{"title":"Whitehead and Kant at Copenhagen","authors":"Jason Bell, S. Iyengar","doi":"10.3366/edinburgh/9781474461351.003.0012","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Jason Bell and Seshu Iyengar examine Whitehead’s complicated relationship to Kant, of whom he is highly critical in parts of the Harvard lectures, and yet with whom he also shares some common themes, including ‘the limits of both empirical and cognitive investigations, and the role of the subject in generating mechanics’. The chapter argues that while Whitehead called himself anti-Kantian, what he actually rejected was neo-Kantian analytic tendencies, and not Kant himself, who never intended to promote an epistemic prison or to promote subjectivism. In the end, Whitehead’s Harvard lectures ‘represent a harsh rejection of anti-scientific “Kantianism”, but a more careful editorial revision of the scientifically minded Kant, with the addition of new discoveries in science to which Kant did not have access.’","PeriodicalId":324412,"journal":{"name":"Whitehead at Harvard, 1924-1925","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Whitehead at Harvard, 1924-1925","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3366/edinburgh/9781474461351.003.0012","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Jason Bell and Seshu Iyengar examine Whitehead’s complicated relationship to Kant, of whom he is highly critical in parts of the Harvard lectures, and yet with whom he also shares some common themes, including ‘the limits of both empirical and cognitive investigations, and the role of the subject in generating mechanics’. The chapter argues that while Whitehead called himself anti-Kantian, what he actually rejected was neo-Kantian analytic tendencies, and not Kant himself, who never intended to promote an epistemic prison or to promote subjectivism. In the end, Whitehead’s Harvard lectures ‘represent a harsh rejection of anti-scientific “Kantianism”, but a more careful editorial revision of the scientifically minded Kant, with the addition of new discoveries in science to which Kant did not have access.’
Jason Bell和Seshu Iyengar研究了怀特黑德与康德的复杂关系,他在哈佛大学的部分讲座中对康德进行了高度批评,但他也与康德分享了一些共同的主题,包括“经验和认知调查的局限性,以及主体在生成机制中的作用”。本章认为,尽管怀特黑德称自己为反康德主义者,但他实际上反对的是新康德主义的分析倾向,而不是康德本人,康德本人从未打算推广认知监狱或推广主观主义。最后,怀特黑德在哈佛的讲座“代表了对反科学的‘康德主义’的严厉拒绝,但对康德的科学思想进行了更仔细的编辑修订,增加了康德没有接触到的科学新发现。”