政大機構典藏-National Chengchi University Institutional Repository(NCCUR):Item 140.119/100083
English  |  正體中文  |  简体中文  |  Post-Print筆數 : 27 |  全文筆數/總筆數 : 113451/144438 (79%)
造訪人次 : 51325407      線上人數 : 876
RC Version 6.0 © Powered By DSPACE, MIT. Enhanced by NTU Library IR team.
搜尋範圍 查詢小技巧：
  • 您可在西文檢索詞彙前後加上"雙引號"，以獲取較精準的檢索結果
  • 若欲以作者姓名搜尋，建議至進階搜尋限定作者欄位，可獲得較完整資料
    •  進階搜尋


    請使用永久網址來引用或連結此文件: https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/100083


    題名: 關於《第二批判》的「理性事實學說」之兩種解讀方式
    其他題名: Two Possible Interpretations of the Doctrine of “Fact of Reason” in the Second Critique
    作者: 彭文本
    Pong, Wen-berng
    關鍵詞: 理性事實;自由;道德法則;先驗演繹
    the fact of reason;freedom;moral law;transcendental deduction
    日期: 2005-07
    上傳時間: 2016-08-11 15:23:07 (UTC+8)
    摘要: 關於《第二批判》中有名的「理性事實學說」有一些不同的解讀方式，一般較傳統的看法是把「理性事實」理解成道德法則存在的事實，在這種理解下有些人認為康德在該書中完全沒有提供什麼論證；另外有些人則認為該書中仍舊可以找到能替康德辯護的論證。後面這些人又分兩類，一類認為康德其實提出像演繹這樣強的論證 (Beck)，另一類則認為康德提出不是演繹的一種較弱的論證 (Henrich)；最近幾年德國有位學者Willaschek提出新的一種看法，他認為這個事實不是指道德法則存在的事實，而是「理性的行動」作為一種事實，Willaschek以後者為基礎，發展出一種與傳統不同的解讀方式。\\r 這篇文章中筆者首先想要處理的是根據這兩個不同的解釋，對康德的《第二批判》論證構造（尤其是第一節到第八節）如何出現不同的樣貌。
    There are several possible readings about the famous “doctrine fact of reason of the second Critique. Traditionally it is understood to be the fact of existence of moral law. Under such understanding some philosophers claim that there are no argument at all in this book, and others argue on the contrary that Kant did offer some arguments in it. Of the second group, somebody contends that Kant give a strong argument like a deduction(Beck), somebody else says that Kant had a weak argument, i.e. an argument without the sense of deduction(Henrich). In the recent years, Willaschek gave a new interpretation on the basis of different meaning of the fact of reason. According to Willaschek, the fact of reason does not mean the fact of existence of moral law, instead it means “the act of reason” as a fact. Willaschek developed thereafter some new perspectives of the second Critique, which I find very interesting. In this paper I try to summarize the arguments of both interpretations, especially that of Beck and Willaschek in order to make clear two possible reading of the second Critique, especially the beginning 8 sections.
    關聯: 政治大學哲學學報, 14, 37-70
    The national Chengchi university philosophical
    資料類型: article
    顯示於類別:[政治大學哲學學報 THCI Core] 期刊論文

    文件中的檔案:

    檔案 描述 大小格式瀏覽次數
    14-37-70.pdf2042KbAdobe PDF2384檢視/開啟


    在政大典藏中所有的資料項目都受到原著作權保護.


    社群 sharing

    著作權政策宣告 Copyright Announcement
    1.本網站之數位內容為國立政治大學所收錄之機構典藏，無償提供學術研究與公眾教育等公益性使用，惟仍請適度，合理使用本網站之內容，以尊重著作權人之權益。商業上之利用，則請先取得著作權人之授權。
    The digital content of this website is part of National Chengchi University Institutional Repository. It provides free access to academic research and public education for non-commercial use. Please utilize it in a proper and reasonable manner and respect the rights of copyright owners. For commercial use, please obtain authorization from the copyright owner in advance.

    2.本網站之製作，已盡力防止侵害著作權人之權益，如仍發現本網站之數位內容有侵害著作權人權益情事者，請權利人通知本網站維護人員(nccur@nccu.edu.tw)，維護人員將立即採取移除該數位著作等補救措施。
    NCCU Institutional Repository is made to protect the interests of copyright owners. If you believe that any material on the website infringes copyright, please contact our staff(nccur@nccu.edu.tw). We will remove the work from the repository and investigate your claim.
    DSpace Software Copyright © 2002-2004  MIT &  Hewlett-Packard  /   Enhanced by   NTU Library IR team Copyright ©   - 回饋