The question of the possibility of freedom in the critique of pure reason: an interpretation of B 560 and B 586
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2013 |
Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
Idioma: | por |
Título da fonte: | Argumentos : Revista de Filosofia (Online) |
Texto Completo: | http://periodicos.ufc.br/argumentos/article/view/19035 |
Resumo: | It is undeniable that the passages B 560 and B 586 from The Critique of Pure Reason are apparently paradoxical. That is because, although Kant has affirmed there being a possibility of freedom on the solution of the third antinomy (B560), in apparent contradiction to this result, he claims, on a passage from the ninth section of the second chapter in the second book of Transcendental Dialect, not even having had the problem of demonstrating the possibility of that concept. This problem, correlated to the difficulty of making those passages compatible is the motive for the engendering of this paper. Therefore, this work aims to explain why the passages mentioned above are not contradictory. They are not, so far the meaning of the term ‘possibility’ employed on the passages is ambiguous, that is, it conveys more than one meaning. Distinguishing the meaning of the concepts of logic and real possibility present in these two passages, one can not only solve this problem, but enable a systemic harmony between the first and its second major criticism that would present the analysis of the same rationality, but in its practical that the possibility of freedom was dependent. |
id |
UFC-17_159cb2a740779296d9dbc449849e6b27 |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:periodicos.ufc:article/19035 |
network_acronym_str |
UFC-17 |
network_name_str |
Argumentos : Revista de Filosofia (Online) |
repository_id_str |
|
spelling |
The question of the possibility of freedom in the critique of pure reason: an interpretation of B 560 and B 586A questão da possibilidade da liberdade na crítica da razão pura: uma interpretação de B560 e B586Transcendental Freedom. Logical possibility. Real possibility. Third Antinomy.Liberdade Transcendental. Possibilidade lógica. Possibilidade real. Terceira antinomia.It is undeniable that the passages B 560 and B 586 from The Critique of Pure Reason are apparently paradoxical. That is because, although Kant has affirmed there being a possibility of freedom on the solution of the third antinomy (B560), in apparent contradiction to this result, he claims, on a passage from the ninth section of the second chapter in the second book of Transcendental Dialect, not even having had the problem of demonstrating the possibility of that concept. This problem, correlated to the difficulty of making those passages compatible is the motive for the engendering of this paper. Therefore, this work aims to explain why the passages mentioned above are not contradictory. They are not, so far the meaning of the term ‘possibility’ employed on the passages is ambiguous, that is, it conveys more than one meaning. Distinguishing the meaning of the concepts of logic and real possibility present in these two passages, one can not only solve this problem, but enable a systemic harmony between the first and its second major criticism that would present the analysis of the same rationality, but in its practical that the possibility of freedom was dependent.É inegável que as passagens B 560 e B 586 da Crítica da Razão Pura sejam aparentemente paradoxais. Isso porque, embora Kant tenha afirmado haver uma possibilidade da liberdade na solução da terceira antinomia (B 560), de forma aparentemente contraditória a esse resultado, alega, numa passagem da nona seção do segundo capítulo do segundo livro da dialética transcendental, sequer ter tido o problema de demonstrar a possibilidade daquele conceito (B 586). Esse problema, correlato à dificuldade de compatibilizarem-se aquelas passagens, é a causa motriz do engendramento deste artigo. Logo, por meio dele, busca-se explicar por que razão tais passagens não são contraditórias. Não o são, porque a acepção do termo “possibilidade” nelas empregadas é ambígua, ou seja, possui mais de um significado. Distinguindo o significado dos conceitos de possibilidade lógica e real presentes nessas duas passagens, pode-se resolver não apenas tal problemática, mas possibilitar uma harmonia sistêmica entre a primeira e a sua segunda grande Crítica em que iria apresentar a análise da mesma racionalidade, mas em seu prático de que da possibilidade da liberdade era dependente.Universidade Federal do Ceará2013-07-01info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionapplication/pdfhttp://periodicos.ufc.br/argumentos/article/view/19035Argumentos - Revista de Filosofia; No 10Argumentos - Periódico de Filosofia; Núm. 10Argumentos - Revista de Filosofia; n. 101984-42551984-4247reponame:Argumentos : Revista de Filosofia (Online)instname:Universidade Federal do Ceará (UFC)instacron:UFCporhttp://periodicos.ufc.br/argumentos/article/view/19035/29754Copyright (c) 2017 Argumentosinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessFagherazzi, Onorato Jonas2021-07-23T21:45:12Zoai:periodicos.ufc:article/19035Revistahttp://www.filosofia.ufc.br/argumentosPUBhttp://periodicos.ufc.br/argumentos/oaiargumentos@ufc.br||1984-42551984-4247opendoar:2021-07-23T21:45:12Argumentos : Revista de Filosofia (Online) - Universidade Federal do Ceará (UFC)false |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
The question of the possibility of freedom in the critique of pure reason: an interpretation of B 560 and B 586 A questão da possibilidade da liberdade na crítica da razão pura: uma interpretação de B560 e B586 |
title |
The question of the possibility of freedom in the critique of pure reason: an interpretation of B 560 and B 586 |
spellingShingle |
The question of the possibility of freedom in the critique of pure reason: an interpretation of B 560 and B 586 Fagherazzi, Onorato Jonas Transcendental Freedom. Logical possibility. Real possibility. Third Antinomy. Liberdade Transcendental. Possibilidade lógica. Possibilidade real. Terceira antinomia. |
title_short |
The question of the possibility of freedom in the critique of pure reason: an interpretation of B 560 and B 586 |
title_full |
The question of the possibility of freedom in the critique of pure reason: an interpretation of B 560 and B 586 |
title_fullStr |
The question of the possibility of freedom in the critique of pure reason: an interpretation of B 560 and B 586 |
title_full_unstemmed |
The question of the possibility of freedom in the critique of pure reason: an interpretation of B 560 and B 586 |
title_sort |
The question of the possibility of freedom in the critique of pure reason: an interpretation of B 560 and B 586 |
author |
Fagherazzi, Onorato Jonas |
author_facet |
Fagherazzi, Onorato Jonas |
author_role |
author |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Fagherazzi, Onorato Jonas |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
Transcendental Freedom. Logical possibility. Real possibility. Third Antinomy. Liberdade Transcendental. Possibilidade lógica. Possibilidade real. Terceira antinomia. |
topic |
Transcendental Freedom. Logical possibility. Real possibility. Third Antinomy. Liberdade Transcendental. Possibilidade lógica. Possibilidade real. Terceira antinomia. |
description |
It is undeniable that the passages B 560 and B 586 from The Critique of Pure Reason are apparently paradoxical. That is because, although Kant has affirmed there being a possibility of freedom on the solution of the third antinomy (B560), in apparent contradiction to this result, he claims, on a passage from the ninth section of the second chapter in the second book of Transcendental Dialect, not even having had the problem of demonstrating the possibility of that concept. This problem, correlated to the difficulty of making those passages compatible is the motive for the engendering of this paper. Therefore, this work aims to explain why the passages mentioned above are not contradictory. They are not, so far the meaning of the term ‘possibility’ employed on the passages is ambiguous, that is, it conveys more than one meaning. Distinguishing the meaning of the concepts of logic and real possibility present in these two passages, one can not only solve this problem, but enable a systemic harmony between the first and its second major criticism that would present the analysis of the same rationality, but in its practical that the possibility of freedom was dependent. |
publishDate |
2013 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2013-07-01 |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
http://periodicos.ufc.br/argumentos/article/view/19035 |
url |
http://periodicos.ufc.br/argumentos/article/view/19035 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
por |
language |
por |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
http://periodicos.ufc.br/argumentos/article/view/19035/29754 |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
Copyright (c) 2017 Argumentos info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
rights_invalid_str_mv |
Copyright (c) 2017 Argumentos |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
application/pdf |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Universidade Federal do Ceará |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Universidade Federal do Ceará |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
Argumentos - Revista de Filosofia; No 10 Argumentos - Periódico de Filosofia; Núm. 10 Argumentos - Revista de Filosofia; n. 10 1984-4255 1984-4247 reponame:Argumentos : Revista de Filosofia (Online) instname:Universidade Federal do Ceará (UFC) instacron:UFC |
instname_str |
Universidade Federal do Ceará (UFC) |
instacron_str |
UFC |
institution |
UFC |
reponame_str |
Argumentos : Revista de Filosofia (Online) |
collection |
Argumentos : Revista de Filosofia (Online) |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Argumentos : Revista de Filosofia (Online) - Universidade Federal do Ceará (UFC) |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
argumentos@ufc.br|| |
_version_ |
1797068845505052672 |