The question of the possibility of freedom in the critique of pure reason: an interpretation of B 560 and B 586

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Fagherazzi, Onorato Jonas
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