HernandezBianka HernandezProfessor Sarah JacobPHI2010 W 5:40-8:40 P11/28/2017How do we know and what can we know according to Kant’s “Critique of Pure Reason? Immanuel Kant was a German philosopher whom in the late 1700’s questioned both empiricist and rationalist on their views of how humans gain knowledge of the world and sought to synthesize both theories into one, in order to close the gap between the two. His primary goal was to measure the extent in which rationalism could be supported without any assistance from senses or other factors. He argued that though we may have innate/rational knowledge of a scopeof actions, we were limited to the reality of our perceiving mind and thus would need, to a degree, external influences to
…show more content…
To contain any external speculations Kant makes sure to remove the idea of metaphysical occurrences that are normally accounted for and explained in every day experiences or perception. “Kant achieves what he calls a Copernican revolution in philosophy by turning from metaphysical speculation about the nature of reality to a critical examination of the nature of the thinking and perceiving mind” (http://www.sparknotes.com/philosophy/kant/section1/page/2/). From Kant’s new entity of philosophy we can infer that there are things in the natural world in which we have an innate knowledge, such things may be danger, happiness and feelingsof safety. We can also be born with the ideals of need to feed ourselves throughout mouth and notour eye or ear, things that concern survival or the wellbeing for the psyche, emotional and physical state. His ideas surround the idea that we should not keep in mind things that are completely beyond our power, we were created with all the items and information that we neededto know or obtain all the knowledge we would need to complete our purpose. We find examples removing any metaphysical, now known as “religious” ideas and keep a firm belief on our everyday perception. There’s a largely different life and growth of knowledge for someone who has be adapted to the jungle, with threats, experiences of poisoning from food with others they are aware of and time over time trials of survival vs someone who may be born to a more safe, sturdy type of living that may not have someone so aware of their current surroundings or situations. In Immanuel Kant’s reasoning and explanation through “Critique of Pure Reasons” was not simple and was not meant for the everyday, mental pallet. His description of a new philosophical view through integration of two already known ideals was revolutionary. Within the confusion and need for new reasoning he developed “Prolegomena to
To contain any external speculations Kant makes sure to remove the idea of metaphysical occurrences that are normally accounted for and explained in every day experiences or perception. “Kant achieves what he calls a Copernican revolution in philosophy by turning from metaphysical speculation about the nature of reality to a critical examination of the nature of the thinking and perceiving mind” (http://www.sparknotes.com/philosophy/kant/section1/page/2/). From Kant’s new entity of philosophy we can infer that there are things in the natural world in which we have an innate knowledge, such things may be danger, happiness and feelingsof safety. We can also be born with the ideals of need to feed ourselves throughout mouth and notour eye or ear, things that concern survival or the wellbeing for the psyche, emotional and physical state. His ideas surround the idea that we should not keep in mind things that are completely beyond our power, we were created with all the items and information that we neededto know or obtain all the knowledge we would need to complete our purpose. We find examples removing any metaphysical, now known as “religious” ideas and keep a firm belief on our everyday perception. There’s a largely different life and growth of knowledge for someone who has be adapted to the jungle, with threats, experiences of poisoning from food with others they are aware of and time over time trials of survival vs someone who may be born to a more safe, sturdy type of living that may not have someone so aware of their current surroundings or situations. In Immanuel Kant’s reasoning and explanation through “Critique of Pure Reasons” was not simple and was not meant for the everyday, mental pallet. His description of a new philosophical view through integration of two already known ideals was revolutionary. Within the confusion and need for new reasoning he developed “Prolegomena to