Immanuel Kant
Known for his work on the Critique of Pure Reason , Immanuel Kant was a German philosopher in the late 18 th century during the Enlightenment era. He was a fourth child in a family of nine, born in the year 1724 in Prussia, commonly known as Russia. He changed his name from Kantto to appreciate the spelling practices of German. As devout Pietism followers, his parents, Johann Georg Cant and Anna Regina Cant, saw the potential of Kant and arranged for his education through the help of the local pastor. Kant was able to gain a deep appreciation for the Latin classes while at school. He went to the University of Konigsberg in 1740 to study theology but later fall in love with physics and mathematics. However, he was forced to leave the university after the death of his father to help his family. Working as a private tutor for the wealthy, Kant published several papers on scientific questions based on empiricism and rationalism. Among his published work as a tutor includes Theory of the Heavens and General Natural History done in the year 1755 ( Robinson & Surprenant, 2017 ).
He returned to the University of Konigsberg in 1755 to continue his education, where he received his doctorate of philosophy is the same year. As a metaphysics lecturer for 15 years, Kant published various critiques in his entire life. He became a full professor at the same university in 1770, teaching logic and metaphysics. His work regarding a Critique of Pure Reason reflected on the reasons and experiences on the interaction between understanding and thought. The critique was his enormous work touching on how a human perceives to follow imperative unconditionally when subjected to moral claim. Through a moral law called Categorical imperative, Kant reflected on the ethics and philosophical study of moral where he presumed that the existence of moral judgment and rationality drive morality. Kant further indicated that there is no grey area on what is right or wrong since what is wrong is wrong and right is right. Through critiques such as Critique of Judgment and Critique of Practical Reason , Kant refined his theories with a philosophical point of view until his death in 1804 after losing his memory.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
David Hume
Born in 1711, David Hume was a Scottish historian, philosopher, essayist, and economist with a vast knowledge of skepticism and empiricism. As a younger son of Joseph Hume and Christine, he was born in Scotland and went to Edinburgh University at the age of 12. His father died while in his third year, and he opted to drop out of school at the age of 14 or 15 due to nervous breakdown in 1729 ( Fogelin, 2019 ). He tried to study law but felt distasteful about it opting to read the wider sphere voraciously. He relocated to France in 1734 after trying his hand in merchant office based in Bristol. His turning point was when he decided to study and write a Treatise of Human Nature to formulate a full-fledged philosophical system. He is among the greatest western philosophers to have existed during Scottish Enlightenment. His attributes echo that of George Berkeley, John Locke, among other British Empiricists. Hume believes that philosophy is an inductive experimental science regarding human nature. He used Isaac Newton model to build on the issues surrounding epistemology
A summary of each of their positions
Hume had an inquiry concerning moral principles as we reflect on his first work, A Treatise of Human Nature , written in 1739. He is a philosopher behind the science of man , where he created a total naturalistic that was examined by the psychological basis of human nature. He was preceded as notably Descartes by stark opposition to the nationalists, with the conclusion that Reason is, and ought only to be, the slave of the passions since human behaviour is governed by a desire, not reason. The attribute on human behaviour makes Hume a prominent figure due to his strong empiricist and skeptical philosophical argument against the existence of innate ideas. Contrary to epistemology, Hume implicated that humans have knowledge on a direct experience they exhibit, and therefore impressions have to be either coupled with direct sensations and fainter ideas or strong and lively impressions.
Hume was able to develop an idea that mental behaviour depends on custom where our ideas on the effects, constant conjunction, and effects justify the use of induction. Thus, human fails to administer actual conception of the self when direct impression based on metaphysical self is not present. Hume adds that with the less direct metaphysical self-impression, an only bundle of sensations exhibits. The findings helped Hume to come up with a compatibilist theory of free will with the intention to extreme proof influence on subsequent moral philosophy. Hume coupled as a sentimentalist with the notion that ethics depends on feelings instead of abstract moral principles. Through his work entitled Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion that was written in 1779, Hume challenged the ambiguous Christianity views based on the normative is-ought problem. Through his critical views, he believed that priests were motivated by ambition and self-interest, and such writings drew heretical and controversial attributes of the time.
Hume has provided subsequent extreme philosophy on logical positivism, early analytic philosophy, utilitarianism, cognitive philosophy, and philosophy of science. For instance, Hume’s Treatise was proclaimed by Jerry Fodor, a philosopher in the time, who indicated that the founding document was within cognitive science. Hume is known to be a prose stylist, characterized by contemporary intellectual luminary traits and the greatest philosopher whose essays were coupled with literary genre and attributes influencing political and economic philosophy ( Warburton, 2011 ).
On the other hand, Kant had different ideas and views towards Hume sentiments, terming him as a person full of dogmatic slumber. The problems facing Hume’s philosophical point of view led Kant having insights into epistemology. First, the problem on the epistemology reveals that there is either knowledge of sense without certain experience or knowledge certainty without sense experience. Many philosophers had a problem regarding the above statement for years prompting Kant to formulate his perception towards epistemology philosophical point of view. In his views, Kant indicates that dogmatic slumber interrupted David Hume's recollections for many years. Kant posits that it was the objective principle of Hume to solve the problem regarding Skepticism with the notion. Despite philosophical speculations with strange perception, Kant attributed that the problem of skepticism needed the immediate address and possible solution than anticipated. Through a new era of philosophy, Kent, in large measure, solved the problem of skepticism, an aspect that gave him a greater emphasis on the relationship and minds of people across the world. Additionally, Kant was responsible for the rise of scientific discipline involving perceptual psychology.
A comparison and contrast of their positions
Analytic and synthetic are two kinds of propositions within epistemology, with each proposition having the subject and predicate terms. The work of the predicate term in analytic propositions is to limit new additional information to the subject through restating the subject term. For instance, a triangle has three-sided objects with predicate term as three-sided objects, and therefore there is no new information regarding triangles due to restatement. However, new additional information to the subject term is introduced by predicate terms during synthetic propositions. For instance, the colour of the car is red, where the predicate term is red, an aspect that can change, and it gives us more information regarding the subject term car. Knowledge of propositions can be gained in two ways. The truth of the analytic proposition can be easily determined with the above example showing that triangles are three-sided objects which are undisputed and true regarding the characteristics of triangles. Secondly, a sense of experience helps us gain knowledge of propositions, hence a priori . However, sense experience is required when most synthetic propositions are taken into consideration since it requires sense experience to tell if the aspect portrayed is true or not, hence posteriori ( Waxman, 2019) .
A synthetic proposition is a posteriori, while analytic propositions are a priori which are used to give a comparison attributes on the position of Hume and Kant as far as a restatement of Hume’s problem in Kantian terms is concerned. Hume indicates that there is no certainty when matters of fact are considered and thus in Kantian terms implying that it is not easy to have synthetic a priori knowledge. The argument from Hume's perspective can be illustrated mathematically in the following setup that at some point, an individual has knowledge of a synthetic a priori knowledge and sometimes not. But from the realm of mathematics, Kant gives us two examples based on the mathematical and metaphysical setup. For instance, 7+5 = 12 is a mathematical proposition that gives us a contradictive response on whether the expression, which is a synthetic proposition, is right or wrong, given none is interested in involved mathematical insights. However, a metaphysical example carries significant views contributed by Kant.
A metaphysical perspective view of Kant indicates that every event has a cause and thus, a clear that the predicate term cause is a synthetic proposition that adds new information to the event, which is a subject term. However, it is hard to justify if the above Kant’s statement is true or false, given that the knowledge we have on the above attribute has to be a priori on account that we are yet to experience every event around us. Kant believed that Hume missed the aspect of how synthetic knowledge is possible but perturbed by the problem of if synthetic a priori knowledge is possible. One problem that affected Hume decides that his attributes were based on empiricist assumption with the notion that all knowledge is as a result of sense experience and that individual knowledge has to attribute objects of sense experience. However, his view on causality is incorrect as per Kant, given that he believed humans have no sense experience; therefore, no knowledge of causality. Hume belief that sense experience lack causality was not a mistake, but his mistake is predetermined on the aspect that sense experience is all people have.
Kant believed that at some point, Hume was right and at some point, wrong based on his monumental preface regarding Critique of Pure Reason . Kant posits that experience defines all our knowledge with no doubts, but not a subject to arise from experience when finding a solution to prevailing problems. Kant also used the Copernicus astronomical story to illustrate the aspect of sense experience. The problem reflected the explanation behind the movement of the planets around the earth, and through a revolutionary point of view, the sun was perceived to be at the centre rather than the earth. Kant used Copernicus to give detailed information regarding planetary motion, making the problem understandable. Kant had the ambition to use the idea behind the Copernican Revolution in philosophy and therefore going far from Hume's perspective and justifying that it is not a must our knowledge conforms to objects of sense experience ( Warburton, 2011 ).
Kant was able to solve Hume’s problem by agreeing that we do not know causality since it is not in the sense experience, although not correct to say that knowledge comes from sense experience. His reflection on causality is compared to someone wearing a pair of rose-colored glasses that the world will appear rose-colored, but if people were born with those glasses, it is sense experience to determine it. Kant compares causality with the pair of glasses and categorized filters such as time, space, and substance as categories of the mind with proportional attributes towards his critical philosophy as far as epistemology is concerned. Kant exhibited radical thinking in that he believed time, substance, causality, and space forms part of the mind's ability to process experience, unlike other philosophers who spend time studying the nature of space to understand its perception.
Kant believed that time and space were subjective conditions defining what we perceive is the reality, contrary to Principia Mathematica by Newton perceived that the two were absolute frames of reference. Additionally, Kant indicated that reality is perceived in four dimensions, although a different perspective from contemporary physicists as far as string theory is concerned. Kant adds that the mind organizes sense experience with an example reflected on a Kanizsa square. Kant argues that looking at the square one perceives to see a white square, but there is nothing like a white square since the mind always fills in the square. Kant worked hard to find a middle ground between empiricism and rationalism that had serious problems as anticipated from Hume and his philosophical attributes. As a reflection, rationalism comes into the conclusion that some, if not all, ideas are perceived innate as empiricism brings us on skepticism regarding fundamental aspects that our knowledge is as a result of causality. Despite having useful elements, both are unacceptable as Kant presume that taking the best aspects of each epistemology through a combination creates an optimal solution to the problems at hand. Kant called optimal solution as a critical philosophy with denial attributes of innate ideas since his prior belief indicates that sense experience defines knowledge. However, Kant believed that innate structures are within our minds and governs how sense experience is processed.
Original Reflection
Philosophical life exhibited challenges of theoretical proofing framework that would address problems at hand. The critical philosophy of Kant and Hume's attribute towards epistemology is of critical importance as far as problems facing philosophers at the time were concerned. First, the category implications indicate that people do not perceive objects independently, and thus sense experience is predetermined based on either object independent of our sense experience or objects of our sense experience. Unlike Hume, Kant indicates that objects of sense experience are phenomena, while objects that are independent of our sense experience are noumena. However, the implication of Kant is problematic as compared to Hume since both implications may lead to problems associated with epistemology and philosophical point of view regarding the subject matter. Show of human reasoning limits was one of the main concerns of Kant and Hume in that it is hard to know of some of the things existing in our life since they cannot be observed nor touched. Kant calls some untouchable or foreseeable things in platonic terms as transcendental (Waxman, 2019).
Any object that is beyond human sense experience is also beyond our knowledge and therefore requires God’s intervention. Since God is transcendental, people are precluded from having God's knowledge through pure reason alone, and this is the reason Kant postulates that knowledge of God can be gained through other types of reason. If an individual understands morality, then through practical reason, he is also able to have the knowledge, which is God. Philosophically, Hume had an issue to understand the categories of mind in terms of elements of our sense experience, and this is an indication that there exists further transcendental element that should be taken into consideration. From point view, the self has sense experience, and therefore it is not an object of sense experience. Second, sense experience is unified in that its existence is inferred, and thus self is something that is doing unification. Kant calls the unification perception as transcendental unity of perception, which offers a partial solution to Hume’s problems of skepticism ( Warburton, 2011 ).
There is certainty regarding causality given that it creates a condition of having sense experience and presume that without denial of fundamental knowledge, sense experience brings about knowledge due to the presence of causality, time, and space. However, it is not possible to relate these categories into the transcendental realm of noumena. Additionally, we can no postulate that all ideas innate and formed at birth in mind, despite a better understanding of the innate structures and working of the mind. Thus, defining our knowledge limits creates a better and advanced understanding of limits associated with empiricism and rationalism.
References
Fogelin, R. J. (2019). Hume's skepticism in the treatise of human nature . Routledge.
Robinson, E., & Surprenant, C. W. (2017). Kant and the Scottish Enlightenment (Vol. 13). Taylor & Francis.
Warburton, N. (2011). A little history of philosophy . Yale University Press.
Waxman, W. (2019). A Guide to Kant’s Psychologism: via Locke, Berkeley, Hume, and Wittgenstein . Routledge.
