“Creer” y “saber”: un debate entre Kant, Jacobi y Hegel

Q3 Arts and Humanities
Marcela Vélez León
{"title":"“Creer” y “saber”: un debate entre Kant, Jacobi y Hegel","authors":"Marcela Vélez León","doi":"10.5281/ZENODO.4071915","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The aim of this article is to analyse the \"debate\" between the positions of Kant, Jacobi and Hegel in relation to the notions of \"belief\" and “knowledge\". In this way, through detailed study of the critical exposition of the \"attitude\" ( Stellung ) of thought before the so-called \"immediate knowledge\" —within The three attitudes of thought with respect to objectivity — that Hegel offers us in the “Preliminary Concept” in the \"Science of Logic\" of his Encyclopedia ( Enz.-Vorbegriff zur Logik , §§ 19-78) we will be able to, not only analyse the distance that separates him from Kant with regard to the possible modes of relationship between the subjective \"to take as true\" ( Furwahrhalten ) a judgment and the conviction regarding it ( Meinen, Glauben, Wissen ), but also to appreciate Hegel's critique of Jacobi's confession of faith (confession made from Kant —antinomies— and against Kant —Spinoza—, with a view to surpassing, in short, the Kantian \"rational faith\"), thus clearing up, in the last instance, the importance that the role of mediation has as an essential element in Hegelian philosophy.","PeriodicalId":37926,"journal":{"name":"Philosophical Readings","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-10-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Philosophical Readings","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5281/ZENODO.4071915","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The aim of this article is to analyse the "debate" between the positions of Kant, Jacobi and Hegel in relation to the notions of "belief" and “knowledge". In this way, through detailed study of the critical exposition of the "attitude" ( Stellung ) of thought before the so-called "immediate knowledge" —within The three attitudes of thought with respect to objectivity — that Hegel offers us in the “Preliminary Concept” in the "Science of Logic" of his Encyclopedia ( Enz.-Vorbegriff zur Logik , §§ 19-78) we will be able to, not only analyse the distance that separates him from Kant with regard to the possible modes of relationship between the subjective "to take as true" ( Furwahrhalten ) a judgment and the conviction regarding it ( Meinen, Glauben, Wissen ), but also to appreciate Hegel's critique of Jacobi's confession of faith (confession made from Kant —antinomies— and against Kant —Spinoza—, with a view to surpassing, in short, the Kantian "rational faith"), thus clearing up, in the last instance, the importance that the role of mediation has as an essential element in Hegelian philosophy.
“相信”与“知道”:康德、雅各比与黑格尔的一场辩论
本文旨在分析康德立场之间的“争论”,雅各比和黑格尔关于“信仰”和“知识”的概念。这样,通过详细研究黑格尔在其百科全书《逻辑科学》中的“初步概念”中对所谓“直接知识”之前的思想“态度”(Stellong)——在关于客观性的思想的三种态度中——的批判性阐述(Enz.-Vorbegriff zur Logik,§§19-78)我们不仅能够分析他与康德之间的距离,以及主观“视为真实”(Furwahrhalten)的判断与定罪之间的可能关系模式(Meinen,Glauben,Wissen),但也要欣赏黑格尔对雅各比信仰忏悔的批判(从康德——矛盾论——和反对康德——斯宾诺莎的忏悔——以期超越,简而言之,康德的“理性信仰”),从而在最后一个例子中澄清了中介作为黑格尔哲学中一个基本要素的重要性。
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
Philosophical Readings
Philosophical Readings Arts and Humanities-Philosophy
CiteScore
0.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
9
审稿时长
14 weeks
期刊介绍: Philosophical Readings, a four-monthly journal, ISSN 2036-4989, features articles, discussions, translations, reviews, and bibliographical information on all philosophical disciplines. Philosophical Readings is a Open Access journal devoted to the promotion of competent and definitive contributions to philosophical knowledge. Not associated with any school or group, not the organ of any association or institution, it is interested in persistent and resolute inquiries into root questions, regardless of the writer’s affiliation. The journal welcomes also works that fall into various disciplines: religion, history, literature, law, political science, computer scnfoience, economics, and empirical sciences that deal with philosophical problems. Philosophical Readings uses a policy of blind review by at least two consultants to evaluate articles accepted for serious consideration. Philosophical Readings promotes special issues on particular topics of special relevance in the philosophical debates. Philosophical Readings occasionally has opportunities for Guest Editors for special issues of the journal. Anyone who has an idea for a special issue and would like that idea to be considered, should contact the Executive editor. Philosophical Readings publishes at least 9 original researches in a calendar year.
×
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