On the inefficiency of Lambert’s and Mendelssohn’s objections against the inaugural dissertation’s theory of time
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2015 |
Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
Idioma: | por |
Título da fonte: | Argumentos : Revista de Filosofia (Online) |
Texto Completo: | http://periodicos.ufc.br/argumentos/article/view/19097 |
Resumo: | Kant’s theory of the ideality of time suffered attacks since it was first conceived in the Inaugural Dissertation. Johann Heinrich Lambert and Moses Mendelssohn, two of Kant’s most frequent correspondents, were the first to object to that doctrine. In this paper I intend to show that these objections are not successful against the theory of 1770. To achieve that aim, I will firstly explain the structure of the objections, secondly I will show that Kant attacks some epistemological consequences of the postures assumed by these objections and, finally, I will demonstrate how the argument put forward in the first subsection of § 14 of the Inaugural Dissertation is the foundation to reject the objectors’ assumptions. Additionally, in the last part, I will show that such objections would make sense if the 1770’s theory of time was founded on a theory of forms as temporarily presupposed in the course of experience. However, I will also show that such an interpretation would transgress both the principle of charity and the literality of certain excerpts of the text. |
id |
UFC-17_44f5191a7ae10a14494872f8b56e4c85 |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:periodicos.ufc:article/19097 |
network_acronym_str |
UFC-17 |
network_name_str |
Argumentos : Revista de Filosofia (Online) |
repository_id_str |
|
spelling |
On the inefficiency of Lambert’s and Mendelssohn’s objections against the inaugural dissertation’s theory of timeImmanuel Kant. Inaugural Dissertation. Ideality of time. Johann Heinrich Lambert. Moses Mendelssohn.Immanuel Kant. Dissertação de 1770. Idealidade do tempo. Johann Heinrich Lambert. Moses Mendelssohn.Kant’s theory of the ideality of time suffered attacks since it was first conceived in the Inaugural Dissertation. Johann Heinrich Lambert and Moses Mendelssohn, two of Kant’s most frequent correspondents, were the first to object to that doctrine. In this paper I intend to show that these objections are not successful against the theory of 1770. To achieve that aim, I will firstly explain the structure of the objections, secondly I will show that Kant attacks some epistemological consequences of the postures assumed by these objections and, finally, I will demonstrate how the argument put forward in the first subsection of § 14 of the Inaugural Dissertation is the foundation to reject the objectors’ assumptions. Additionally, in the last part, I will show that such objections would make sense if the 1770’s theory of time was founded on a theory of forms as temporarily presupposed in the course of experience. However, I will also show that such an interpretation would transgress both the principle of charity and the literality of certain excerpts of the text.A tese kantiana da idealidade do tempo sofreu ataques desde que foi primeiramente concebida na Dissertação de 1770. Johann Heinrich Lambert e Moses Mendelssohn, dois dos mais frequentes correspondentes de Kant, foram os primeiros a objetar contra aquela tese. No presente trabalho eu pretendo mostrar que essas objeções não surtem efeito nem mesmo contra a teoria de 1770. Para isso, primeiro exporei a estrutura das objeções, em seguida mostrarei que Kant ataca textualmente algumas consequências epistemológicas das posturas pressupostas por essas objeções e, por último, demonstrarei como o argumento exposto no primeiro subitem do §14 da Dissertação de 1770 é o fundamento para contrapor os pressupostos dos objetores. Adicionalmente, na última parte, eu mostrarei que tais objeções fariam sentido se a teoria do tempo de 1770 fosse fundada em uma teoria das formas enquanto temporalmente pressupostas no curso da experiência. Contudo, mostrarei também que interpretar de tal maneira viola tanto o princípio de caridade quanto a literalidade de certas porções do texto.Universidade Federal do Ceará2015-01-01info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionapplication/pdfhttp://periodicos.ufc.br/argumentos/article/view/19097Argumentos - Revista de Filosofia; No 13Argumentos - Periódico de Filosofia; Núm. 13Argumentos - Revista de Filosofia; n. 131984-42551984-4247reponame:Argumentos : Revista de Filosofia (Online)instname:Universidade Federal do Ceará (UFC)instacron:UFCporhttp://periodicos.ufc.br/argumentos/article/view/19097/29815Copyright (c) 2017 Argumentosinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessJunior, Marco Antonio Chabbouh2021-03-13T00:29:19Zoai:periodicos.ufc:article/19097Revistahttp://www.filosofia.ufc.br/argumentosPUBhttp://periodicos.ufc.br/argumentos/oaiargumentos@ufc.br||1984-42551984-4247opendoar:2021-03-13T00:29:19Argumentos : Revista de Filosofia (Online) - Universidade Federal do Ceará (UFC)false |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
On the inefficiency of Lambert’s and Mendelssohn’s objections against the inaugural dissertation’s theory of time |
title |
On the inefficiency of Lambert’s and Mendelssohn’s objections against the inaugural dissertation’s theory of time |
spellingShingle |
On the inefficiency of Lambert’s and Mendelssohn’s objections against the inaugural dissertation’s theory of time Junior, Marco Antonio Chabbouh Immanuel Kant. Inaugural Dissertation. Ideality of time. Johann Heinrich Lambert. Moses Mendelssohn. Immanuel Kant. Dissertação de 1770. Idealidade do tempo. Johann Heinrich Lambert. Moses Mendelssohn. |
title_short |
On the inefficiency of Lambert’s and Mendelssohn’s objections against the inaugural dissertation’s theory of time |
title_full |
On the inefficiency of Lambert’s and Mendelssohn’s objections against the inaugural dissertation’s theory of time |
title_fullStr |
On the inefficiency of Lambert’s and Mendelssohn’s objections against the inaugural dissertation’s theory of time |
title_full_unstemmed |
On the inefficiency of Lambert’s and Mendelssohn’s objections against the inaugural dissertation’s theory of time |
title_sort |
On the inefficiency of Lambert’s and Mendelssohn’s objections against the inaugural dissertation’s theory of time |
author |
Junior, Marco Antonio Chabbouh |
author_facet |
Junior, Marco Antonio Chabbouh |
author_role |
author |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Junior, Marco Antonio Chabbouh |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
Immanuel Kant. Inaugural Dissertation. Ideality of time. Johann Heinrich Lambert. Moses Mendelssohn. Immanuel Kant. Dissertação de 1770. Idealidade do tempo. Johann Heinrich Lambert. Moses Mendelssohn. |
topic |
Immanuel Kant. Inaugural Dissertation. Ideality of time. Johann Heinrich Lambert. Moses Mendelssohn. Immanuel Kant. Dissertação de 1770. Idealidade do tempo. Johann Heinrich Lambert. Moses Mendelssohn. |
description |
Kant’s theory of the ideality of time suffered attacks since it was first conceived in the Inaugural Dissertation. Johann Heinrich Lambert and Moses Mendelssohn, two of Kant’s most frequent correspondents, were the first to object to that doctrine. In this paper I intend to show that these objections are not successful against the theory of 1770. To achieve that aim, I will firstly explain the structure of the objections, secondly I will show that Kant attacks some epistemological consequences of the postures assumed by these objections and, finally, I will demonstrate how the argument put forward in the first subsection of § 14 of the Inaugural Dissertation is the foundation to reject the objectors’ assumptions. Additionally, in the last part, I will show that such objections would make sense if the 1770’s theory of time was founded on a theory of forms as temporarily presupposed in the course of experience. However, I will also show that such an interpretation would transgress both the principle of charity and the literality of certain excerpts of the text. |
publishDate |
2015 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2015-01-01 |
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/19097 |
url |
http://periodicos.ufc.br/argumentos/article/view/19097 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
por |
language |
por |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
http://periodicos.ufc.br/argumentos/article/view/19097/29815 |
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 13 Argumentos - Periódico de Filosofia; Núm. 13 Argumentos - Revista de Filosofia; n. 13 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_ |
1797068845926580224 |