Notes: "Anitomy" in Kant's "Critique of Pure Reason"

Transcendental Dialectic can be understood as the applied part of the Critique of Pure Reason, dealing with the transcendental aspects of rational psychology, rational cosmology, and rational theology, respectively. phantom problem. After paralogism as a transcendental illusion of rational psychology concerning the question of the immortality of the soul, Kant proceeded to enter antinomy as a transcendental illusion of rational cosmology concerning the question of the world.

Roughly speaking, the transcendental vision of rational cosmology is structurally more complex than that of rational psychophenology because it is "two-faced" and not Presented in the form of antinomy, but in the process of reasoning, because the proposition takes "world as appearances" (world as appearances) as the object of criticism, which is a more concrete appearance compared with the mind, so the inference is easier to understand. Cosmological illusions originate from a set of transcendental ideas formed by reason, which is about "absolute totality in the synthesis of appearances": reason grasps appearances from the understanding In operation, due to reason's pursuit of the unconditional, the absolute totality of various conditions is formed. The most general and obvious cosmological ideas are about the universe or the whole world. No matter what appearance the subject begins in the "sensuous-intellectual" faculty, as a simple table or an elusive ocean, reason eventually leads to the same idea of all the conditions of any empirical thing.

As the idea of rational cosmology, "the world" has four specific forms of expression, each of which corresponds to an appearance, which is conditioned as a condition and given in a series. different facets, reflecting the four opposites in the chapter at the same time. It is worth noting that Kant discusses the pros and cons of each of the four contradictory propositions in the form of proof by contradiction, that is, when proving the thesis, the content of the argument is the untenability of the antithesis; the same is true for the principle of proving the antithesis.

First of all, the "past-future" sequence of objects (as appearances) in time and the sequence of positions in space, rationality thus forms an idea with absolute totality of the world as appearances in time and space, and leads to the first a betrayal

- Thesis: The world has a common point in time and a limit in space.
- Antithesis: The world has no beginning in time and no limit in space.

Second, the appearance is conditioned by its inner part, and this part is conditioned by its parts, so that reason forms an absolute totality idea about the decomposition and synthesis of the parts and the whole of the world, and leads to the second contradiction:

- Thesis: Every composite substance consists of simple parts which set limits on its possible reductions and which, as fundamental beings, cannot be reduced any more.
- Antithesis: Simple parts do not exist, and everything that exists is infinitely divisible.

Third, the existence of appearances is restricted by the sequence of causal relations, and rationality thus forms an absolute totality of causal relations, leading to the third contradiction:

- Thesis: In addition to the causality of physical laws, there is also free and spontaneous causality, that is, free will
- Antithesis: There is only causality of physical laws, there is no free and spontaneous causality, that is, there is no free will

Fourthly, every appearance exists contingently, so that reason thus forms an absolutely total idea of the possible conditions of its existence, and leads to the fourth paradox:

- Thesis: An absolute being of the world, as a part of the world or as the cause of the world, exists; it necessarily exists and provides the basis for the contingent existence of appearances.
- Antithesis: An absolute being belonging to the world does not exist, and appearance is a completely accidental existence.

In addition to reflecting the transcendental illusions of the world as appearances leading to reason, the four antitheses and the four antitheses themselves also rely on the principles of dogmatism and empiricism, because the thesis appeals to The intelligible object is used to explain the image, while the antithesis is used to explain the appearance from the point of view of "in the world". Furthermore, Kant called the first two contradictions mathematical (mathematical), because they are about the problem of quantity; the last two contradictions are called dynamical (dynamical), because they are about causality and existence. This article does not intend to enter into a detailed demonstration of individual antinomies, but hopes to point out Kant's approach to solving the problem of antinomies.

The problems pointed to by the four contradictory propositions are still unsolvable problems in philosophy or even science. The choice of pros and cons is more often based on the ontological position behind them. For example, physicalists must basically be more inclined to antithesis position. Kant listed the problem tension of contradiction in the form of counter-evidence. This tension can even declare that the contradiction between pros and cons cannot be eliminated through more rigorous philosophical analysis. On this basis, Kant was able to clarify the illegitimacy of rational cosmology. Determine his meaning in the work of "Analysis", that is, the general claim of transcendental knowledge has no foundation, and positive and meaningful transcendental knowledge cannot be established.

Is there no way to deal with the antinomy? Kant called transcendental idealism just the way to deal with contradictions, and the first step is to deny the common presuppositions of contradictory propositions. The result of the contradictory method is that the negation of one means the establishment of the other. In order to make the negation of one party not directly equal to the establishment of the other, it is first necessary to negate the common presupposition of both parties, and the result of negating the presupposition will make both propositions False, because the opposite proposition based on false common presuppositions is illusory and constitutes what Kant calls the transcendental illusion. Taking the first contradiction as an example, whether the world is limited or infinite in time and space, it presupposes that the object of the world is "defined in its quantity". From the standpoint of transcendental idealism, the world (as appearance) does not exist in itself, but is only constituted in the subjective experience, so it does not exist in itself as a finite whole or an infinite whole . This will cause the pros and cons of the first reverse to be wrong.

In fact, using transcendental idealism as an approach to negate the common presupposition of antinomy, as a method to eliminate antinomy as a transcendental illusion, is to a greater extent a philosophical ingenuity, which may not have positive significance for the solution of this problem. The ultimate truth of the world does not add any content, but Kant's "negative" approach, at the level of philosophical speculation, implements the standpoint of transcendental idealism.

Bibliography:

Gardner, Sebastian. Routledge Philosophy GuideBook to Kant and the Critique of Pure Reason. London: Routledge, 1999.
Kant, Immanuel. Critique of Pure Reason. Hackett Publishing Company, 1996.