In the last part of his book, Kant talks about how the numerous ideas of reason and how the mislead the understanding into posing insoluble metaphysical questions. Kant, like Hume, draws a distinction between metaphysics from mathematics and science. But instead, he says that the former has bounds while the later two don't have any bounds, but instead have two limits. Math an Science are complete and they are limited only in that their scope is not absolutely general. Math can't answer metaphysical questions & science can't give us insight to into things in themselves. But morality and mathematics aren't needed in mathematical explanations and the nature of things in themselves does not affect the advancement of science.
Metaphysics according to Kant is bounded. Why? Because reason poses questions for itself that it cannot answer. However, in these questionings, our reason bumps against boundaries that it can't got past. This includes the fact that we can't gain definite knowledge outside our experience. But this is useful to us. Although we can't go beyond them, we can infer that there exists something beyond them. We can also infer the connection that they must have with the world that we do perceive.
For Kant, we can't prove anything about the existence of God or His nature.
Monday, April 28, 2008
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
i agree that we cannot gain knowledge beyond our experiences, but we have not experienced even a small percentage of what the universe has to offer.
yea, that seems to be the problem...
at the same time i must ask how is knowledge about subjects like astronomy, psyiology, and, for that matter, all subjects possible for the most of us. I mean for us to say tha we have knowledge about a certain subject would mean that we have some experience of it. It might be that we've studied it, we've read up on it. But I don't think that most of humanity has read up on all the subjects that are out there. The question then can we say we have knowledge about them? If so, how?
yeah, i don't like Kant. I think if we are also empirical data than we can understand other empirical data.
Post a Comment