Kant's Critique of Practical Reason

Kant's Critique of Practical Reason

Kant's Critique of Practical Reason: A Critial Guide - edited by Andrews Reath and Jens Timmermann. Cambridge University Press, 2010. 226 lk

Järgmine kord kui astud käed taskus TÜ Eetikakeskuse raamatukokku ja palud selleaastast raamatut Kantist, siis parem oleks, et sa teaksid raamatu nime või kohaviita! Mina nii ei toiminud ja sain käesoleval aastal avaldatud raamatu Kanti filosoofiast, aga mitte selle mida ma soovisin. Raamatuid Kantist ja Kanti sulest on nii palju, et need autorid ise nimetavad end Kantistideks ja kõrvaltvaatajana võib jääda mulje, et tegu on kultusega. Üks mees pani midagi kirja ja 200 aastat hiljem ikka veel üritatakse mõista, mida ta kirja pani. Käesolev teos on kogumik kommentaare Kanti 1788. aasta kirjutisele "Critique of Practical Reason". Mitmed Kantistid loovad seoseid ka teiste Kanti töödega, aga põhirõhk on ikkagi sellel "teisel Critique"-l.
Targemaks sain nii palju, et Kanti enda lugemine väga hea mõte ei ole, kuna ma pole kunagi lasknud saksa keelel oma kurku kraapida ja inglisekeelsed tõlked tunduvad olevat robustsemad kui saksa keel ise. Esialgu piirdun sellega, et loen võimalusel läbi raamatuid, mis selgitavad Kanti selgitusi.
Käesoleva teose taotlus on järgnev: "These new essays shed light on the principal arguments of the second Critique and explore their relations to Kant's critical philosophy as a whole." Sain teada, et kõne all olev Kanti kirjutis keskendub transtsendentaalsetele (kogematutele) küsimustele nagu seda on jumal, vabadus ja (hinge) surematus. Need on küsimused, millele ei saa vastata empiirilisi tõendeid esitades. Seevastu saab avastada võimalikke vastuseid - ja see harjutus on väidetavalt kriitilise mõtlemise arendamiseks väga kasulik. Veel on arutluse all vooruse ja õnne seos ja muu taoline. Mitu peatükki on pühendatud sellele, millises tähenduses Kant kasutab ühte või teist sõna (nt Factum või Triebfeder). Kantismi avastamisega olen nüüd alguse teinud ja tagasi seda tegu võtta ei saa (või saab? (ei, vist mitte (või siiski? (ei))))

0 comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)

Real understanding of any scientific subject must include some knowledge of its historical growth; we cannot comprehend and accept modern concepts and theories without knowing something of their origins - of how we have got where we are. Neglect of this maxim can lead to that unfortunate state of mind which regard the science of the day as finality. (Cherry 1977: 32)

We should temper reading by writing, and reciprocally, so that the written composition gives body (corpus) to what has been obtained by reading. Reading collects orationes logoi (discourses, elements of discourse); we must make a corpus of them. (Foucault 2005: 359)

The existence of the inner book, along with unreading or forgetting, is what makes the way we discuss books so discontinuous and heterogeneous. What we take to be the books we have read is in fact an anomalous accumulation of fragments of texts, reworked by our imagination and unrelated to the books of others, even if these books are materially identical to ones we have held in our hands. (Bayard 2007: 85-86)

The post-Cubist function of quotations in collages emerges with particular clarity in the early notes of Eisenstein, who wrote in 1928 that "an entire treatise can be made by composition of quotations." In his later works, in which compositions of quotations are often used, he himself explains them (in the spirit of the "linear style" of quotations) by a desire for "minimal distortion." (Ivanov 1976b: 323)

A person may be interested in scientific statements for their own sake (interested in collecting them as a person may be interested in collecting butterflies); a person may have knowledge and the increase of knowledge as his goal. (Morris 1949: 128)

In non-literate society, of course, there are usually some individuals whose interests lead them to collect, analyse and interpret the cultural tradition in a personal way [but] it is still evident that the literate individual has in practice so large a field of personal selection from the total cultural repertoire that the odds are strongly against his experiencing the cultural tradition as any sort of patterned whole. (Goody & Watt 1963: 335)

A different language is too often taken for stammering, a nonconformist virtuosity is misinterpreted as formlessness, exquisite variability is confused with cruelty, intentional enigmatic indefiniteness is deplored as the disappointing obscurity or fragmentariness of a mere neglected sketch, and in the stupendous interplay of symmetry and disequilibrium onesided critics are prone to overlook the harmony and to observe nothing but chaos. (Jakobson 1981[1967b]: 498)

I am convinced that there must still be a number of other concepts or models of potentially systemic generality scattered in some (un)fairly unknown works of disappeared or living researchers. We should dive for them in the deeps of literature. (François 1999: 217)

The selections included are of such a nature that readers who feel that the study of the history of systematic social theory is a waste of time will have occasion to ponder how thoroughly our predecessors have plagiarized many of our best ideas. (Meyer 1956: 166)

This, we may conceive, would be no small Advantage to the Knowledge of a thinking Man, if all his past Thoughts and Reasonings could be always present to him. (Locke 1741a: 115)

blogger visitor counter