'Concepts without percepts are empty and percepts without concepts are blind.' Immanuel Kant (1724-1804) is a German Idealist philosopher, renounced for his work in Ethics, Metaphysics, Rationalism and many more. He is considered one of the greatest modern philosophers because of his enormous contribution to philosophy. Born in Konigsberg, he was educated in the Wolfian version of Leibniz's philosophy. However he abandoned it because of the influence of Rousseau and David Hume as he had stated that Hume had woken him from his dogmatic slumbers. By dogmatic slumbers he meant the work of earlier Metaphysicians like Descartes, Leibniz, Spinoza (It is to say that there are certain axiomatic principles from which everything else could be deduced). Kant was a very habitual person that people used to set their watches as he passed their doors. He read Rousseau's book several times because the beauty of his writing kept him away from realizing the subject matter. His early works were more concerned with science. The most important of his scientific writings is his General Natural History and Theory of the Heavens (1755), which anticipates Laplace's nebular hypothesis, and sets forth a possible origin of the solar system. Kant most important book is The Critique of Pure Reason (1st edition 1781; 2nd edition 1787), which deals with knowledge. His another important book is The Critique of Practical Reason (1786), which deals with ethics and morality. And yes, he never got married.
Synthetic a priori judgements
There are some terms that we need to understand, I mean really understand before starting anything because they play an essential role in Kant's epistemology. Knowledge can be of two types a priori and a posteriori. The former is derived independently of experience or from reason alone and the latter needs experience to acquire it and reason cannot account for it. For Kant a priori knowledge is necessary and universal while a posteriori knowledge is not universal but empirical. He again draws the distinction between two types of judgements 'Synthetic' and 'Analytic'. Analytic propositions are true by definition, the predicate is contained in the subject. Synthetic propositions are not true by definition, the predicate is not contained in the subject. The analytic proposition adds no new concept, but synthetic propositions do. Example of an analytic statement is 'All bachelors are unmarried', this is true by definition and of synthetic statement is 'My laptop is painted grey' which is not true by definition. It is logical to assume that there exist analytic a priori and synthetic a posteriori statements. That is what Descartes, Leibniz thought and so did Hume. But Kant argues that synthetic a priori judgements are possible too and it was a radical claim. Hume did claim that causality was not analytic but not a priori. So, it is to say that we can have empirical knowledge, a priori. Here is a table to summarize all of this.
He means that A child learning arithmetic may be helped by
experiencing two marbles and two other marbles and observing that altogether he is experiencing
four marbles. But when he has grasped the general proposition "two and two are four" he no
longer requires confirmation by instances. So how are synthetic judgments a priori possible? This question, Kant explores in his book 'Critique of Pure Reason'.
Categories of understanding
According to Kant, there are innate ideas, pure concepts of understanding called the 'Categories'. There is synthetic a priori truths, the laws of understanding. For Kant, these are the necessary preconditions for the possibility of experience. There are twelve categories given in the table below:
So, these concepts are essential prerequisite for experience. These concepts are purely subjective i.e. present only in the mind and we become aware of them while having an experience.
Space and Time
According to Kant, we perceive object in space and time. Space and time are in built in our minds. Space and time are our perceptive spectacles. It is not a category Kant says, but a form of intuition (The German word is
"Anschauung," which means literally "looking at" or "view"). So we perceive things being in space and time but space and time itself is not an objective reality. It is purely subjective, a manifestation of our perception. This also relates to geometry being a priori. Kant says that we are equipped with the intuition of 'Euclidean Space'. This immediately raises the question of continuity. How things have continuity when we are not experience it? But we are not going to explore the problem in this blog.
Transcendental Idealism
How does our mind perceive the external reality? There are three approaches to it, Direct Realism, Indirect Realism and Idealism. Let's talk briefly about each. According to DR we perceive the world directly as it exists, which menas whatever we perceive is exactly how the world is. This approach has some limitations but we won't go there. However as an Indirect Realist, we do not directly perceive the world but through 'Sensa datum'. According to John Locke, who is in fact an Indirect Realist, we only perceive the primary quality of objects and the secondary qualities are subject to our mind. So if I am seeing a carrot, the sense data consists it's shape, dimensions but color, taste and smell are secondary qualities which are manifestation of our mind. Thirdly, an Idealist completely abolishes material world. For him, there is no object reality as everything is the projection or ideas of our mind. There is no external world is there is no mind to perceive it. George Berkely was an Idealist.
Kant however sits between Indirect Realist and Idealist. According to Kant, the objects of experience are the projection of our mind but an external reality independent of my experience also exist. This is quite confusing. He says that whatever we experience are the projection of the mind, 'Phenomena' but an external world also exists independent of our experience of which we can have no information and knowledge, 'noumena'. So there are things in themselves which we cannot know called the noumena and the things we experience, which are the appearances that we know called the phenomena. So from here we get this noumena and phenomena distinction.
Copernican Revolution
Scientists prior to Nicolas Copernicus believed in the 'Geocentric Theory' according to which Earth is at the center and planets or heavenly bodies revolve around it. Of course this was not based on any scientific evidences. It was purely based on the fact that we human beings are special and we inhabit in a very special part or area of the universe. But Copernicus changed the perspective from geocentric to heliocentric. According to 'Heliocentric Theory' the sun is at the center and planet revolves around it. This was the Copernican Revolution.
Similarly Kant's predecessors thought that our mind conforms to the world that is to say our mind revolves around the everyday objects. It is the job of our mind to conform to the world. It is a requirement for experience. But Kant says that no it's not our mind's job to conform to the world but it's the world's job to conform to our mind. It means that the world must conform itself to the mind's faculty of understanding, to the categories so that we can have experience. This means our minds can process the information that we perceive in certain ways. We receive percepts(unknown) and process them in such a way to conform it to the mind. Kant says "If the intuition must conform to nature of objects, I do not see how we can know anything a priori". Everything we experience is the projection of our mind. The world must conform too our mind so that we can have experience because we have the inbuilt concepts, categories. The triangle must conform to my mind's concept of triangularity to be experienced. Our mind constructs the objects so the structure of world is the result of our mind. This is what is famously called the 'Kant's Copernican Revolution'.
 |
| Overall picture |
Metaphysics
Kant discusses metaphysics in the Transcendental dialectic part of Critique of Pure Reason. His argument is that we cannot have complete metaphysical knowledge from reason alone and that the metaphysical claims are the fallacies that arises when we take reason alone into account. Kant argues that the metaphysical claims are unproven facts. He also says that we may not have metaphysical knowledge but metaphysical beliefs. He leaves room for belief. As we will see that although he disproves the traditional approach to god's existence, he nevertheless believes in god on moral grounds. Traditional metaphysicians mainly starting from Descartes divide metaphysics into three categories which are
- Mind - Rational Psychology
- Nature - Rational Cosmology
- God - Rational Theology
- Paralogisms (mind) - Arguments that are beyond logic. The claim fails because conclusion of the arguments goes beyond what can be proven logically.
- Antinomies (nature) - Arguments in which both 'thesis' and 'antithesis' exist. It means a claim in both true and false.
- Ideal (god) - It is a need to unify our understanding. Arguments that can't be proven but postulated.
This begins with Descartes Cogito ergo sum, res cogito i.e. I think, I am. So what am I? A thinking substance. The term 'substance' is introduced, mind/soul is a thing/substance. It assigns the substance a cartesian character. But according to Kant mind and body can't be treated as a substance. It goes beyond logical ends. Substance is a category and for Kant a category is purely subjective. It also introduces mind-body problem. Rational psychologists claim soul as substance that is simple and has personal identity. According to Kant, this claim is fallacious arising from reason alone. The demand for unconditioned unity leads to it. He says that the features of self consciousness gets transformed into metaphysical claims. He doesn't completely abolish the claim but says that there is no logical basis for claiming it.
2. Rational Cosmology
Here both thesis and antithesis of metaphysical claims are possible so Kant says we have no any definitive knowledge. If a statement can be proven to be both true and false at the same time, how can we know anything of certain? There are four antinomies
- The first thesis says: "The world has a beginning in time, and is also limited as regards space." The antithesis says: "The world has no beginning in time, and no limits in space; it is infinite as regards both time and space."
- The second antinomy proves that every composite substance both is, and is not, made up of simple parts.
- The thesis of the third antinomy maintains that there are two kinds of causality, one according to the laws of nature, the other that of freedom; the antithesis maintains that there is only causality according to the laws of nature.
- The fourth antinomy proves that there is, and is not, an absolutely necessary Being.
3. Rational Theology
According to Rational Theology there are three rational proofs of god's existence and they are the ontological
proof, the cosmological proof, and the physico-theological proof.
- The Ontological proof:- It defines god as the most real being ens realissimum.
- The Cosmological proof:- It says If anything exists, then an absolutely necessary being ens realissimum must exist.
- The physico-theological proof:- It argues god's existence because of the orderliness, fine tuning of our universe. A creator or an architect who did it all.
Kantian Ethics
Kantian ethics is described in the book Metaphysic of Morals (1785). This book contains the 'Categorical Imperative'. Unlike Hume, Kant is not a follower of Utilitarianism. He says, "a completely isolated metaphysic of morals, which is not mixed with
any theology or physics or hyper physics". All moral concepts have their seat and
origin wholly a priori in the reason. He adds that morality is the one's act to fulfill his duty. to be a moral being it is not enough to fulfill the duty but fulfilling it with right intentions is a must. The only good thing is a goodwill. There are objective principles called the imperatives. He draws the distinction between hypothetical and categorical imperative. The hypothetical imperative is conditional i.e. to achieve such and such, do so and so. But categorical imperative is synthetic a priori. Categorical principle is a must obey for everyone regardless of the situation. Kant formulates categorical imperative in three ways
1. Act only according to a maxim by which you can at the same time will that it shall
become a general law:- It means that we should act in such a way that my act will be established as a universal law. If I perform any act then think what will happen if everyone in the world acted the same? If I burrow money then what will happen if everyone burrows it? There will be no money left to burrow. So burrowing is morally condemned.
2. Treat humanity as an end in itself but never as a means:- It means ensure every person's right. Don't force a person into work to accomplish your dreams. However, it has many limitations.
3. Kingdom of ends:- Kant imagines a hypothetical kingdom where only moral rational being exist. He asks us to be a part of that kingdom and see yourself as a law giver. See whether you will approve your act or not.
The concept of freedom is related to self imposed law. It is to say that where there is law there is freedom. This approach of freedom is also accepted by Hegel. According to Kant, god, freedom and immortality are the ideas of reason. Reason alone cannot prove its reality. The importance of these ideas is practical, connected with
morals. The practical use of reason is described mainly in The Critique of Practical Reason (1786). The achievement of goodwill in this life is never complete. We cannot achieve moral perfection in this life. There is also God given desire for happiness never achieved in this life while pursuing duty. So, there must be continuation of life where our moral development is continued and rewarded with happiness. A moral being must provide happiness i.e. God. So, immortality of soul and god are practical necessity.
References:
- Dr. Holmes lecture series 'A history of Philosophy' in You tube -
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rR-syCO7kCU
- Dr. Daniel Bonevac's lectures on Immanuel Kant, You tube -
- Bertrand Russell's book 'A history of Western Philosophy' pdf (page 701-729)
- https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/kant/
- Philosophy vibe You tube channel - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=284PIEhQ-Xg
You can contact me at :- kafleashesh24@gmail.com
https://learnwithashesh.blogspot.com/
0 Comments