The Transcendental Deduction of Categories as Philosophical Proof

Q2 Arts and Humanities
Elena Ficara
{"title":"The Transcendental Deduction of Categories as Philosophical Proof","authors":"Elena Ficara","doi":"10.5922/0207-6918-2023-3-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"My aim is to reconstruct the basic steps and the fundamental idea of Kant’s transcendental deduction of categories as well as Hegel’s interpretation and reframing of Kant’s idea. Hegel’s reading is crucial for two reasons: first, for fixing the basic form of the Kant­ian argument and secondly, for understanding its metaphilosophical relevance. For Hegel, philosophical proof has a specific nature, which distinguishes it from scientific proof and brings it closer to a juridical one. In this perspective the transcendental deduction, which is universally considered one of the most difficult chapters in the history of philosophy, reveals itself as the genuine clarification of specifically philosophical proof. I first present the idea of Kant’s transcendental deduction in the Critique of Pure Reason as well as its Hegelian reading in the Science of Logic and reformulation as the very method of philosophy in the Philo­sophy of Right. I show what in the Kantian argumentation constituted the basis for Hegel’s own interpretation and transformation. In so doing, I highlight a ‘red thread’ between the two ideas of the transcendental deduction. I conclude by proposing a formal account of Kant’s and Hegel’s ideas and by summing up the main metaphilosophical insights we can gain from Kant’s idea and its Hegelian interpretation.","PeriodicalId":53007,"journal":{"name":"Kantovskii sbornik","volume":"134 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Kantovskii sbornik","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5922/0207-6918-2023-3-4","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

My aim is to reconstruct the basic steps and the fundamental idea of Kant’s transcendental deduction of categories as well as Hegel’s interpretation and reframing of Kant’s idea. Hegel’s reading is crucial for two reasons: first, for fixing the basic form of the Kant­ian argument and secondly, for understanding its metaphilosophical relevance. For Hegel, philosophical proof has a specific nature, which distinguishes it from scientific proof and brings it closer to a juridical one. In this perspective the transcendental deduction, which is universally considered one of the most difficult chapters in the history of philosophy, reveals itself as the genuine clarification of specifically philosophical proof. I first present the idea of Kant’s transcendental deduction in the Critique of Pure Reason as well as its Hegelian reading in the Science of Logic and reformulation as the very method of philosophy in the Philo­sophy of Right. I show what in the Kantian argumentation constituted the basis for Hegel’s own interpretation and transformation. In so doing, I highlight a ‘red thread’ between the two ideas of the transcendental deduction. I conclude by proposing a formal account of Kant’s and Hegel’s ideas and by summing up the main metaphilosophical insights we can gain from Kant’s idea and its Hegelian interpretation.
范畴的先验演绎作为哲学证明
本文的目的是重构康德范畴先验演绎的基本步骤和基本思想,以及黑格尔对康德思想的解释和重构。黑格尔的阅读是至关重要的,有两个原因:首先,为了确定康德论证的基本形式,其次,为了理解其形而上学的相关性。在黑格尔看来,哲学证明具有一种特殊性,这使它区别于科学证明,并使它更接近于法律证明。在这种观点下,普遍认为是哲学史上最困难的一章的先验推演,显示出它本身是对特殊的哲学证明的真正澄清。我首先在《纯粹理性批判》中提出康德的先验演绎思想,以及在《逻辑学》中对其进行黑格尔式解读,并在《法哲学》中将其重新表述为哲学的方法。我展示了康德论证中构成黑格尔自己的解释和转化基础的东西。在这样做时,我强调了先验演绎的两个概念之间的“红线”。最后,我对康德和黑格尔的思想进行了正式的描述,并总结了我们可以从康德的思想及其黑格尔式解释中获得的主要形而上学见解。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Kantovskii sbornik
Kantovskii sbornik Arts and Humanities-Philosophy
CiteScore
0.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
9
审稿时长
18 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信