comprehend). I found myself slightly understanding aspects only to be thrown off just a little later and somehow end up lost by the end. However, there was a part that I found to be very interesting (that I could actually understand)! This was when he discusses specialization; how one person cannot do everything, but rather each person specializes in one aspect of the whole and works to make that part perfect. My question then is if this could be related to the

“A transcendental principle is one by which we think the universal a priori condition which alone things can become objects of our cognition in general[.]”

Immanuel Kant was a philosopher who took ideas from the empiricists and rationalists to create is own view of how humans come to knowledge. Essentially updating and blending science and logic based knowledge. Kant was a rationalist, yet had empirical views much like John Locke and David Hume. Kant agreed with Hume and Locke on experience. Yet, Kant developed a priori idea of how humans learn to learn that was very different from Locke and Hume.

For Immanuel Kant, truth is accessible to the mind only because it derives from rational categories already in the mind. Although knowledge begins in the senses, Kant claims, “besides what is given to the sensuous intuition, special concepts must yet be superadded—concepts which have their origin wholly a priori in the pure understanding, and under which every perception must be first of all subsumed and then by their means changed into experience.”6 The sources of such synthetic a priori concepts are categories inherent in reason, and Kant supplies a table of such categories, including in it: Unity (measure), Plurality (magnitude), Totality (whole), Reality, Negation, Limitation, Substance, Cause, Community, Possibility, Existence, and Necessity.7 Thus, the understanding of any perceived thing as a whole entity, or as having an independent material existence, or as being caused by anything, or as itself the cause of anything has its origin in rational categories in the mind and is not traceable to any essential quality or state of being that can be attributed to the thing in itself, according to Kant.

Immanuel Kant (1724-1804) is much concerned about the operations of the mind. Though he believed in the existence of the mind, he held a different view from the empiricists when it comes to the nature and function of the mind. He set out to prove that Hume was wrong by claiming that some truths were certain and were not based on subjective experience alone. Kant argued that the very ingredients which are necessary for even thinking in terms of a causal relationship could not be derived from experience and therefore must exist a priori, or independent of experience. Though he did not deny the importance of sensory data, he thought that the mind must add something to that data before knowledge could be attained; that something was provided by a priori (innate) categories of thought (unity, totality, time, space, cause and effect, reality, quantity, quality, negation, possibility-impossibility, and existence-nonexistence). Kant claimed that the subjective experiences of human has been modified by the pure concepts of the mind and is therefore more meaningful than it would otherwise have been.

Kant is not looking to take any part of what the historical philosophers posited for granted, instead, he wants to clear the slate and be able to create a new era of epistemological thought. He wants to delve into what knowledge is and be able to prove the possibilities and limitations of knowledge. Kant realizes that his project has never been attempted before and Aristotle, Socrates, Plato, Hume, Descartes, and others believed that knowledge about the world was possible, but Kant was now going to question this notion (Kant, 6.) It must be asked if anything like metaphysics can be a real body of knowledge? Can the human mind really pronounce supersensible creatures before we analyze the mind that is doing the pronouncing? Kant would say that we have entered into a region of subjectivity that has not been seriously contemplated in the past and that all reason is limited, therefore we cannot know certain metaphysical concepts (Kant, 27.) He believes that the mind is finite and therefore cannot proclaim anything that is beyond what is experienced, all we can know is what is in the realm of our experience. Classical metaphysics, according to Kant, is a pretense to wisdom but is not wisdom itself because Kant’s wisdom is to understand the human mind and its limitations, which classical metaphysics does

In his book, “Critique of Practical Reason,” Immanuel Kant outlines his philosophy of ethics and moral reasoning. He introduces the reader to the Fundamental Law of Pure Practical Reason in chapter one of the Analytic. The Universal Law is a categorical imperative, which states: “So act that the maxim of your will could always hold at the same time as a principle in a giving of universal law” (Kant, 1993, p. 30). Like other nonconsequentialists, Kant is much more concerned with the motive behind an action, rather than the outcome of that action when deciding the action’s morality. This avenue of thinking is still very relevant today, over 200 years after Kant first shared his treatises through his writings. Today’s college students can be taught to evaluate whether their actions are moral by examining the motives behind their actions using Kant’s philosophy through judicial affairs and community civility programming, and service learning on college campuses.