Phil – 10 into to philosophy lecture 13 - kant


Published on

  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Phil – 10 into to philosophy lecture 13 - kant

  1. 1. Phil 10 – Introduction to Philosophy Kant
  2. 2. Mid-term• As stated on the syllabus you will be able to correct your own exam for ½ credit.• Instead of one or two sentences I expect a paragraph typed for each question.• Turned in NO LATER than Tuesday October16th. That’s 5 days!
  3. 3. Mid-term questions• What is the structure of the republic that Plato suggests in The Republic? – Merchant class, warrior/soldier class, Philosopher Kings• What is the problem with his proof for the existence of God? – We can clearly and distinctly thing which do not exist. Example: Perfect Circles, irrational numbers etc….• The Greeks became critical of myth as explanation, why and how is this related to the idea of “the Truth”? What kind of explanation did they want instead of myth? – They wanted Naturalistic explanations
  4. 4. Extra Credit• Philosophy Center (sign in and shoot me an email letting me know) – Location: FOB 231 Hours: T-W 11-4• Presentations – Shoot me an email letting me know your interested – 2-5 min• To Kill a Mocking Bird – bring a ticket stub – Wednesday 7 – Thursday 7 – Friday 7 – Saturday 7 – Give a free-form response to the play – 1 page • Have you encountered racism? • Do you think racism still exist? • Even if “race” does not exist scientifically, does the societal conception of it still effect society?
  5. 5. • Rationalism• Empiricism• Immanuel Kant (1724–1804)
  6. 6. • Was a follower of Liebniz• Read Hume and was “woken from his dogmatic slumber”• Categories – the mind structures reality.• =Z8jAs0utwxo
  7. 7. Immanuel Kant (1724–1804)• He synthesized early modern rationalism and empiricism and addressed the crisis of the enlightenment.• The Critique of Pure Reason (1781, 1787)• The Critique of Practical Reason (1788)• The Critique of the Power of Judgment (1790)
  8. 8. Kant’s Epistemology• He argues that the human understanding is the source of the general laws of nature that structure all our experience• Human reason gives itself the moral law, which is our basis for belief in God, freedom, and immortality.
  9. 9. Kant’s Epistemology• Scientific knowledge, morality, and religious belief are mutually consistent and secure because they all rest on the same foundation of human autonomy
  10. 10. Kant’s Epistemology• Human autonomy is also the final end of nature according to the teleological worldview of reflecting judgment that Kant introduces to unify the theoretical and practical parts of his philosophical system.
  11. 11. Kant’s Epistemology• The Critique of Pure Reason• Kant defines metaphysics in terms of “the cognitions after which reason might strive independently of all experience,” and his goal in the book is to reach a “decision about the possibility or impossibility of a metaphysics in general, and the determination of its sources, as well as its extent and boundaries, all, however, from principles” (Axii. See also Bxiv; and 4:255– 257).
  12. 12. Kant’s Epistemology• Kant wrote the Critique toward the end of the Enlightenment, which was then in a state of crisis.• Enlightenment (Newton) was optimistic about reason• traditional authorities were increasingly questioned• =MKXszzCp2_U
  13. 13. Kant’s Epistemology• For why should we need political or religious authorities to tell us how to live or what to believe, if each of us has the capacity to figure these things out for ourselves?
  14. 14. Kant’s Epistemology• . The Enlightenment commitment to the sovereignty of reason was tied to the expectation that it would not lead to any of these consequences but instead would support certain key beliefs that tradition had always sanctioned.
  15. 15. Kant’s Epistemology• Physics (Newton) taken as ideal• Determinism• If nature is entirely governed by mechanistic, causal laws, then it may seem that there is no room for freedom, a soul, or anything but matter in motion. This threatened the traditional view that morality requires freedom.
  16. 16. Kant’s Epistemology• Threatened to undermine traditional moral and religious beliefs that free rational thought was expected to support.• This was the main intellectual crisis of the Enlightenment.
  17. 17. Kant’s Epistemology• The Critique of Pure Reason is Kants response to this crisis.
  18. 18. Kant’s Epistemology• Kant’s Main Goal:• To show that a critique of reason by reason itself, unaided and unrestrained by traditional authorities, establishes a secure and consistent basis for both Newtonian science and traditional morality and religion.• In other words, free rational inquiry adequately supports all of these essential human interests and shows them to be mutually consistent. So reason deserves the sovereignty attributed to it by the Enlightenment.
  19. 19. Kant’s Epistemology• Phenomena vs Noumina• noumenon, plural Noumena: the thing- in-itself (das Ding an sich) as opposed to what Kant called the phenomenon—the thing as it appears to an observer.• =Sz6qunm6q30
  20. 20. Kant’s Epistemology• Kant now recognizes the Power of reason as well as its Limitations• A Priori• A Posteriori• Analytic• Synthetic
  21. 21. Kant’s Epistemology• “Analytic” sentences, such as “Ophthalmologists are doctors,” are those whose truth seems to be knowable by knowing the meanings of the constituent words alone. “all bachelors are unmarried men”
  22. 22. Kant’s Epistemology• “synthetic” ones, such as “Ophthalmologists are ill-humored,” whose truth is knowable by both knowing the meaning of the words and something about the world.
  23. 23. Kant’s Epistemology• A priori knowledge is knowledge that rests on a priori justification. A priori justification is a type of epistemic justification that is, in some sense, independent of experience.
  24. 24. Kant’s Epistemology• a posteriori knowledge or justification is dependent on experience or empirical evidence (for example "Some bachelors are very happy"). A posteriori justification makes reference to experience; but the issue concerns how one knows the proposition or claim in question—what justifies or grounds ones belief in it.
  25. 25. Kant’s Epistemology• Our mind has categories• Examples: space, time (forms of intuition), relation, cause and effect• These categories constrain our experience• Thus we experience Phenomena (constrained experience) rather than Noumena (thing-in-itself).• We constitute the objects of experience
  26. 26. Kant’s Epistemology• Kant’s idealism: “The view that the world is constituted by our ideas” was a radical view of knowledge.• =7M-cmNdiFuI
  27. 27. Kant’s Deontology• Kants morality• The word deontology derives from the Greek words for duty (deon) and science (or study) of (logos).
  28. 28. Kant’s Deontology• =79hOZdh4PkQ• stand in opposition to consequentialists.
  29. 29. Kant’s Deontology• deontology falls within the domain of moral theories that guide and assess our choices of what we ought to do (deontic theories), in contrast to (aretaic [virtue] theories) that — fundamentally, at least — guide and assess what kind of person (in terms of character traits) we are and should be.
  30. 30. Kant’s Deontology• Consequentialists hold that choices — acts and/or intentions — are to be morally assessed solely by the states of affairs they bring about.
  31. 31. Kant’s Deontology• However much consequentialists differ about what the Good consists in, they all agree that the morally right choices are those that increase the Good. Moreover, consequentialists generally agree that the Good is “agent-neutral.”
  32. 32. Kant’s Deontology• Consequentialism -criticized for what it seemingly permits and requires. It seemingly may demand (and thus, of course, permit) that innocents be killed, beaten, lied to, or deprived of material goods to produce greater benefits for others.
  33. 33. Kant’s Deontology• Consequences — and only consequences — can conceivably justify any kind of act, no matter how harmful it is to some.
  34. 34. Kant’s Deontology• deontological theories judge the morality of choices by criteria different than the states of affairs those choices bring about. Roughly speaking, deontologists of all stripes hold that some choices cannot be justified by their effects — that no matter how morally good their consequences, some choices are morally forbidden.
  35. 35. Kant’s Deontology• For deontologists, what makes a choice right is its conformity with a moral norm.
  36. 36. Kant’s Deontology• The way in which Kant organizes his argument is supposed to lead any rational being towards the Categorical Imperative. He does this through a series of steps; from good will to duty, duty to law, and finally from law to universal law
  37. 37. Kant’s Deontology• Good Will: essential to the Kantian framework - is good without qualification. For example understanding, happiness, and moderation can in some lights look to be intrinsically good, yet we find that if there is an ‘ill will’ involved, then they can be turned into negatives
  38. 38. Kant’s Deontology• Duty: . Good will is always enticed to come away from its duty by physical pleasures or a vast number of other temptations
  39. 39. Kant’s Deontology• Good will• Duty• Law: “The third proposition, which follow from the other two, can be expressed thus: Duty is the necessity of an action done out of respect from the law” (Kant 13).
  40. 40. Kant’s Deontology• “Since I have deprived the will of every impulse that might arise for it from obeying any particular law, there is nothing left to serve the will as principle except the universal conformity of its actions to law as such” (14).• The above paragraph outlines the path that Kant believes will lead every rational man to Universal Law which is the basis for his Categorical Imperative.
  41. 41. Categorical Imperative• The Categorical Imperative has three main formulations and two sub-formulations.• the Formula of Universal Law – Formula for the Law of Nature• the Formulation of Humanity• Formula of Autonomy – Formulation of the Kingdom of Ends
  42. 42. Categorical Imperative• the Formula of Universal Law which states: “act only according to that maxim whereby you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law” (Kant 30).
  43. 43. Categorical Imperative• the Formula for the Law of Nature, which goes thusly: “act as if the maxim of your actions were to become through your will a universal law of nature” (Kant 30).
  44. 44. Categorical Imperative• Formulation of Humanity is: “Act in such a way that you treat humanity, whether in your own person or in the person of another, always at the same time as an end and never simply as a means” (Kant 36).
  45. 45. Categorical Imperative• Formula of Autonomy and states: “The idea of the will of every rational being as a will that legislates universal law. According to this principle all maxims are rejected which are not consistent with the will’s own legislation of universal law” (Kant 38).
  46. 46. Categorical Imperative• Formulation of the Kingdom of Ends which says: “Every being must so act as if he were through his maxim always a legislating member in the universal kingdom of ends” (Kant 43).
  47. 47. Terms to know (see last lecture also)• A priori • Categorical imperative• A posteriori • Formula of Universal Law• Analytic• Synthetic • Formula for the Law of• Deontology Nature • Formulation of Humanity• Consequentialism• • Formula of Autonomy Phenomena• • Formulation of the Noumenon Kingdom of Ends
  48. 48. Summery• xwOCmJevigw