Why Kant is a Weak Conceptualist.
The question whether Kant is a conceptualist has attracted significant attention of Kant scholars in recent decades. I present all three dominant positions in the debate (strong conceptualism, weak conceptualism, nonconceptualism) and argue that strong conceptualism and nonconceptualism are less pla...
| Publicado en: | Problems / Problemos Vol. 95; pp. 81 - 94 |
|---|---|
| Autor principal: | |
| Formato: | Artículo |
| Publicado: |
Vilnius University
2019
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: | Ver este registro en EBSCOhost |
| fields | @attributes: recordID: 1 pdfLink: plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=hlh&AN=136144518&site=ehost-live header: @attributes: shortDbName: hlh uiTerm: 136144518 longDbName: Humanities International Complete uiTag: AN controlInfo: bkinfo: jinfo: jid: 13921126 3D4C jtl: Problems / Problemos issn: 13921126 maglogo: N pubinfo: dt: 2019 vid: 95 pid: 16037 pub: Vilnius University artinfo: ui: 136144518 10.15388/Problemos.95.7 ppf: 81 ppct: 13 formats: fmt: @attributes: type: P size: 2.5MB tig: atl: Why Kant is a Weak Conceptualist. aug: au: Baranovas, Ruslanas affil: Institute of Philosophy, Vilnius University su: Philosophy Conceptualism Legal judgments Imagination Naturalists sug: subj: Philosophy Conceptualism Legal judgments Imagination Naturalists keyword: antikonceptualizmas categories empirical concepts empirinės sąvokos Kant Kantas kategorijos non-conceptualism silpnasis konceptualizmas stiprusis konceptualizmas weak conceptualism antikonceptualizmas empirinės sąvokos Kantas kategorijos silpnasis konceptualizmas stiprusis konceptualizmas ab: The question whether Kant is a conceptualist has attracted significant attention of Kant scholars in recent decades. I present all three dominant positions in the debate (strong conceptualism, weak conceptualism, nonconceptualism) and argue that strong conceptualism and nonconceptualism are less plausible interpretations of Kant's philosophy. I argue that the first cannot explain Kant's commitments related to the incongruents, animals, and infants. The second one, meanwhile, cannot explain Kant's argument on causation against Hume. At the end of the paper, I try to show that the key to a plausible and convincing interpretation of Kant as a weak conceptualist is the distinction between categories and empirical concepts. Klausimas, ar Kantas yra konceptualistas, yra vienas gausiausiai nagrinėtų Kanto studijų klausimų pastaraisiais dešimtmečiais. Aš pristatau tris šiuose debatuose dominuojančias pozicijas (stiprųjį konceptualizmą, silpnąjį konceptualizmą ir antikonceptualizmą) ir teigiu, kad stiprusis konceptualizmas ir antikonceptualizmas yra mažiau pagrįstos Kanto filosofijos interpretacijos. Teigiu, kad pirmasis negali paaiškinti Kanto įsipareigojimų, susijusių su nekongruentiškais vaizdiniais bei gyvūnais ir kūdikiais, o antrasis - Kanto polemikos prieš Hume'ą. Straipsnio pabaigoje bandau parodyti, kad raktas į įtikinamą Kanto kaip silpnojo konceptualisto interpretaciją yra perskyra tarp kategorijų ir empirinių sąvokų. pubtype: Academic Journal doctype: Article src: R language: English refInfo: copyright: @attributes: flag: Y custom: Copyright of Problems / Problemos is the property of Vilnius University and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. item: Problems / Problemos holder: Vilnius University dt: @attributes: year: 2019 holdings: @attributes: islocal: N |
|---|