对Tom Rockmore文章《康德哥白尼转向的一些后果》的评论

V. Przhilenskiy
{"title":"对Tom Rockmore文章《康德哥白尼转向的一些后果》的评论","authors":"V. Przhilenskiy","doi":"10.21146/2413-9084-2019-24-1-69-71","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The “remarks” assess the consistency of T. Rockmore’s assertion that Kant’s philosophy creates the possibility of further development of anti-representationalist and constructivist ideas. They criticize the reduction of the turn to the statement that phenomena are only representations, not things-in-themselves. Rockmore’s interpretation of the turn is opposed to a more traditional position whereby I. Kant changed a ratio of theoretical and practical in the hierarchy of knowledge, which caused a “revolutionary” and “turnable” revision of the whole idea of mind, its structure and content.","PeriodicalId":227944,"journal":{"name":"Philosophy of Science and Technology","volume":"118 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comments on the Tom Rockmore’s article “Some consequences of Kant’s Copernican turn”\",\"authors\":\"V. Przhilenskiy\",\"doi\":\"10.21146/2413-9084-2019-24-1-69-71\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The “remarks” assess the consistency of T. Rockmore’s assertion that Kant’s philosophy creates the possibility of further development of anti-representationalist and constructivist ideas. They criticize the reduction of the turn to the statement that phenomena are only representations, not things-in-themselves. Rockmore’s interpretation of the turn is opposed to a more traditional position whereby I. Kant changed a ratio of theoretical and practical in the hierarchy of knowledge, which caused a “revolutionary” and “turnable” revision of the whole idea of mind, its structure and content.\",\"PeriodicalId\":227944,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Philosophy of Science and Technology\",\"volume\":\"118 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1900-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Philosophy of Science and Technology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.21146/2413-9084-2019-24-1-69-71\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Philosophy of Science and Technology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21146/2413-9084-2019-24-1-69-71","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

“评论”评估了T.洛克莫尔关于康德哲学为反表征主义和建构主义思想的进一步发展创造了可能性的主张的一致性。他们批评把这种转向归结为现象只是表象,而不是自在之物的说法。洛克莫尔对这一转变的解释与康德改变知识层次中理论与实践的比例的传统立场相反,康德改变了知识层次中理论与实践的比例,这导致了对整个心智概念及其结构和内容的“革命性的”和“可转向的”修正。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Comments on the Tom Rockmore’s article “Some consequences of Kant’s Copernican turn”
The “remarks” assess the consistency of T. Rockmore’s assertion that Kant’s philosophy creates the possibility of further development of anti-representationalist and constructivist ideas. They criticize the reduction of the turn to the statement that phenomena are only representations, not things-in-themselves. Rockmore’s interpretation of the turn is opposed to a more traditional position whereby I. Kant changed a ratio of theoretical and practical in the hierarchy of knowledge, which caused a “revolutionary” and “turnable” revision of the whole idea of mind, its structure and content.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信