Immanuel Kant, Prolegomena | Removing Hume's Doubt About Causality | Philosophy Core Concepts
Request personal videos on Cameo - www.cameo.com/gregorybsadler
Get Kant's Prolegomena - amzn.to/3RxRlGz
Support my work here - / sadler or here www.buymeacoffee.com/a4quydwom
Philosophy tutorials - reasonio.wordpress.com/tutori...
Take classes with me - reasonio.teachable.com/
This is a video in my new Core Concepts series -- designed to provide students and lifelong learners a brief discussion focused on one main concept from a classic philosophical text and thinker.
This Core Concept video focuses on Immanuel Kant's Prolegomena To Any Future Metaphysics and examines his discussion in the Second Part Of The Transcendental Problem: How Is Pure Natural Science Possible? Specifically this bears upon Kant's situating himself in relation to his predecessor David Hume, who argues that we have no experience of causality as such, and that we can and should have doubts about the relationship between what we think to be cause and effect.
If you'd like to support my work producing videos like this, become a Patreon supporter! Here's the link to find out more - including the rewards I offer backers: / sadler
You can also make a direct contribution to help fund my ongoing educational projects, by clicking here: www.paypal.me/ReasonIO
If you're interested in philosophy tutorial sessions with me - especially on Kant! - click here: reasonio.wordpress.com/tutori...
You can find the copy of the text I am using for this sequence on Immanuel Kant's Prolegomena To Any Future Metaphysics here - amzn.to/3RxRlGz
#Kant #idealism #Critique #Philosophy #Metaphysics #Epistemology #Reason #Prolegomena #Dogmatism #Lecture #German
My videos are used by students, lifelong learners, other professors, and professionals to learn more about topics, texts, and thinkers in philosophy, religious studies, literature, social-political theory, critical thinking, and communications. These include college and university classes, British A-levels preparation, and Indian civil service (IAS) examination preparation
(Amazon links are associate links. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases)
Пікірлер: 7
Thanks again - loving you going through the Prolegomena I feel a little bit uncomfortable about causality even in the phenomenal world giving us objectivity. 14:45
@GregoryBSadler
7 ай бұрын
Causality doesn't give us objectivity. Better put, some judgements of experience, that are objectively valid, involve causality
Hume says we cannot have knowledge of cause and effect, we only make judgements about cause from custom and our limited experience. Kant says we can have causal knowledge because cause is an inherent aspect of our faculty of perception that allows us to perceive the phenomena. Causation is fundamental to the phenomenal realm, that is our capacity to perceive the world. Does kant forego any claim that the noumenal realm causes the phenomenal in some sense? Or does kant try to claim that the phenomena are causally affected by noumena and how does he do that if our concept of causation is embedded in our faculty of perception? Thanks for the videos!
@GregoryBSadler
29 күн бұрын
Causality is not within the domain of the noumenal for Kant
I could be totally wrong, and I do hope so, but Kant miss the bus here. For me, Hume says: from what physical laws, more generic and antecedent laws, can we derive scientifically the law of the cause and effect? Why there isn't an effect or a thing without a cause physically speaking, mathematically speaking. Then, Hume, as a gentleman, says the laws of causality are derived from the habit, in other words: from common sense, from from conjecture and belief. Even Newton says his system reposes on the will of the Spirit, or "Alma Mundi", that makes the law of cause and effect or the laws of nature constant or so sure as analytical propositions or the Forms. Finally, as Plato says, there is no science of the sub-lunar realm, just opinions and conjunctures. So if Kant cannot demonstrate from what premises, more anterior, clear and evident premises, the laws of nature are derivative, he is just taking common sense as he start point. I must be deadly wrong, but...maybe not. Thank you so much for the class, Professor!
@GregoryBSadler
7 ай бұрын
Hume does not think causality is derived from "common sense". It's from custom or habit, and he explains what these mean in the Treatise and in the first Enquiry. What Newton or Plato have to say are pretty much irrelevant here. And yes, you're way off. I'd just not post comments if they're along these lines
@danyel80be40
7 ай бұрын
@@GregoryBSadlerThank you, Professor :)