Kant: Rationalism VS Empiricism

This is our Philosophy project about Immanuel Kant. Enjoy(:

Category:

Education

Tags:

• kant
• empiricism
• rationalism
• philosophy
• sexy
• obama
• germany
• hippie
• funny
• constanza
• amaparan
• smile
• face
• smoke
• peace
• reason
• choose
• goal
• gay
• dance
• science
• video
• music
• akon
• fashion
• wig
• food
• immanuel
• dog
• hot

[tyz228]

part2: kant's epistemology consists basically of the entire analytic part of the Critique of Pure Reason. If you take hume's position to it's logical conclusion, all you know is the momentary content of your own consciousness. This isn't theory of knowing, it's the destruction of knowledge. Hume had his own purpose: he wanted to be the "Newton of the mind", explaining mental goings on the way Newton explained physical goings on. Kant, on one view, realized how inadequate Hume's story was..

[tyz228]

Part 1: kant raises questions he thinks hume lacks resources to answer. as in...ok, david, you say we have NO idea that does not come from an antecedent impression, and all ideas are faded, less lively copies of impressions. Where do we get the idea of space from? Or time? Try to imagine a being with no sense of space or trying to abstract them by copying them from particular impressions. How would it experience an object as distinct from itself? How would it represent a succession of objects?

[ChaneyBrinkmanBurlin]

For what it's worth, the fact that quantum mechanics overthrows certain principles of Newtonian physics suggests that Hume actually obliterates Kant.

[ChaneyBrinkmanBurlin]

Also, an *epistemology* cannot be a learned process. That doesn't even make sense. An epistemology is a theory, not a process. I assume you meant to say that Hume thinks that we can only come to know something through experience. This is actually completely inaccurate, but it's not necessary to go into that. Kant is normally taken to have responded to Hume in the Second Analogy. But there Kant simply presupposes the transcendental idealism of the Transcendental Aesthetic. Some "response."

[ChaneyBrinkmanBurlin]

@dkurmanov, you're entirely incorrect. Kant doesn't even *have* an epistemology. He doesn't offer a theory of the necessary and sufficient conditions for a particular belief to be an instance of knowledge. He is interested only in the general conditions which make knowledge, experience, cognition, etc. possible *at all.* Hume, on my reading of him, does have an epistemology. Kant hardly obliterates it. He doesn't even address it.

[dkurmanov]

@ChaneyBrinkmanBurlin His specific epistemology would be my defense. Although I am a great fan of Hume's Discourse on Natural Religion...his epistemology is more of a learned process rather than natural observation. Kant obliterated Hume's epistemology.

[ChaneyBrinkmanBurlin]

Hume! Where is your defense?!

[tenseman08]

Kant is sooooooooooo gay

[jsh0Xx1]

So Immanuel Kant was gay?

[mashinebenz]

Hhahahahah ... seriously this is brilliant.