下面为大家整理一篇优秀的essay代写范文- Kant's pure natural science，供大家参考学习，这篇论文讨论了康德的纯粹自然科学。康德的纯粹自然科学不是通常意义上的理论自然科学，而是具有形而上特性的命题。这些命题因为其先天综合性为本义上的自然科学带来了无可置疑的确定性，它们是作为本义上的自然科学的牛顿物理学的形而上学基础。尽管纯粹自然科学中的两类先天综合判断不是重合的，但康德关于它们的先天综合性的证明是可辩护的。康德的纯粹自然科学是他的自然科学理论的核心概念，先天综合判断则是理解这一概念的钥匙。
Kant's "pure natural science" is the core concept of his natural science theory, and a priori synthetic judgment is the key to understand this concept. "Pure science" is not Newton established in the mathematical principles of natural philosophy of the experience in physics, but in the form of innate comprehensive judgment about the nature of metaphysics, it has to do with Kant's metaphysics opposite namely ethics about freedom, on the structure by the general nature of metaphysics and form natural metaphysics of two parts. The three principles of "the analogy of experience" as a synthetic judgment of a priori belong to the former, while Kant's three laws of mechanics as a synthetic judgment of a priori belong to the latter. Therefore, luo zhong's view that "pure natural science" is merely "transcendental philosophy" is worth discussing, and Kant's proof of the latter is completely defensible. This paper first analyzes the meaning of Kant's term "pure natural science" and determines its reference, then finds out the synthetic a priori judgments, and finally refutes the misreading of Kant's synthetic a priori arguments on these judgments by researchers in the english-speaking world.
In the prologue of the initial metaphysical basis of natural sciences, Kant divided natural science in its original sense into pure natural science and the empirical part of natural science according to whether it contains the priori principle of natural explanation or not. In its original sense, the pure part of natural science, namely, pure natural science, contains the priori principles of natural interpretation, which are the synthetic judgment of priori. The rest of the empirical part does not include these a priori principles, which tend to be acquired synthetic judgments that appeal to the principle of experience. Since these a priori synthetic judgments always carry a sense of necessity for themselves, the pure natural sciences constituted by these a priori synthetic judgments are at the same time the basis for natural sciences in their original sense to obtain their unquestioned certainty.
Pure natural science already exists in reality, and its actuality is the premise on which Kant traces its possibility. In his introduction to the critique of pure reason, Kant expressed his absolute belief in its reality, which we can find in the synthetic apriori judgments as principles of physics. He gave examples of the principle of the conservation of matter in quantity and of the equality of action and reaction in the transmission of motion. Now the question is what is pure science?
Luo zhongzhong, peng zhijun and shu yuanzhao all believe that the concept of pure natural science is not the theoretical natural science usually understood, and the author agrees with their views. Luo zhongzhong believes that Kant's pure natural science is not a theoretical natural science, but a purely non-empirical part of natural science. Based on the principles of purity, universality and argumentation, he divided pure natural science into pure natural science in a narrow sense and pure natural science in a non-strict sense. Peng zhijun and shu yuanzhao agree that pure natural science is not theoretical natural science, and insist that pure natural science is the inherent natural metaphysics. The author believes that as the three said, pure natural science is not theoretical natural science. For Kant said, "all natural sciences by their very nature require a pure part upon which to establish the incontrovertible certainty which reason seeks in it. And as this part is wholly different in principle from those parts which are merely empirical, so far as its method is concerned, it is separated from the rest, and not mixed in at all... And where its capacity begins to require the help of empirical principles, is extremely useful." In addition to this, Kant concluded in his discussion of the place of mathematics in the science of precision that "natural science in its proper sense requires a pure part to be the basis of the empirical part." These two quotations show that there is a great difference in principle between pure natural science and empirical natural science. The former is philosophy, and the latter is empirical science. The former forms the latter together with the empirical part of natural science, and the latter needs the former as its foundation.
Although luo zhongjing and peng zhijun, shu yuanzhao think pure natural science is not theoretical natural science, but they are in pure natural science after all point to what problem produced disagreement. Luo zhongzhong believes that pure natural science is the metaphysics of general nature, while peng zhijun and shu yuanzhao believe that pure natural science not only includes the metaphysics of general nature but also includes the metaphysics of body nature. Before entering into the argument, it is necessary to determine Kant's reference to the metaphysics of nature in general. The initial according to metaphysics of natural science gives us inspiration, Kant there will be divided into natural metaphysics of the prior part and special metaphysics of natural science, the former is different from the latter is that it has nothing to do with the experience of the specific object and concerned about the general nature, the latter, on the other hand, it refers to one kind of the nature of things, so the former and Kant called "general natural metaphysics". In this way, this transcendental part can only be the metaphysics of nature in general, because the metaphysics of nature in general is concerned with the possibility of nature. Kant even named section 36 of the introduction to metaphysics of the future as "how is nature itself possible?" In this section he argues that the possibilities of nature in general are not in nature but in human understanding. It can be seen that the metaphysical principles of nature in general are the legislation of man on nature, which is expressed in the form of propositions as "all synthetic principles of pure understanding". Kant distinguishes them from the special metaphysical natural sciences.
In view of the above is the demonstration of the general nature of Kant's metaphysics is "purely intellectual all comprehensive theory", and his natural form of metaphysics and the whole of his metaphysics in the building planning, the next will be examining plans Kant's metaphysics, under the premise of his metaphysics "pure science" corresponding to the solution of the what part of the problem. Comparatively speaking, I agree with peng zhijun and shu yuanzhao that Kant's "pure natural science" should refer to his metaphysics of nature in general and metaphysics of body nature.
Luo zhong's view of excluding metaphysics of physical nature from pure natural science is incompatible with his own distinction between pure natural science in a narrow sense and pure natural science in a non-strict sense. Kant in the future the introduction to metaphysics of section 15 had the nature of the doctrine of prep is divided into mathematical principle and is not completely pure, pure reasoning, experience does not depend on the source of these three things, because of the second kind is pure principle of sex are the innate comprehensive judgment, they are completely independent of experience, so Kant to establish them as natural science, but there is no clear to the third class as a pure natural science, too. Perhaps because of the fuzziness of this section, Mr. Luo also distinguishes pure natural science in a narrow sense from pure natural science in a non-strict sense, and the distinction is valid. But the third category, which deals exclusively with external sensory objects, should also be classified as pure natural science, or at least as pure natural science in the non-strict sense. Otherwise, professor luo's distinction between pure natural science in the narrow sense and pure natural science in the non-strict sense would be meaningless. Kant of third class example is the "movement" "impenetrability" "inertia", he once said: "the mathematical principles of physicists cannot lack of metaphysics, and in these principles is not a lack of their natural objects, i.e. material congenitally suitable for the principles of the above applies to the external experience, i.e. inertia motion, full of space, such as concept." And initiative according to the scientific nature of metaphysics "is around the basic rules of movement as a material, the second chapter is all substances to fill a space according to the theorem in the third chapter three detailed elaborated the concept of movement inertia can be the meaning of transitivity, visible in the third type of things in this book, which should be considered at least is strict in the sense of pure science.
Kant's metaphysics of body and nature is consistent with his metaphysical assumption of pure rational architecture in the initial basis of metaphysics of natural sciences. In the architecture of pure reason Kant gives a positive account of his whole metaphysical project. He divided philosophy into natural philosophy and moral philosophy according to whether the legislative object of reason is nature or freedom. The systematic knowledge in natural philosophy is natural metaphysics, which can be either a transcendental philosophy or a rational natural philosophy, and the latter can be subdivided into transcendental or internal natural science. Thus, Kant's whole metaphysics consists of "transcendental philosophy, i.e. ontology, rational science of nature: reasonable physics and psychology, reasonable cosmology, and reasonable theology". What part of his whole metaphysical project is his work in the initial metaphysical foundations of the natural sciences? In my opinion, this monograph completes the sound physics in the second part. It is not the metaphysics of nature in general, but the metaphysics of body nature. First, this treatise is not a transcendental philosophy. For transcendental philosophy CARES not whether the concrete objects themselves are given to us, but only the understanding itself. And this treatise has its object, which is the object of the external senses, which is matter. Second, it is not a reasonable cosmology and a reasonable theology. Kant has been demonstrated in the "transcendental dialectic", psychology, cosmology, theology is not a strictly scientific, because they are, respectively, as the soul of unconditional, the universe and god as the object, and will never appear in the may experience unconditional, these objects do not belong to the intellectual concept, and belongs to the concept of rational. The concept of reason involves not the synthetic unity of appearances, but the absolute and unconditional synthetic unity. Therefore, although there is a synthetic a priori judgment in the understanding, there is no synthetic a priori judgment in reason, at least no constructive synthetic a priori judgment. Psychology, cosmology and theology are certainly not sciences. This work is concerned only with the metaphysical basis of the natural sciences, so it is not reasonable cosmology and reasonable theology.
The title of the original metaphysical foundation of the natural sciences tells us that this treatise is engaged in metaphysics, and that it is evidently directed not against what ought to be, but only against all that is, and therefore belongs to nature, not to the metaphysics of freedom. Fourth, the comparison of rational physics with the particular metaphysical physics in which this work is engaged shows that it is the metaphysics of body nature. Before facing the reconstruction of Kant's metaphysics plan tells us that the inner nature of learning objects are either physical nature or mind of nature, the former depend on outer senses, which rely on the senses, and "the physical nature of metaphysics was called physics, but because it should contain only the innate principles of physics, it is called a reasonable physics". Kant made a division of the metaphysics of nature, which makes us know more clearly what is the metaphysics of body and nature in Kant's mind. Kant's principle of this division is whether the metaphysics of nature, which is the transcendental part of nature's metaphysics, studies a particular class of things, and does not specialize in a particular class of things, but merely "discusses the laws which make a notion of nature possible in general". The metaphysics that studies the nature of form is the metaphysics of the nature of form, and the metaphysics that studies the nature of thinking is the metaphysics of nature that can think, and Kant calls the metaphysics of the nature of form the physics of the special metaphysics. Might as well put special metaphysics and physics reasonable physics, they are only in order to form natural as the research object, and they all belong to the natural metaphysics, so they are the same thing, special metaphysics is reasonable in physics, physics is the natural form of metaphysics.
The analysis of the connotation of pure natural science shows that it can be divided into two parts: metaphysics of general nature and metaphysics of body nature. Its significance to natural science in its original sense lies in providing a priori principle, which is always expressed in the form of a priori synthetic judgment. Only a priori synthetic judgment can bring unquestionable certainty to the natural explanation given by natural science in its original meaning. It is reasonable to suppose, therefore, that there are two kinds of a priori synthetic judgments in pure natural science, and the question now is to find them.
The first kind of apriori synthetic judgments are the synthetic principles of pure understanding in the metaphysics of nature. Generally speaking, Kant does not put the proof of these three principles in the "supreme principle of all analytical judgments", but in the "supreme principle of all synthetic judgments", so Kant cannot claim the analytical nature of these principles. Specifically, in the proof of entity to be principle, Kant explicitly advocated the principle of congenital comprehensive, because he was against the rationalism philosophers as a proposition analysis to deal with it, he said "such a proof is not never can be arbitrary, namely from the concept, because it involves a priori synthetic proposition". In proving causation principle, Kant also stick to its comprehensive and a priori is true, he had this principle is regarded as a natural rule, "according to this rule, in the general advance in an event of STH. There must be a rule conditions, according to the rules are always necessary to follow" the event, and the principle of causality attributed to, of course, can not rely on the analysis of the concept of and self-evident, suggesting that Kant did indeed this principle as innate comprehensive judgment to prove. As for the principle of synergy, Kant once said, "the coexistence of entities in space can only be known empirically on the premise that they interact with each other. So interaction is also a possible condition for the objects themselves to be objects of experience." It can be seen that Kant argues that the principle of synergy is a condition for us to obtain the experience of the simultaneous coexistence of entities in phenomena. In Kant's mind, this principle is a priori not dependent on experience, and Kant of course insists on its a priori comprehensiveness.
想要了解更多英国留学资讯或者需要英国代写，请关注51Due英国论文代写平台，51Due是一家专业的论文代写机构，专业辅导海外留学生的英文论文写作，主要业务有essay代写、paper代写、assignment代写。在这里，51Due致力于为留学生朋友提供高效优质的留学教育辅导服务，为广大留学生提升写作水平，帮助他们达成学业目标。如果您有essay代写需求，可以咨询我们的客服QQ：800020041。
51Due网站原创范文除特殊说明外一切图文著作权归51Due所有；未经51Due官方授权谢绝任何用途转载或刊发于媒体。如发生侵犯著作权现象，51Due保留一切法律追诉权。
Kant's "pure natural science" is the core concept of his natural science theory, and a priori synthetic judgment is the key to understand this concept. "Pure science" is not Newton established in the mathematical principles of natural philosophy of the experience in physics, but in the form of innate comprehensive judgment about the nature of metaphysics, it has to do with Kant's metaphysics opposite namely ethics about freedom, on the structure by the general nature of metaphysics and form natural metaphysics of two parts. The three principles of "the analogy of experience" as a synthetic judgment of a priori belong to the former, while Kant's three laws of mechanics as a synthetic judgment of a priori belong to the latter. Therefore, luo zhong's view that "pure natural science" is merely "transcendental philosophy" is worth discussing, and Kant's proof of the latter is completely defensible. This paper first analyzes the meaning of Kant's term "pure natural science" and determines its reference, then finds out the synthetic a priori judgments, and finally refutes the misreading of Kant's synthetic a priori arguments on these judgments by researchers in the english-speaking world.
In the prologue of the initial metaphysical basis of natural sciences, Kant divided natural science in its original sense into pure natural science and the empirical part of natural science according to whether it contains the priori principle of natural explanation or not. In its original sense, the pure part of natural science, namely, pure natural science, contains the priori principles of natural interpretation, which are the synthetic judgment of priori. The rest of the empirical part does not include these a priori principles, which tend to be acquired synthetic judgments that appeal to the principle of experience. Since these a priori synthetic judgments always carry a sense of necessity for themselves, the pure natural sciences constituted by these a priori synthetic judgments are at the same time the basis for natural sciences in their original sense to obtain their unquestioned certainty.
Pure natural science already exists in reality, and its actuality is the premise on which Kant traces its possibility. In his introduction to the critique of pure reason, Kant expressed his absolute belief in its reality, which we can find in the synthetic apriori judgments as principles of physics. He gave examples of the principle of the conservation of matter in quantity and of the equality of action and reaction in the transmission of motion. Now the question is what is pure science?
Luo zhongzhong, peng zhijun and shu yuanzhao all believe that the concept of pure natural science is not the theoretical natural science usually understood, and the author agrees with their views. Luo zhongzhong believes that Kant's pure natural science is not a theoretical natural science, but a purely non-empirical part of natural science. Based on the principles of purity, universality and argumentation, he divided pure natural science into pure natural science in a narrow sense and pure natural science in a non-strict sense. Peng zhijun and shu yuanzhao agree that pure natural science is not theoretical natural science, and insist that pure natural science is the inherent natural metaphysics. The author believes that as the three said, pure natural science is not theoretical natural science. For Kant said, "all natural sciences by their very nature require a pure part upon which to establish the incontrovertible certainty which reason seeks in it. And as this part is wholly different in principle from those parts which are merely empirical, so far as its method is concerned, it is separated from the rest, and not mixed in at all... And where its capacity begins to require the help of empirical principles, is extremely useful." In addition to this, Kant concluded in his discussion of the place of mathematics in the science of precision that "natural science in its proper sense requires a pure part to be the basis of the empirical part." These two quotations show that there is a great difference in principle between pure natural science and empirical natural science. The former is philosophy, and the latter is empirical science. The former forms the latter together with the empirical part of natural science, and the latter needs the former as its foundation.
Although luo zhongjing and peng zhijun, shu yuanzhao think pure natural science is not theoretical natural science, but they are in pure natural science after all point to what problem produced disagreement. Luo zhongzhong believes that pure natural science is the metaphysics of general nature, while peng zhijun and shu yuanzhao believe that pure natural science not only includes the metaphysics of general nature but also includes the metaphysics of body nature. Before entering into the argument, it is necessary to determine Kant's reference to the metaphysics of nature in general. The initial according to metaphysics of natural science gives us inspiration, Kant there will be divided into natural metaphysics of the prior part and special metaphysics of natural science, the former is different from the latter is that it has nothing to do with the experience of the specific object and concerned about the general nature, the latter, on the other hand, it refers to one kind of the nature of things, so the former and Kant called "general natural metaphysics". In this way, this transcendental part can only be the metaphysics of nature in general, because the metaphysics of nature in general is concerned with the possibility of nature. Kant even named section 36 of the introduction to metaphysics of the future as "how is nature itself possible?" In this section he argues that the possibilities of nature in general are not in nature but in human understanding. It can be seen that the metaphysical principles of nature in general are the legislation of man on nature, which is expressed in the form of propositions as "all synthetic principles of pure understanding". Kant distinguishes them from the special metaphysical natural sciences.
In view of the above is the demonstration of the general nature of Kant's metaphysics is "purely intellectual all comprehensive theory", and his natural form of metaphysics and the whole of his metaphysics in the building planning, the next will be examining plans Kant's metaphysics, under the premise of his metaphysics "pure science" corresponding to the solution of the what part of the problem. Comparatively speaking, I agree with peng zhijun and shu yuanzhao that Kant's "pure natural science" should refer to his metaphysics of nature in general and metaphysics of body nature.
Luo zhong's view of excluding metaphysics of physical nature from pure natural science is incompatible with his own distinction between pure natural science in a narrow sense and pure natural science in a non-strict sense. Kant in the future the introduction to metaphysics of section 15 had the nature of the doctrine of prep is divided into mathematical principle and is not completely pure, pure reasoning, experience does not depend on the source of these three things, because of the second kind is pure principle of sex are the innate comprehensive judgment, they are completely independent of experience, so Kant to establish them as natural science, but there is no clear to the third class as a pure natural science, too. Perhaps because of the fuzziness of this section, Mr. Luo also distinguishes pure natural science in a narrow sense from pure natural science in a non-strict sense, and the distinction is valid. But the third category, which deals exclusively with external sensory objects, should also be classified as pure natural science, or at least as pure natural science in the non-strict sense. Otherwise, professor luo's distinction between pure natural science in the narrow sense and pure natural science in the non-strict sense would be meaningless. Kant of third class example is the "movement" "impenetrability" "inertia", he once said: "the mathematical principles of physicists cannot lack of metaphysics, and in these principles is not a lack of their natural objects, i.e. material congenitally suitable for the principles of the above applies to the external experience, i.e. inertia motion, full of space, such as concept." And initiative according to the scientific nature of metaphysics "is around the basic rules of movement as a material, the second chapter is all substances to fill a space according to the theorem in the third chapter three detailed elaborated the concept of movement inertia can be the meaning of transitivity, visible in the third type of things in this book, which should be considered at least is strict in the sense of pure science.
Kant's metaphysics of body and nature is consistent with his metaphysical assumption of pure rational architecture in the initial basis of metaphysics of natural sciences. In the architecture of pure reason Kant gives a positive account of his whole metaphysical project. He divided philosophy into natural philosophy and moral philosophy according to whether the legislative object of reason is nature or freedom. The systematic knowledge in natural philosophy is natural metaphysics, which can be either a transcendental philosophy or a rational natural philosophy, and the latter can be subdivided into transcendental or internal natural science. Thus, Kant's whole metaphysics consists of "transcendental philosophy, i.e. ontology, rational science of nature: reasonable physics and psychology, reasonable cosmology, and reasonable theology". What part of his whole metaphysical project is his work in the initial metaphysical foundations of the natural sciences? In my opinion, this monograph completes the sound physics in the second part. It is not the metaphysics of nature in general, but the metaphysics of body nature. First, this treatise is not a transcendental philosophy. For transcendental philosophy CARES not whether the concrete objects themselves are given to us, but only the understanding itself. And this treatise has its object, which is the object of the external senses, which is matter. Second, it is not a reasonable cosmology and a reasonable theology. Kant has been demonstrated in the "transcendental dialectic", psychology, cosmology, theology is not a strictly scientific, because they are, respectively, as the soul of unconditional, the universe and god as the object, and will never appear in the may experience unconditional, these objects do not belong to the intellectual concept, and belongs to the concept of rational. The concept of reason involves not the synthetic unity of appearances, but the absolute and unconditional synthetic unity. Therefore, although there is a synthetic a priori judgment in the understanding, there is no synthetic a priori judgment in reason, at least no constructive synthetic a priori judgment. Psychology, cosmology and theology are certainly not sciences. This work is concerned only with the metaphysical basis of the natural sciences, so it is not reasonable cosmology and reasonable theology.
The title of the original metaphysical foundation of the natural sciences tells us that this treatise is engaged in metaphysics, and that it is evidently directed not against what ought to be, but only against all that is, and therefore belongs to nature, not to the metaphysics of freedom. Fourth, the comparison of rational physics with the particular metaphysical physics in which this work is engaged shows that it is the metaphysics of body nature. Before facing the reconstruction of Kant's metaphysics plan tells us that the inner nature of learning objects are either physical nature or mind of nature, the former depend on outer senses, which rely on the senses, and "the physical nature of metaphysics was called physics, but because it should contain only the innate principles of physics, it is called a reasonable physics". Kant made a division of the metaphysics of nature, which makes us know more clearly what is the metaphysics of body and nature in Kant's mind. Kant's principle of this division is whether the metaphysics of nature, which is the transcendental part of nature's metaphysics, studies a particular class of things, and does not specialize in a particular class of things, but merely "discusses the laws which make a notion of nature possible in general". The metaphysics that studies the nature of form is the metaphysics of the nature of form, and the metaphysics that studies the nature of thinking is the metaphysics of nature that can think, and Kant calls the metaphysics of the nature of form the physics of the special metaphysics. Might as well put special metaphysics and physics reasonable physics, they are only in order to form natural as the research object, and they all belong to the natural metaphysics, so they are the same thing, special metaphysics is reasonable in physics, physics is the natural form of metaphysics.
The analysis of the connotation of pure natural science shows that it can be divided into two parts: metaphysics of general nature and metaphysics of body nature. Its significance to natural science in its original sense lies in providing a priori principle, which is always expressed in the form of a priori synthetic judgment. Only a priori synthetic judgment can bring unquestionable certainty to the natural explanation given by natural science in its original meaning. It is reasonable to suppose, therefore, that there are two kinds of a priori synthetic judgments in pure natural science, and the question now is to find them.
The first kind of apriori synthetic judgments are the synthetic principles of pure understanding in the metaphysics of nature. Generally speaking, Kant does not put the proof of these three principles in the "supreme principle of all analytical judgments", but in the "supreme principle of all synthetic judgments", so Kant cannot claim the analytical nature of these principles. Specifically, in the proof of entity to be principle, Kant explicitly advocated the principle of congenital comprehensive, because he was against the rationalism philosophers as a proposition analysis to deal with it, he said "such a proof is not never can be arbitrary, namely from the concept, because it involves a priori synthetic proposition". In proving causation principle, Kant also stick to its comprehensive and a priori is true, he had this principle is regarded as a natural rule, "according to this rule, in the general advance in an event of STH. There must be a rule conditions, according to the rules are always necessary to follow" the event, and the principle of causality attributed to, of course, can not rely on the analysis of the concept of and self-evident, suggesting that Kant did indeed this principle as innate comprehensive judgment to prove. As for the principle of synergy, Kant once said, "the coexistence of entities in space can only be known empirically on the premise that they interact with each other. So interaction is also a possible condition for the objects themselves to be objects of experience." It can be seen that Kant argues that the principle of synergy is a condition for us to obtain the experience of the simultaneous coexistence of entities in phenomena. In Kant's mind, this principle is a priori not dependent on experience, and Kant of course insists on its a priori comprehensiveness.
想要了解更多英国留学资讯或者需要英国代写，请关注51Due英国论文代写平台，51Due是一家专业的论文代写机构，专业辅导海外留学生的英文论文写作，主要业务有essay代写、paper代写、assignment代写。在这里，51Due致力于为留学生朋友提供高效优质的留学教育辅导服务，为广大留学生提升写作水平，帮助他们达成学业目标。如果您有essay代写需求，可以咨询我们的客服QQ：800020041。
51Due网站原创范文除特殊说明外一切图文著作权归51Due所有；未经51Due官方授权谢绝任何用途转载或刊发于媒体。如发生侵犯著作权现象，51Due保留一切法律追诉权。
※コメント投稿者のブログIDはブログ作成者のみに通知されます