Metaphysics as Addressed by Kant and Hume Essay

In the Critique of Pure Reason, philosopher Immanuel Kant aims to thoroughly explain his philosophy of the metaphysical world. Within the Transcendental Aesthetic, Kant focuses on confirming that space and time are a priori intuitions. He provides reasoning and arguments as to why they are transcendentally ideal but empirically real, making space and time subjectively necessary for experiences. Simultaneously, Kant distinguishes space and time from secondary qualities, which belong to our senses through experience, by confirming that unlike space and time, secondary qualities are not empirically real. Kant does run into conflicts with his theory, he still successfully claims that space and time are transcendentally ideal but empirically real, as well as distinguish them from secondary qualities by supporting his theories with reasoning.

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

In his publication, Foundations of the Metaphysics of Morals, Immanuel Kant supplies his readers with a thesis that claims morality can be derived from the principle of the categorical imperative. The strongest argument to support his thesis is the difference between actions in accordance with duty and actions in accordance from duty. To setup his thesis, Kant first draws a distinction between empirical and “a priori” concepts. Empirical concepts are ideas we reach from our experiences in the world. On the other hand and in contrast, “a priori” concepts are ideas we reach as an end point of reasoning prior to or apart from any experience of how things occur in the world. Kant

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

Like stated earlier, David Hume had a very interesting view on cause and effect or causality. Like me, many of us believe that cause and effect go together hand in hand. For example, take the billiards game pool, If I hit the cue ball into the eight ball, we will call this idea one, and the eight ball proceeds towards the designed pocket, we will call this idea two, this would be cause and effect. I did something that made something else do something. Many philosophers have used this idea also. Thomas Aquinas wrote in his Summa Theologica that every cause is dependent on a previous cause. This proceeds back to the very first motion. If there is no first motion then there will be no immediate cause or even a final cause. Now, David Hume was a bit different. Hume’s critique was that our experience was basically two ideas that have customarily became conjoined with each other. These two ideas could absolutely be unrelated, but has always occurred together in the past. Hume’s belief is that our minds have added something extra. Our minds would add through experience that because the cue ball hit the eight ball, then the effect would be the eight ball moving. When in reality it has given us the habitual occurrence that the eight ball moves when hit by the cue ball.

Kant’s moral philosophy lies somewhere between that of an empiricist and a rationalist. An empiricist believes that we gain knowledge about the world only through experience while a rationalist believes that we gain knowledge only through self-reflection because we are born with ideas that we simply need to pull out of our conscious minds (Drogalis, Lecture, March 10). Kant states that when we are attempting to understand morality and ethics we must use logic consisting of a priori truths that are realized through self-reflection (Kant, Groundwork, 387-388). While there are two types of a priori truths, Kant focuses on synthetic a priori truths that add additional information about a concept as opposed to analytic a priori truths that simply define a concept (Kant, Groundwork, 389). The reason that synthetic a priori truths are

Immanuel Kant’s metaphysics of morals offer a well thought out and complex set of formulations that give rational beings the opportunity to be autonomous from outside factors and make moral decisions. In theory, Kant’s metaphysics of morals and a careful use of the categorical imperative are needed to create what Kant describes as the “kingdom of ends”. Kant oversimplifies certain questions certain ideas, presuming the answers are “rational” when in reality the answers really depend on multiple assumptions that cannot be nullified in making moral judgments. After a carefully researched analysis of Kant’s metaphysics of morals, why the metaphysics of morals is necessary according to Kant, and critiques of Kant’s metaphysics of morals, my contention is that Kant’s metaphysics of morals is flawed, not wholly applicable to the real current world, and therefore not convincing.

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.

Kant wrote “The Fundamental Principles of the Metaphysic of Morals” to share his views on morals and what truly determines if actions are moral. The book defines metaphysics as the study of concepts in relation to moral and physical experiences. The first two principles Kant explain are that actions are only moral when they are based off morals alone. If any other factor or circumstance comes into play, then the action

The effects of his metaphysics,epistemology ,ethics and aesthetics was important to the philosophical movement that followed him.("Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy."). A large part of Immanuel Kant’s work came from the question, “what can we know”. Kant thought that if it can be stated simply, and our knowledge is constrained to mathematics and the science of the natural, empirical word. There were two major methods in the early modern time of philosophy that had a major impact on Immanuel Kant. The first one was Empiricism. Empiricism is the theory that all knowledge is derived from sense-experience. The second method was Rationalism. Rationalism is a theory that opinions and actions should be based on reason and knowledge rather than religious belief or emotional response. Kant believed that both of the theories of the philosophers’ arguments had some flaws to them. ("Internet Encyclopedia of

	David Hume, a Scottish philosopher and historian who lived from 1711-76, carried the empiricism of John Locke and George Berkeley to the logical extreme of radical skepticism. Although his family wanted him to become a lawyer, he felt an "insurmountable resistance to everything but philosophy and learning". Mr. Hume attended Edinburgh University where he studied but did not graduate, and in 1734 he moved to a French town called La Fleche to pursue philosophy. He later returned to Britain and began his literary career. As Hume built up his reputation, he gained more and more political power. He discarded the possibility of certain knowledge, finding in the mind nothing but a series of sensations, and held that cause-and-effect in the

In Hume’s writings, the Treatise and Enquiry, he makes an attempt to reform philosophy, claiming that philosophical systems prior to his own work had “convinced him philosophy was in a sorry state and in dire need of reform” (4 Stanford). One of Hume’s motivations for writing his own works is that ancient philosophers and natural philosophers both had made errors in developing theories Hume felt were entirely too hypothetical (4 Stanford). He claimed that these philosophers had made claims “based on speculation and invention rather than experience and observation” (4 Stanford). Additionally, Hume was an advocate for natural philosophy, arguing that it wasn’t as speculative as the philosophy of the ancients. In Hume’s Enquiry, he discusses

The philosophy of Immanuel Kant, therefore, is a frantic effort to escape from the implications of David Hume, whose beliefs haunted the philosophes of the Enlightenment. First, Kant accuses many philosophers of indifferentism, stating “those pretended indifferentists fall back into those very same metaphysical dogmas they profess to despise” (Kant 50). Adam Smith’s theory for example, regarding the “invisible hand” that controls society, makes reference to a metaphysical being. Philosophers who challenged the theory of God threatened Kant as he tries desperately to bring God back into the

This movement away from feelings and towards foundational principles of taste is where Kant most explicitly diverges from Hume. These ‘a priori foundations of taste’, as I have called them, can unite one with the human race at large. A judgment of taste, to Kant, is what you share with your neighbor, what unites you to your species, it is to speak with a universal voice. When we employ this voice, we have certain expectations; namely, we except others to assent to the views expressed. Although, how do we properly use this voice so apparent within us? The four moments Kant presents in Critique of Judgment are part of a social/moral training in becoming a critic capable of doing so. In this way, coming to agreement is to come to know or grasp that which ought to be shared by all humans, and is deeply rooted in our common sense cognitive capacities.

Immanuel Kant, a philosopher after Hume, sets out to reform metaphysics. Kant believed that if Hume was right, metaphysics would be impossible. But, Kant was unwilling to surrender to Hume's skeptical argument, so Kant sets out to do a critique in order to explore the possibilities and reform metaphysics. Kant begins his critique searching for ‘a priori' knowledge within philosophy.