Kant and the construction of pure reason: an analogy with a chemical experiment

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Klein, Joel Thiago
Data de Publicação: 2023
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: eng
Título da fonte: Manuscrito (Online)
Texto Completo: https://periodicos.sbu.unicamp.br/ojs/index.php/manuscrito/article/view/8674097
Resumo: This paper defends a constructive interpretation of the Critique of Pure Reason, which is built in analogy with an experimental construction that Kant believes to characteristic of chemistry. I also argue for a way to reconcile the methodological perspective of the constructivist method with that of transcendental reflection. I therefore provide a constructive explanation for what Kant describes as being pure reason and the argument of the transcendental deduction. I propose to frame the different perspectives in such a way that the experimental construction is the ratio cognoscendi of pure reason, while pure reason is the ratio essendi of the experimental construction. O’Neill (1989, 2015) is one of the most important scholars that have argued for a constructivist reading of the Critique of pure reason (CPR). In this paper I develop and explore new aspects of this line of interpretation. One of the main criticisms raised against constructivist readings of Kant’s philosophy is an alleged commitment to subjectivism or voluntarism (cf. Kleingeld & Willaschek 2019). This concern led some scholars to rename their position as constitutivist instead (Korsgaard 2009; Sensen 2013, 2017; Formosa 2011). Constitutivism, is intended to be a sort of constructivism capable of avoiding voluntarism. However, it becomes difficult, sometimes, to differentiate between the constitutivist and foundationalist positions, which are based on transcendental reflection and imply a sort of realist perspective on reason. The same preoccupation applies to the constructivist interpretation of the CPR. In order to deal with this issue, the following questions must be addressed: how can constructivism justify the necessity and universality of transcendental principles of pure reason without compromising the normative and procedural aspects of the construction? How to reconcile arguments based on the analysis of representations and faculties with a constructivist procedure? Or even, how may transcendental reflection, as a view of the possibility of a priori cognition, be rendered compatible with a constructive procedure? This paper is divided into three sections, followed by brief final remarks. The first section outlines the main characteristics of constructivism and relates them to Kant’s positions about the nature of philosophy and its method. The second part argues for a type of experimental constructivism that might serve as a guiding analogy to understand the method underlying the CPR. Thirdly, I will show how the transcendental subject and pure reason are derived from this experimental construction. The conclusion briefly points out some advantages of this position.
id UNICAMP-17_63ca1cb0235cf5e423046572d9039856
oai_identifier_str oai:ojs.periodicos.sbu.unicamp.br:article/8674097
network_acronym_str UNICAMP-17
network_name_str Manuscrito (Online)
repository_id_str
spelling Kant and the construction of pure reason: an analogy with a chemical experimentKant y la construcción de la razón pura: una analogía con un experimento químicoKant and the construction of pure reason: an analogy with a chemical experimentConstrutivismoExperimento químicoKantRazão puraConstructivismoExperimento químicoKantRazón puraConstructivismChemical experimentKantPure reasonThis paper defends a constructive interpretation of the Critique of Pure Reason, which is built in analogy with an experimental construction that Kant believes to characteristic of chemistry. I also argue for a way to reconcile the methodological perspective of the constructivist method with that of transcendental reflection. I therefore provide a constructive explanation for what Kant describes as being pure reason and the argument of the transcendental deduction. I propose to frame the different perspectives in such a way that the experimental construction is the ratio cognoscendi of pure reason, while pure reason is the ratio essendi of the experimental construction. O’Neill (1989, 2015) is one of the most important scholars that have argued for a constructivist reading of the Critique of pure reason (CPR). In this paper I develop and explore new aspects of this line of interpretation. One of the main criticisms raised against constructivist readings of Kant’s philosophy is an alleged commitment to subjectivism or voluntarism (cf. Kleingeld & Willaschek 2019). This concern led some scholars to rename their position as constitutivist instead (Korsgaard 2009; Sensen 2013, 2017; Formosa 2011). Constitutivism, is intended to be a sort of constructivism capable of avoiding voluntarism. However, it becomes difficult, sometimes, to differentiate between the constitutivist and foundationalist positions, which are based on transcendental reflection and imply a sort of realist perspective on reason. The same preoccupation applies to the constructivist interpretation of the CPR. In order to deal with this issue, the following questions must be addressed: how can constructivism justify the necessity and universality of transcendental principles of pure reason without compromising the normative and procedural aspects of the construction? How to reconcile arguments based on the analysis of representations and faculties with a constructivist procedure? Or even, how may transcendental reflection, as a view of the possibility of a priori cognition, be rendered compatible with a constructive procedure? This paper is divided into three sections, followed by brief final remarks. The first section outlines the main characteristics of constructivism and relates them to Kant’s positions about the nature of philosophy and its method. The second part argues for a type of experimental constructivism that might serve as a guiding analogy to understand the method underlying the CPR. Thirdly, I will show how the transcendental subject and pure reason are derived from this experimental construction. The conclusion briefly points out some advantages of this position.En este trabajo se defiende una interpretación constructivista de la Crítica de la razón pura, que se construye por analogía con una construcción experimental que Kant considera característica de la química. También defiendo una forma de conciliar la perspectiva metodológica del método constructivista con la de la reflexión trascendental. Por tanto, proporciono una explicación constructiva de lo que Kant describe como razón pura y el argumento de la deducción trascendental. Propongo enmarcar las diferentes perspectivas de tal manera que la construcción experimental sea la ratio cognoscendi de la razón pura, mientras que la razón pura sea la ratio essendi de la construcción experimental. O'Neill (1989, 2015) es uno de los estudiosos más importantes que han defendido una lectura constructivista de la Crítica de la razón pura (CPR). En este trabajo desarrollo y exploro nuevos aspectos de esta línea interpretativa. Una de las principales críticas planteadas contra las lecturas constructivistas de la filosofía de Kant es un supuesto compromiso con el subjetivismo o el voluntarismo (cf. Kleingeld & Willaschek 2019). Esta preocupación llevó a algunos estudiosos a renombrar su posición como constitutivista en su lugar (Korsgaard 2009; Sensen 2013, 2017; Formosa 2011). El constitutivismo, pretende ser una especie de constructivismo capaz de evitar el voluntarismo. Sin embargo, a veces resulta difícil diferenciar entre las posiciones constitutivistas y fundacionalistas, que se basan en la reflexión trascendental e implican una especie de perspectiva realista.Este artigo defende uma interpretação construtiva da Crítica da Razão Pura, que é construída em analogia com uma construção experimental que Kant acredita ser característica da química. Também defendo uma maneira de conciliar a perspectiva metodológica do método construtivista com a da reflexão transcendental. Portanto, forneço uma explicação construtiva para o que Kant descreve como sendo a razão pura e o argumento da dedução transcendental. Proponho enquadrar as diferentes perspectivas de tal forma que a construção experimental seja a ratio cognoscendi da razão pura, enquanto a razão pura seja a ratio essendi da construção experimental. O'Neill (1989, 2015) é um dos mais importantes estudiosos que defenderam uma leitura construtivista da Crítica da razão pura (CPR). Neste artigo, desenvolvo e exploro novos aspectos dessa linha de interpretação. Uma das principais críticas levantadas contra as leituras construtivistas da filosofia de Kant é um suposto compromisso com o subjetivismo ou o voluntarismo (cf. Kleingeld & Willaschek 2019). Essa preocupação levou alguns estudiosos a renomear sua posição como constitutivista (Korsgaard 2009; Sensen 2013, 2017; Formosa 2011). O constitutivismo pretende ser um tipo de construtivismo capaz de evitar o voluntarismo. No entanto, às vezes fica difícil diferenciar entre as posições constitutivista e fundacionalista, que se baseiam na reflexão transcendental e implicam uma espécie de perspectiva realista.Universidade Estadual de Campinas2023-07-28info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionTextoTextoinfo:eu-repo/semantics/otherapplication/pdfhttps://periodicos.sbu.unicamp.br/ojs/index.php/manuscrito/article/view/8674097Manuscrito: Revista Internacional de Filosofia; v. 46 n. 1 (2023): Jan./Mar.; 29-76Manuscrito: International Journal of Philosophy; Vol. 46 No. 1 (2023): Jan./Mar.; 29-76Manuscrito: Revista Internacional de Filosofía; Vol. 46 Núm. 1 (2023): Jan./Mar.; 29-762317-630Xreponame:Manuscrito (Online)instname:Universidade Estadual de Campinas (UNICAMP)instacron:UNICAMPenghttps://periodicos.sbu.unicamp.br/ojs/index.php/manuscrito/article/view/8674097/32299Brazil, ContemporaryBrasil; ContemporáneoBrasil; ContemporâneoCopyright (c) 2023 Manuscrito: Revista Internacional de Filosofiahttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessKlein, Joel Thiago2023-07-28T19:54:05Zoai:ojs.periodicos.sbu.unicamp.br:article/8674097Revistahttps://periodicos.sbu.unicamp.br/ojs/index.php/manuscritoPUBhttps://periodicos.sbu.unicamp.br/ojs/index.php/manuscrito/oaimwrigley@cle.unicamp.br|| dascal@spinoza.tau.ac.il||publicacoes@cle.unicamp.br2317-630X0100-6045opendoar:2023-07-28T19:54:05Manuscrito (Online) - Universidade Estadual de Campinas (UNICAMP)false
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Kant and the construction of pure reason: an analogy with a chemical experiment
Kant y la construcción de la razón pura: una analogía con un experimento químico
Kant and the construction of pure reason: an analogy with a chemical experiment
title Kant and the construction of pure reason: an analogy with a chemical experiment
spellingShingle Kant and the construction of pure reason: an analogy with a chemical experiment
Klein, Joel Thiago
Construtivismo
Experimento químico
Kant
Razão pura
Constructivismo
Experimento químico
Kant
Razón pura
Constructivism
Chemical experiment
Kant
Pure reason
title_short Kant and the construction of pure reason: an analogy with a chemical experiment
title_full Kant and the construction of pure reason: an analogy with a chemical experiment
title_fullStr Kant and the construction of pure reason: an analogy with a chemical experiment
title_full_unstemmed Kant and the construction of pure reason: an analogy with a chemical experiment
title_sort Kant and the construction of pure reason: an analogy with a chemical experiment
author Klein, Joel Thiago
author_facet Klein, Joel Thiago
author_role author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Klein, Joel Thiago
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv Construtivismo
Experimento químico
Kant
Razão pura
Constructivismo
Experimento químico
Kant
Razón pura
Constructivism
Chemical experiment
Kant
Pure reason
topic Construtivismo
Experimento químico
Kant
Razão pura
Constructivismo
Experimento químico
Kant
Razón pura
Constructivism
Chemical experiment
Kant
Pure reason
description This paper defends a constructive interpretation of the Critique of Pure Reason, which is built in analogy with an experimental construction that Kant believes to characteristic of chemistry. I also argue for a way to reconcile the methodological perspective of the constructivist method with that of transcendental reflection. I therefore provide a constructive explanation for what Kant describes as being pure reason and the argument of the transcendental deduction. I propose to frame the different perspectives in such a way that the experimental construction is the ratio cognoscendi of pure reason, while pure reason is the ratio essendi of the experimental construction. O’Neill (1989, 2015) is one of the most important scholars that have argued for a constructivist reading of the Critique of pure reason (CPR). In this paper I develop and explore new aspects of this line of interpretation. One of the main criticisms raised against constructivist readings of Kant’s philosophy is an alleged commitment to subjectivism or voluntarism (cf. Kleingeld & Willaschek 2019). This concern led some scholars to rename their position as constitutivist instead (Korsgaard 2009; Sensen 2013, 2017; Formosa 2011). Constitutivism, is intended to be a sort of constructivism capable of avoiding voluntarism. However, it becomes difficult, sometimes, to differentiate between the constitutivist and foundationalist positions, which are based on transcendental reflection and imply a sort of realist perspective on reason. The same preoccupation applies to the constructivist interpretation of the CPR. In order to deal with this issue, the following questions must be addressed: how can constructivism justify the necessity and universality of transcendental principles of pure reason without compromising the normative and procedural aspects of the construction? How to reconcile arguments based on the analysis of representations and faculties with a constructivist procedure? Or even, how may transcendental reflection, as a view of the possibility of a priori cognition, be rendered compatible with a constructive procedure? This paper is divided into three sections, followed by brief final remarks. The first section outlines the main characteristics of constructivism and relates them to Kant’s positions about the nature of philosophy and its method. The second part argues for a type of experimental constructivism that might serve as a guiding analogy to understand the method underlying the CPR. Thirdly, I will show how the transcendental subject and pure reason are derived from this experimental construction. The conclusion briefly points out some advantages of this position.
publishDate 2023
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2023-07-28
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
Texto
Texto
info:eu-repo/semantics/other
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv https://periodicos.sbu.unicamp.br/ojs/index.php/manuscrito/article/view/8674097
url https://periodicos.sbu.unicamp.br/ojs/index.php/manuscrito/article/view/8674097
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv https://periodicos.sbu.unicamp.br/ojs/index.php/manuscrito/article/view/8674097/32299
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv Copyright (c) 2023 Manuscrito: Revista Internacional de Filosofia
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
rights_invalid_str_mv Copyright (c) 2023 Manuscrito: Revista Internacional de Filosofia
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
dc.coverage.none.fl_str_mv Brazil, Contemporary
Brasil; Contemporáneo
Brasil; Contemporâneo
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Universidade Estadual de Campinas
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Universidade Estadual de Campinas
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Manuscrito: Revista Internacional de Filosofia; v. 46 n. 1 (2023): Jan./Mar.; 29-76
Manuscrito: International Journal of Philosophy; Vol. 46 No. 1 (2023): Jan./Mar.; 29-76
Manuscrito: Revista Internacional de Filosofía; Vol. 46 Núm. 1 (2023): Jan./Mar.; 29-76
2317-630X
reponame:Manuscrito (Online)
instname:Universidade Estadual de Campinas (UNICAMP)
instacron:UNICAMP
instname_str Universidade Estadual de Campinas (UNICAMP)
instacron_str UNICAMP
institution UNICAMP
reponame_str Manuscrito (Online)
collection Manuscrito (Online)
repository.name.fl_str_mv Manuscrito (Online) - Universidade Estadual de Campinas (UNICAMP)
repository.mail.fl_str_mv mwrigley@cle.unicamp.br|| dascal@spinoza.tau.ac.il||publicacoes@cle.unicamp.br
_version_ 1800216568508973056