|
|
 Up |
|
|
  |
Author: SkyLineSkyLine Date: Dec 29, 2006 20:41
Immortalist wrote:
> Kant revolutionized philosophy. Kant showed that the mind, through its
> innate categories, constructs our experience along certain lines
> (space, time, causality, self, etc.). Thus, thinking and experiencing
> give no access to things as they really are. We can think as hard as we
> like, but we will never escape the innate constraints of our minds.
It should have been obvious even before Kant that animal minds had
innate formal knowledge guiding their behaviors (nest-building, care of
young, vocal patterns, etc) which manifested itself even in individuals
raised in isolation from other members of their species. But in spite
of any contemporary genetic, cognitive and neuro research demonstrating
the contrary, there's probably an abundance of yokels still clinging to
the blank slate view when it comes to the human mind.
|
| Show full article (1.89Kb) |
|
| | no comments |
|
|
Author: Malrassic ParkMalrassic Park Date: Dec 30, 2006 13:48
Immortalist wrote:
> The philosophy of Immanuel Kant (1724-1804) is sometimes called the
> "Copernican revolution of philosophy" to emphasize its novelty and
> huge importance.
That is partly true. But why is it novel? Because it takes a particular
turn analogous to that of the Copernican turn toward a view of
cosmology that places the locus of attention elsewhere. Kantianism
reverses the trend started by Copernicus back to the view that
everything indeed revolves around us
-- transcendentally, that is.
And then the transcendental turn, in turn, helps to explain what
made the Copernican turn possible at all.
|
| |
|
| | no comments |
|
|
Author: ImmortalistImmortalist Date: Dec 29, 2006 11:11
The philosophy of Immanuel Kant (1724-1804) is sometimes called the
"Copernican revolution of philosophy" to emphasize its novelty and
huge importance. Kant synthesized (brought together) rationalism and
empiricism. After Kant, the old debate between rationalists and
empiricists ended, and epistemology went in a new direction. After
Kant, no discussion of reality or knowledge could take place without
awareness of the role of the human mind in constructing reality and
knowledge.
Kant revolutionized philosophy. Kant showed that the mind, through its
innate categories, constructs our experience along certain lines
(space, time, causality, self, etc.). Thus, thinking and experiencing
give no access to things as they really are. We can think as hard as we
like, but we will never escape the innate constraints of our minds.
Kant forced philosophy to look seriously at the world for the agent
(what Kant calls the phenomenal world) independently of the real world
outside consciousness - the world in itself (the noumenal world).
http://instruct.westvalley.edu/lafave/KANT.HTM
---------------------------------
|
| Show full article (5.46Kb) |
| 66 Comments |
|
|
Date: Dec 29, 2006 17:50
"Immortalist" yahoo.com> writes:
>The philosophy of Immanuel Kant (1724-1804) is sometimes called the
>"Copernican revolution of philosophy" to emphasize its novelty and
>huge importance. Kant synthesized (brought together) rationalism and
>empiricism. After Kant, the old debate between rationalists and
>empiricists ended, and epistemology went in a new direction. After
>Kant, no discussion of reality or knowledge could take place without
>awareness of the role of the human mind in constructing reality and
>knowledge.
Before Kant, epistemology was mostly word games. After Kant, epistemology
was mostly word games.
Before Kant, the real theorizing about knowledge was done by
scientists and mathematicians, not by philosophers. After Kant,
the real theorizing about knowledge was done by scientists and
mathematicians, not by philosophers.
I don't see much of a change.
>Kant revolutionized philosophy. Kant showed that the mind, through its
>innate categories, constructs our experience along certain lines
>(space, time, causality, self, etc.).
|
| Show full article (2.51Kb) |
| 7 Comments |
|
|
Author: mikegordgemikegordge Date: Dec 29, 2006 18:15
Immortalist wrote:
> Kant showed that the mind, through its
> innate categories, constructs our experience along certain lines
> (space, time, causality, self, etc.).
experience of WHAT?
> Thus, thinking and experiencing
> give no access to things as they really are. We can think as hard as we
> like, but we will never escape the innate constraints of our minds.
All of which of course ignores the very simple fact, that, there has to
be something already existing to experience.
The logical order therefore of man's knowledge is
existence
experience (perceive)
identification (without contradiction)
integration without contradiction
=
man's knowledge.
|
| Show full article (1.85Kb) |
| 38 Comments |
|
|
Author: 1Z1Z Date: Dec 30, 2006 04:22
Neil W Rickert wrote:
> "Immortalist" yahoo.com> writes:
>>>The philosophy of Immanuel Kant (1724-1804) is sometimes called the
>>"Copernican revolution of philosophy" to emphasize its novelty and
>>huge importance. Kant synthesized (brought together) rationalism and
>>empiricism. After Kant, the old debate between rationalists and
>>empiricists ended, and epistemology went in a new direction. After
>>Kant, no discussion of reality or knowledge could take place without
>>awareness of the role of the human mind in constructing reality and
>>knowledge.
>
> Before Kant, epistemology was mostly word games. After Kant, epistemology
> was mostly word games.
>
> Before Kant, the real theorizing about knowledge was done by
> scientists and mathematicians, not by philosophers...
|
| Show full article (1.30Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: Jos HorikxJos Horikx Date: Dec 30, 2006 05:40
On 29 Dec 2006 18:15:51 -0800, mikegordge@ xtra.co.nz wrote: >Immortalist wrote:
...
>> Thus, thinking and experiencing
>> give no access to things as they really are. We can think as hard as we
>> like, but we will never escape the innate constraints of our minds.
>All of which of course ignores the very simple fact, that, there has to
>be something already existing to experience.
You reaction has to do with your interpretation of Kant, not with
Kant himself.
...
>existence preceeds experience, indeed it HAS to, there has to be
>somethng to experience to KNOW, to claim ANY and ALL of your knowledge
>about,
|
| Show full article (1.17Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: Randroid TerminatorRandroid Terminator Date: Dec 30, 2006 21:40
> Malrassic Park wrote:
>>> existence preceeds experience, indeed it HAS to, there has to be
>>> somethng to experience to KNOW,
>>
>> Kant agrees with you.
>
> In your dreams.
It is sad to see that Objectivism is still stuck at such a
primitive level of philosophizing. There is far more to be proven,
philosophically speaking, than can be furnished by merely
swinging your arm in a wide circle and declaring, "This exists."
|
| Show full article (2.54Kb) |
| 17 Comments |
|
|
Author: galathaeagalathaea Date: Dec 30, 2006 22:05
Immortalist wrote:
> The philosophy of Immanuel Kant (1724-1804) is sometimes called the
> "Copernican revolution of philosophy" to emphasize its novelty and
> huge importance. Kant synthesized (brought together) rationalism and
> empiricism. After Kant, the old debate between rationalists and
> empiricists ended, and epistemology went in a new direction. After
> Kant, no discussion of reality or knowledge could take place without
> awareness of the role of the human mind in constructing reality and
> knowledge.
>
> Kant revolutionized philosophy. Kant showed that the mind, through its
> innate categories, constructs our experience along certain lines
> (space, time, causality, self, etc.). Thus, thinking and experiencing
> give no access to things as they really are. We can think as hard as we
> like, but we will never escape the innate constraints of our minds.
> Kant forced philosophy to look seriously at the world for the agent
> (what Kant calls the phenomenal world) independently of the real world
> outside consciousness - the world in itself (the noumenal world).
>
> http://instruct.westvalley.edu/lafave/KANT.HTM ...
|
| Show full article (7.67Kb) |
| 13 Comments |
|
|
|
|
|
Author: mikegordgemikegordge Date: Dec 30, 2006 22:44
Randroid Terminator wrote:
> There is far more to be proven,
> philosophically speaking, than can be furnished by merely
> swinging your arm in a wide circle and declaring, "This exists."
Really? Well dont just make statements without substaniating them
Randaphobe, give an example of something you have proved that doesn't
exist.
> Nobody ever questioned the idea that there is existence.
Liar, you did precisely that when you said Rutherford could not sense,
as an existent of matter, the atom that he split.
> And in general, there is no qualitative difference
> between saying "existence is that which exists" and "existence
> is that which is experienced."
Which contradicts your statement that Rutherford could not have
experienced the atom of matter he split.
|
| Show full article (1.84Kb) |
| 16 Comments |
|
|
|
|
