انسداد معرفتی در نظریه معرفتی کانت (مقاله علمی وزارت علوم)
درجه علمی: نشریه علمی (وزارت علوم)
آرشیو
چکیده
از زمان یونان باستان تاکنون مساله معرفت یکی از دغدغه های محوری در فلسفه محسوب می شود. در عصر مدرن نیز این دغدغه با تاکید بیشتری مورد توجه قرار گرفته است. از جمله فیلسوفان مهم در عصر مدرن کانت است که با اراِئه نظام معرفتی خود در کنار عقل گرایی و تجربه گرایی رایج در عصر جدید تلاش نمود تا امکان تحصیل معرفت را نشان بدهد. هدف مقاله حاضر تلاش برای نشان دادن این مساله است که آیا نظام معرفتی کانت در دفاع و بیان امکان تحصیل معرفت چه اندازه موفق بوده است. نویسنده با تکیه بر آراء کانت بویژه اثر مهم او "نقد عقل محض" استدلال خواهد نمود که نظام معرفتی کانت علی رغم نشان دادن امکان دستیابی معرفت به نحوی دچار نوعی انسداد معرفتی و شکاکیت به معنای خاص شده است. به نظر می آید انقلاب کوپرنیکی کانت که در آن رابطه ذهن و عین به طرز متفاوتی نسبت به گذشتگان بیان می شود و نیز مطرح نمودن عالم نومن و فنومن سبب می شود تا نظام معرفتی کانت به نوعی به بن بست و شکاکیت معرفتی دچار شود.Epistemological deadlock in Kantian epistemological view
IntroductionImmanuel Kant (1724-1804) is one of the philosophers of the modern era, who expressed his dissatisfaction with the school of rationalism and the school of empiricism and started to present an epistemological system in which the possibility of knowledge is displayed. The importance of Kant in the history of Western philosophy could not ignored by anyone, and with his appearance, Western philosophy is at a turning point, so that in examining the opinions of philosophers, we can talk about the term philosophers before Kant and after Kant. Kant spent all his efforts to measure reason in the scale of critical method and define the boundaries of human knowledge. As a philosopher of the modern age, Kant inherited an epistemological tradition that, on the one hand, Cartesian rationalism introduced reason as the source of knowledge, and on the other hand, John Locke and Hume introduced experience as the source of knowledge. The common point of this tradition was the emphasis on the possibility of acquiring knowledge. But in his epistemological system, Kant acted in such a way that the contribution of reason and experience was considered in the acquisition of knowledge. The common point of the mentioned philosophers is the possibility of acquiring knowledge objectively. Kant is a philosopher who seeks to show the possibility of knowledge in the framework of the intellectual principles of the modern age. His epistemological concern, like other epistemologists of the modern age, which is similar to the intellectual principles of the predecessors, especially Plato and Aristotle, is to achieve the truth. Emphasizing on the truth in an epistemological project on the one hand and adopting the theory of correspondence in the traditional interpretation about the nature of truth on the other hand can be a significant challenge for any epistemological theory that leads to a result outside this framework, and this point is a challenge that should not be neglected in judging and evaluating Kant's epistemological project.MethodThe research method to examine and answer the main research problem is descriptive and analytical, and the authors use a critical approach to answer. To deal this task, the research is based on Kant`s works in particular is based on the Critique of Pure Reason.FindingsBased on the presented discussions and insisting on some important components of Kant's epistemic system, the findings of the research are revealed. The findings of the research show that the epistemological concern that emphasizes truth and seeking the possibility of acquiring knowledge on the basis of the correspondence theory, cannot present an epistemological theory based on which the human intellect cannot access the truth per se.Discussions and the ResultsKant's epistemological theory is actually a point of view that is in the middle of the point of view of Descartes and John Locke. Because he accepts this part of Descartes' view regarding the intrinsic value of some concepts and John Locke's and Hume's view regarding the empirical nature of all concepts. (Kant, 1997, p. 33)One of the important aspects that is one of the components of Kant's epistemic system and by relying on it, one can infer cognitive deadlock from it in such a way that despite Kant's effort to display the possibility of knowledge, he suffers some kind of epistemic deadlock is the reflection on his theory of mind and its function.The meaning of Kant's Copernican revolution lies in the fact that until Kant's time it was the object that imposed itself on the mind, but in Kant's epistemic system it is the mind that imposes its structure on the object. (Kant, 1881, 374) It is with this revolution that Kant searches for the laws governing things not outside but in man himself.According to him, in metaphysics, the relationship between object and the mind is not according to the opinion of the ancients. According to the old method, the mind reflected the object like a mirror, but Kant changed this perception. (ibid., p. 375) One of the main axes based on which a kind of cognitive blockage can be deduced from Kant's epistemic system is this component in his epistemological theory. If the mind has the ability to impose itself structurally on the object, then how can one claim knowledge. Especially since Kant considers the result of understanding in his epistemic system to be the achievement of the world of phenomena, and considers the world of noumenon to be beyond the reach of understanding.The noteworthy point is that, although Kant tried his best to solve the main epistemological challenge and show knowledge as possible, his theory itself fuels epistemological problems and suffers a kind of epistemological deadlock. Because human reason is suffering regarding what is going on outside the mind, and this is Kant's epistemic impasse.As a result, Kant's epistemological theory unwittingly leads to a cognitive impasse that he tried to get rid of. Because the central separation in his epistemological system (phenomenon and phenomenon) and the lack of access of reason to the world of truth per se and the impact and influences of understanding on sensory data cannot have any other result than this.
تبلیغات
