康德时间论II:纯粹理性批判的证据法则

IF 0.9 3区 哲学 0 PHILOSOPHY
D. Hyder
{"title":"康德时间论II:纯粹理性批判的证据法则","authors":"D. Hyder","doi":"10.1515/kant-2022-2028","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Dieter Henrich’s “Notion of a Deduction” (1989) opened up approaches to both Deductions in terms of legal as opposed to syllogistic reasoning. Since the KrV is shot through with juridical metaphors and analogies, many points of connection suggest themselves. In this paper, I extend and modify Henrich’s approach, in order to extract a particular logic of evidence. I argue that the three syntheses of the A-Deduction correspond to parts of a deductive procedure, and that their names have been chosen to indicate this connection to the reader. Nonetheless, the principal aim of the paper is not to develop and defend these historiographical claims, but to explicate the structure of the logic of evidence in question and link it to Kant’s intended refutation of Hume. Since the procedures Kant describes are part of the law of evidence of many nations and are equally well at work in contemporary information-theory, a precise reconstruction can map directly onto contemporary problems in philosophy, physics, and informatics, without any loss of historical accuracy.","PeriodicalId":45952,"journal":{"name":"KANT-STUDIEN","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Kant on Time II: The Law of Evidence of the Critique of Pure Reason\",\"authors\":\"D. Hyder\",\"doi\":\"10.1515/kant-2022-2028\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract Dieter Henrich’s “Notion of a Deduction” (1989) opened up approaches to both Deductions in terms of legal as opposed to syllogistic reasoning. Since the KrV is shot through with juridical metaphors and analogies, many points of connection suggest themselves. In this paper, I extend and modify Henrich’s approach, in order to extract a particular logic of evidence. I argue that the three syntheses of the A-Deduction correspond to parts of a deductive procedure, and that their names have been chosen to indicate this connection to the reader. Nonetheless, the principal aim of the paper is not to develop and defend these historiographical claims, but to explicate the structure of the logic of evidence in question and link it to Kant’s intended refutation of Hume. Since the procedures Kant describes are part of the law of evidence of many nations and are equally well at work in contemporary information-theory, a precise reconstruction can map directly onto contemporary problems in philosophy, physics, and informatics, without any loss of historical accuracy.\",\"PeriodicalId\":45952,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"KANT-STUDIEN\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-09-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"KANT-STUDIEN\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1515/kant-2022-2028\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"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":"KANT-STUDIEN","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/kant-2022-2028","RegionNum":3,"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

迪特尔·亨利希的《演绎的概念》(1989)从法律的角度出发,开辟了与三段论推理相反的两种演绎方法。由于《KrV》充满了法律上的隐喻和类比,因此许多连接点都暗示了自己。在本文中,我扩展和修改了Henrich的方法,以提取一个特定的证据逻辑。我认为,a -演绎的三个综合对应于演绎过程的各个部分,选择它们的名称是为了向读者表明这种联系。尽管如此,本文的主要目的不是要发展和捍卫这些史学的主张,而是要解释所讨论的证据逻辑的结构,并将其与康德对休谟的反驳联系起来。由于康德所描述的程序是许多国家证据法的一部分,并且在当代信息论中同样发挥着很好的作用,因此精确的重建可以直接映射到哲学、物理学和信息学中的当代问题,而不会失去任何历史准确性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Kant on Time II: The Law of Evidence of the Critique of Pure Reason
Abstract Dieter Henrich’s “Notion of a Deduction” (1989) opened up approaches to both Deductions in terms of legal as opposed to syllogistic reasoning. Since the KrV is shot through with juridical metaphors and analogies, many points of connection suggest themselves. In this paper, I extend and modify Henrich’s approach, in order to extract a particular logic of evidence. I argue that the three syntheses of the A-Deduction correspond to parts of a deductive procedure, and that their names have been chosen to indicate this connection to the reader. Nonetheless, the principal aim of the paper is not to develop and defend these historiographical claims, but to explicate the structure of the logic of evidence in question and link it to Kant’s intended refutation of Hume. Since the procedures Kant describes are part of the law of evidence of many nations and are equally well at work in contemporary information-theory, a precise reconstruction can map directly onto contemporary problems in philosophy, physics, and informatics, without any loss of historical accuracy.
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
KANT-STUDIEN
KANT-STUDIEN PHILOSOPHY-
CiteScore
0.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
44
期刊介绍: Publications in the Kant-Studien have a dual focus: firstly contributions to the interpretation, history and editorial questions of Kant"s philosophy, and secondly systematic debates on transcendental philosophy. In addition, there are investigations on Kant"s precursors and on the effects of his philosophy. The journal also contains a documentation section, in which the current state of research is indicated by means of a continually updated bibliography with reviews and references.
×
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