伊恩-普罗普斯康德论超验自由(批判的火热考验:第 11-12 章)

IF 1.1 2区 哲学 0 PHILOSOPHY
Allen Wood
{"title":"伊恩-普罗普斯康德论超验自由(批判的火热考验:第 11-12 章)","authors":"Allen Wood","doi":"10.1017/s1369415424000141","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Kant’s position on the problem of free will can be perplexing and frustrating: all the real questions about human agential capacities or even about issues of moral imputability are empirical questions, which have empirical answers. But there remains a metaphysical or transcendental problem about the possibility of freedom, which is forever insoluble. Ian Proops’ discussion in <jats:italic>The Fiery Test of Critique</jats:italic> is to be commended for displaying the rare virtue of appreciating this last point and presenting Kant’s position about it accurately. The only questionable part has to do with the standard terminology – ‘determinism’, ‘libertarianism’, ‘compatibilism’, and ‘incompatibilism’. I argue that it would be better to say, as Kant does, and Proops also does most of the time, that practical freedom, hence transcendental freedom, must be presupposed whenever we act or even judge, but how freedom is possible is both unknowable and even incomprehensible to us.","PeriodicalId":54140,"journal":{"name":"Kantian Review","volume":"50 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Ian Proops: Kant on Transcendental Freedom (The Fiery Test of Critique: Chs. 11–12)\",\"authors\":\"Allen Wood\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/s1369415424000141\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Kant’s position on the problem of free will can be perplexing and frustrating: all the real questions about human agential capacities or even about issues of moral imputability are empirical questions, which have empirical answers. But there remains a metaphysical or transcendental problem about the possibility of freedom, which is forever insoluble. Ian Proops’ discussion in <jats:italic>The Fiery Test of Critique</jats:italic> is to be commended for displaying the rare virtue of appreciating this last point and presenting Kant’s position about it accurately. The only questionable part has to do with the standard terminology – ‘determinism’, ‘libertarianism’, ‘compatibilism’, and ‘incompatibilism’. I argue that it would be better to say, as Kant does, and Proops also does most of the time, that practical freedom, hence transcendental freedom, must be presupposed whenever we act or even judge, but how freedom is possible is both unknowable and even incomprehensible to us.\",\"PeriodicalId\":54140,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Kantian Review\",\"volume\":\"50 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-04-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Kantian Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1017/s1369415424000141\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"PHILOSOPHY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Kantian Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/s1369415424000141","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"PHILOSOPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

康德在自由意志问题上的立场可能会令人困惑和沮丧:所有关于人类行动能力的真正问题,甚至是关于道德可归责性的问题,都是经验问题,都有经验的答案。但关于自由的可能性,仍然存在一个形而上学或超验的问题,这个问题永远无法解决。伊恩-普罗普斯在《批判的火热考验》一书中的论述值得称赞,因为它展现了罕见的美德,即理解了最后这一点,并准确地阐述了康德关于这一点的立场。唯一值得商榷的部分与标准术语有关--"决定论"、"自由主义"、"兼容论 "和 "不兼容论"。我认为,更好的说法是,康德是这样说的,普罗普斯大多数时候也是这样说的,即无论我们何时行动甚至判断,都必须预设实践自由,也就是超验自由,但自由如何可能对我们来说是不可知的,甚至是不可理解的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Ian Proops: Kant on Transcendental Freedom (The Fiery Test of Critique: Chs. 11–12)
Kant’s position on the problem of free will can be perplexing and frustrating: all the real questions about human agential capacities or even about issues of moral imputability are empirical questions, which have empirical answers. But there remains a metaphysical or transcendental problem about the possibility of freedom, which is forever insoluble. Ian Proops’ discussion in The Fiery Test of Critique is to be commended for displaying the rare virtue of appreciating this last point and presenting Kant’s position about it accurately. The only questionable part has to do with the standard terminology – ‘determinism’, ‘libertarianism’, ‘compatibilism’, and ‘incompatibilism’. I argue that it would be better to say, as Kant does, and Proops also does most of the time, that practical freedom, hence transcendental freedom, must be presupposed whenever we act or even judge, but how freedom is possible is both unknowable and even incomprehensible to us.
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
Kantian Review
Kantian Review PHILOSOPHY-
CiteScore
1.00
自引率
20.00%
发文量
63
期刊介绍: The journal aims to publish the best contemporary work on Kant and Kantian issues and places an emphasis on those current philosophical debates which reflect a Kantian influence. Almost all recent Western philosophy makes some reference to the work of Kant, either consciously rejecting or consciously endorsing some aspect of that work. In epistemology, in philosophy of mind and language, in moral and political philosophy, and in aesthetics, such Kantian influences are widely acknowledged and extensively discussed. Kant"s work has also increasingly become a concern for the social and political sciences. The journal strengthens this interest both by establishing interpretations of Kant"s own writing and by discussing the substance of the related current philosophical debates.
×
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