首页> 外文学位 >Concept construction in Kant's 'Metaphysical Foundations of Natural Science'.
【24h】

Concept construction in Kant's 'Metaphysical Foundations of Natural Science'.

机译:康德《自然科学的形而上学基础》中的概念建构。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

Kant's reasoning in his special metaphysics of nature is often opaque, and the character of his a priori foundation for Newtonian science is the subject of some controversy. Recent literature on the Metaphysical Foundations of Natural Science has fallen well short of consensus on the aims and reasoning in the work. Various of the doctrines and even the character of the reasoning in the Metaphysical Foundations have been taken to present insuperable obstacles to accepting Kant's claim to ground Newtonian science. Gordon Brittan and Gerd Buchdahl, amongst others, have argued that Kant's stated aims in this case are not to be taken at face value, and that prior ontological commitments play a hidden but central role in Kant's special metaphysics.;Michael Friedman (1992) has shown how Kant's stated aims can be taken seriously with his ingenious reconstruction of the Metaphysical Foundations as a demonstration of the a priori basis for our thinking bodies to be in true motion and in absolute space. However, Friedman does not address the issue of matter theory--despite the importance of the issue to Kant. I argue that a strict reading of both the stated aims and doctrines of the Metaphysical Foundations is possible, since much of Kant's reasoning about the empirical concept of matter can be explained by his views on how the construction of empirical concepts is possible.;Kant's quasi-mathematical constructions are pivotal in Friedman's interpretation. Constructibility is Kant's criterion of acceptability for the concepts of natural science. Yet Kant notoriously fails to construct the dynamical concept of matter, and accepts this failure with an equally notorious complacency. I argue that Kant's criteria of empirical concept construction, apart from any prior ontological commitments, are enough to generate his views on matter. Kant's failure to construct the requisite concept of matter can be ascribed to a missing law of nature, a law of the relation of forces the discovery of which Kant thought imminent. I conclude that matter theory is central to the Metaphysical Foundations, but that this does not undermine Kant's stated aim of giving the a priori ground of Newtonian science.
机译:康德在其特殊的自然形而上学中的推理通常是不透明的,并且他对牛顿科学的先验基础的性格也引起了一些争议。关于自然科学的形而上学基础的最新文献远未就工作的目的和推理达成共识。形而上学基础中的各种学说,甚至是推理的性质,都被认为是接受康德关于牛顿科学的主张的不可克服的障碍。戈登·布里坦(Gordon Brittan)和盖尔德·布赫达尔(Gerd Buchdahl)等人认为,在这种情况下康德的既定目标不应该一视同仁,并且先前的本体论承诺在康德的特殊形而上学中扮演着隐藏但重要的角色。迈克尔·弗里德曼(Michael Friedman,1992)展示了康德如何巧妙地重建形而上学基础,可以认真对待康德提出的目标,以证明我们的思维机构在真实的运动和绝对的空间中处于先验基础。但是,弗里德曼没有讨论物质理论问题,尽管该问题对康德很重要。我认为,对康德的形而上学基础的既定目标和学说进行严格的阅读是可能的,因为康德关于物质经验概念的大部分推理可以通过他关于经验概念的构造方式的观点来解释。数学结构对于弗里德曼的解释至关重要。可构造性是康德对自然科学概念的可接受性的标准。然而,康德臭名昭著地未能构建物质的动力学概念,并以同样臭名昭著的自满接受了这种失败。我认为,除了任何先前的本体论承诺之外,康德的经验概念建构标准足以产生他对物质的观点。康德未能建立必要的物质概念的原因可以归结为自然法则的缺失,这是康德认为迫在眉睫的力量关系法则。我得出结论,物质理论是形而上学基础的核心,但是这并不损害康德提出的为牛顿科学提供先验基础的既定目标。

著录项

  • 作者

    McRobert, Jennifer Nadine.;

  • 作者单位

    The University of Western Ontario (Canada).;

  • 授予单位 The University of Western Ontario (Canada).;
  • 学科 Philosophy.
  • 学位 Ph.D.
  • 年度 1995
  • 页码 171 p.
  • 总页数 171
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类
  • 关键词

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号