Freedom: a relationship between canon and dialectic in the Critique of Pure Reason

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Pellizzaro, Nilmar
Data de Publicação: 2017
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: por
Título da fonte: Griot : Revista de Filosofia
Texto Completo: http://www3.ufrb.edu.br/seer/index.php/griot/article/view/772
Resumo: The current study investigates the consistency between the claims of the Dialectic and those of the Canon concerning the problem of freedom, and does so through a comparative analysis of three interpretations, showing why two of them (Carnois and Allison) would be mistaken, and a third (Esteves), defensible. Carnois points out that there would be an incompatibility between Dialectic and Canon in considering that the freedom of the Canon would be a limited and empirical freedom, whereas in the Dialectic it would have an absolute spontaneity. Allison believes that the texts would be compatible, although both present relative and ambiguous practical freedom (dependent on a sensitive incentive), and therefore there would be a pre-critical morality in KrV. Esteves's interpretation seems to us to be more sustainable and allows us to understand the coherence and contemporaneity of texts (both present freedom with absolute spontaneity), showing that, although practical freedom is a relational freedom (applied to human beings and therefore in contact with the empirical), it is not an empirical but hybrid concept.
id UFRB-4_113660f8c389d0f362f50e65e7d2d6f1
oai_identifier_str oai:seer.www.ufrb.edu.br:article/772
network_acronym_str UFRB-4
network_name_str Griot : Revista de Filosofia
repository_id_str
spelling Freedom: a relationship between canon and dialectic in the Critique of Pure ReasonLiberdade: uma relação entre cânon e dialética na Crítica da razão puraKant; Dialética; Cânon; Liberdade transcendental; Liberdade prática.Kant; Dialectic; Canon; Transcendental freedom; Practical freedomThe current study investigates the consistency between the claims of the Dialectic and those of the Canon concerning the problem of freedom, and does so through a comparative analysis of three interpretations, showing why two of them (Carnois and Allison) would be mistaken, and a third (Esteves), defensible. Carnois points out that there would be an incompatibility between Dialectic and Canon in considering that the freedom of the Canon would be a limited and empirical freedom, whereas in the Dialectic it would have an absolute spontaneity. Allison believes that the texts would be compatible, although both present relative and ambiguous practical freedom (dependent on a sensitive incentive), and therefore there would be a pre-critical morality in KrV. Esteves's interpretation seems to us to be more sustainable and allows us to understand the coherence and contemporaneity of texts (both present freedom with absolute spontaneity), showing that, although practical freedom is a relational freedom (applied to human beings and therefore in contact with the empirical), it is not an empirical but hybrid concept.O presente estudo investiga a consistência entre as afirmações da Dialética e as do Cânon acerca do problema da liberdade e o faz através de uma análise comparativa de três interpretações, mostrando por que duas delas (Carnois e Allison) seriam equivocadas, e, uma terceira (Esteves), defensável. Carnois aponta que haveria uma incompatibilidade entre Dialética e Cânon ao considerar que a liberdade do Cânon seria uma liberdade limitada e empírica, enquanto que, na Dialética, teria uma espontaneidade absoluta. Allison considera que os textos seriam compatíveis, embora ambos apresentem uma liberdade prática relativa e ambígua (dependente de um estímulo sensível), e por isso haveria uma moralidade pré-crítica na KrV. A interpretação de Esteves nos parece a mais sustentável e permite perceber a coerência e a contemporaneidade dos textos (ambos apresentam a liberdade com espontaneidade absoluta), mostrando que, embora a liberdade prática seja uma liberdade relacional (aplicada a seres humanos e por isso em contato com o empírico), ela não é um conceito empírico, mas híbrido.Universidade Federal do Recôncavo da Bahia2017-12-18info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionPeer-ReviewedEvaluados por los paresAvaliados pelos paresapplication/pdfhttp://www3.ufrb.edu.br/seer/index.php/griot/article/view/77210.31977/grirfi.v16i2.772Griot : Revista de Filosofia; v. 16 n. 2 (2017); 169-1872178-1036reponame:Griot : Revista de Filosofiainstname:Universidade Federal do Recôncavo na Bahia (UFRB)instacron:UFRBporhttp://www3.ufrb.edu.br/seer/index.php/griot/article/view/772/487Copyright (c) 2017 Nilmar Pellizzaroinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessPellizzaro, Nilmar2020-06-30T18:15:23Zoai:seer.www.ufrb.edu.br:article/772Revistahttp://www.ufrb.edu.br/griot/PUBhttp://www3.ufrb.edu.br/seer/index.php/griot/oai||griotrevista@gmail.com2178-10362178-1036opendoar:2020-06-30T18:15:23Griot : Revista de Filosofia - Universidade Federal do Recôncavo na Bahia (UFRB)false
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Freedom: a relationship between canon and dialectic in the Critique of Pure Reason
Liberdade: uma relação entre cânon e dialética na Crítica da razão pura
title Freedom: a relationship between canon and dialectic in the Critique of Pure Reason
spellingShingle Freedom: a relationship between canon and dialectic in the Critique of Pure Reason
Pellizzaro, Nilmar
Kant; Dialética; Cânon; Liberdade transcendental; Liberdade prática.
Kant; Dialectic; Canon; Transcendental freedom; Practical freedom
title_short Freedom: a relationship between canon and dialectic in the Critique of Pure Reason
title_full Freedom: a relationship between canon and dialectic in the Critique of Pure Reason
title_fullStr Freedom: a relationship between canon and dialectic in the Critique of Pure Reason
title_full_unstemmed Freedom: a relationship between canon and dialectic in the Critique of Pure Reason
title_sort Freedom: a relationship between canon and dialectic in the Critique of Pure Reason
author Pellizzaro, Nilmar
author_facet Pellizzaro, Nilmar
author_role author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Pellizzaro, Nilmar
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv Kant; Dialética; Cânon; Liberdade transcendental; Liberdade prática.
Kant; Dialectic; Canon; Transcendental freedom; Practical freedom
topic Kant; Dialética; Cânon; Liberdade transcendental; Liberdade prática.
Kant; Dialectic; Canon; Transcendental freedom; Practical freedom
description The current study investigates the consistency between the claims of the Dialectic and those of the Canon concerning the problem of freedom, and does so through a comparative analysis of three interpretations, showing why two of them (Carnois and Allison) would be mistaken, and a third (Esteves), defensible. Carnois points out that there would be an incompatibility between Dialectic and Canon in considering that the freedom of the Canon would be a limited and empirical freedom, whereas in the Dialectic it would have an absolute spontaneity. Allison believes that the texts would be compatible, although both present relative and ambiguous practical freedom (dependent on a sensitive incentive), and therefore there would be a pre-critical morality in KrV. Esteves's interpretation seems to us to be more sustainable and allows us to understand the coherence and contemporaneity of texts (both present freedom with absolute spontaneity), showing that, although practical freedom is a relational freedom (applied to human beings and therefore in contact with the empirical), it is not an empirical but hybrid concept.
publishDate 2017
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2017-12-18
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
Peer-Reviewed
Evaluados por los pares
Avaliados pelos pares
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv http://www3.ufrb.edu.br/seer/index.php/griot/article/view/772
10.31977/grirfi.v16i2.772
url http://www3.ufrb.edu.br/seer/index.php/griot/article/view/772
identifier_str_mv 10.31977/grirfi.v16i2.772
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv por
language por
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv http://www3.ufrb.edu.br/seer/index.php/griot/article/view/772/487
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv Copyright (c) 2017 Nilmar Pellizzaro
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
rights_invalid_str_mv Copyright (c) 2017 Nilmar Pellizzaro
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Universidade Federal do Recôncavo da Bahia
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Universidade Federal do Recôncavo da Bahia
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Griot : Revista de Filosofia; v. 16 n. 2 (2017); 169-187
2178-1036
reponame:Griot : Revista de Filosofia
instname:Universidade Federal do Recôncavo na Bahia (UFRB)
instacron:UFRB
instname_str Universidade Federal do Recôncavo na Bahia (UFRB)
instacron_str UFRB
institution UFRB
reponame_str Griot : Revista de Filosofia
collection Griot : Revista de Filosofia
repository.name.fl_str_mv Griot : Revista de Filosofia - Universidade Federal do Recôncavo na Bahia (UFRB)
repository.mail.fl_str_mv ||griotrevista@gmail.com
_version_ 1754732699165130752