Kant’s Metaphysics: A Critical Rationalist Revolution
The issue is so fundamental that Kantian metaphysics has not yet found the sure path of science, despite being the most important matter for human beings. It is important to remember that metaphysical questions have always been present. Kant was very much influenced by the development of science; therefore, he wondered what happens to reason when one part cannot avoid thinking about metaphysical issues, and another part lacks a scientific explanation for them.
Why does Kant believe that criticism and analysis of possibilities are right when facing metaphysical fear? This is critical and not dogmatic metaphysics (critical rationalist). This step represents an advance in the metaphysical revolution as important as the groundwork knowledge made by Copernicus in astronomy, and this is called a turnabout. This shift is made in the sense that knowledge is to understand that we change the principles admitted so far, and the principal was that our knowledge must be registered by objects (e.g., remember the Platonic object).
Kant refers to the turnabout in his “Critique of Pure Reason” in the text where it says that if objects are determined, all knowledge can be had. It is impossible to establish a priori knowledge about themselves, which always led to failure because it is contradictory. According to Kant, it would be better to test if necessary to initiate the path of metaphysics in imitation of mathematics or natural science, making it the objects that define the subject. But since this budget will attempt to explain the a priori knowledge and therefore failed to fail metaphysics Kant proposes to abandon this principle and from subject to subject in this way determining the possibility of knowledge can explain this whole attempt a priori Kantian question can be summed up in elaborate metaphysics is possible as a science as are mathematics and physics?
This question will address the kinds of judgments that science uses, and the first two criteria differ depending on the relationship-based subject/predicate.
Two key aspects:
- How their judgments can be a priori or a posteriori.
A priori knowledge is known to be true prior to experience, and judgments are universal and necessary. The philosophy that studies the conditions of possibility of a priori knowledge is Kantian or transcendental philosophy.
A posteriori knowledge is known to be true through experience and is not universal or necessary.
Its definition and concept, which is given (prior to its development), is the theoretical knowledge of reason, and the possibility of applying the theoretical knowledge is practical knowledge. Kant refers to these skills in 4 of the text “wing critique of pure reason.” The fundamental question is how a priori synthetic judgments are possible that give information on one side (synthesis) and another are universal and necessary.
Kant refers to the propositions of science when he speaks of synthetic a priori judgments. We should also see if metaphysics is in its synthetic a priori propositions. The answer is that Kantian metaphysics lacks synthesis, i.e., it does not have experience, and metaphysical claims experience for Kant is the limit of knowledge. We know the phenomenon that the object is determined by the subject, but we cannot know the noumenon. To say that because unconditioned unconditioned know what a contradiction is obvious. (Metaphysical objects), but Kant gives us a possible output (solution) but we can not know the noumenon can think of it. But what if we can know is the phenomenon that objects are empirical.