政大機構典藏-National Chengchi University Institutional Repository(NCCUR):Item 140.119/33490

政大機構典藏-National Chengchi University Institutional Repository(NCCUR):Item 140.119/33490

English | 正體中文 | 简体中文 | Post-Print筆數 : 27 | Items with full text/Total items : 113822/144841 (79%)
Visitors : 51768257 Online Users : 576

RC Version 6.0 © Powered By DSPACE, MIT. Enhanced by NTU Library IR team.

Scope

please add "double quotation mark" for query phrases to get precise results

please goto advance search for comprehansive author search

Adv. Search

Home ‧ Login ‧ Upload ‧ Help ‧ About ‧ Administer

Goto mobile version

政大典藏 > College of Liberal Arts > Department of Philosophy > Theses > Item 140.119/33490

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/33490

Title:	康德認識論中的刺激問題
Authors:	潘柏安
Contributors:	彭文林潘柏安
Keywords:	康德物自身現象刺激雙重世界論雙重觀點論存有論條件認識論條件
Date:	2006
Issue Date:	2009-09-17 16:51:52 (UTC+8)
Abstract:	當康德一方面強調物自身不可能為我們所知，另一方面卻又宣稱物自身刺激了我們的感官、觸發認知機能並產生經驗與現象時，這兩項主張即構成了不一致的情形，也就形成了所謂的刺激問題（the problem of affection）。其中最顯著的困難，是在缺乏感性基礎的物自身上使用因果範疇：現象作為認知能力作用於物自身的結果。因為我們對知性範疇的運用是被康德限制在感性領域之內的。這種將刺激我們的事物視為物自身，而將其與現象視為原因與結果的解讀並不是對康德認識理論的唯一詮釋。本文在導論的部份介紹了在這種觀點下，康德的刺激概念如何與物自身的不可知論構成衝突；也藉由另一種已被提出的詮釋物自身與現象區分之觀點指出解消這項不一致的可能：物自身與現象不是原因與結果，康德並未運用因果範疇於認知物自身。如此一來，其認識理論就能夠免於刺激問題的困難。本文將藉由Henry Allison的理論，在第二章介紹上述為康德辯護的觀點。我們將看到在Allison的詮釋下，物自身與現象如何不是原因與結果的區分，而是基於對感性認知條件限度之界定而得出的同一事物之兩種概念。其中的關鍵在於是以存有論還是認識論的角度去理解康德關於感性認知能力的各種主張。Allison的詮釋除了解消原有的刺激問題，並以其對物自身與現象之區分方式重新賦予刺激概念不同以往的意義：它雖不再將刺激對象視為具有原因性的物自身，卻能夠以認識論的觀點將其理解為經驗中質料方面的先驗認知條件，因而保留了物自身概念在康德認識理論中積極而必要的理論功能。對於康德物自身與現象區分的正確理解，因而就成為了解決其認識論中刺激問題的決定性因素。Allison稱自己的詮釋為雙重觀點論，而稱視物自身與現象為因果的觀點為雙重世界論。在第三章，本文將介紹持雙重世界論立場的詮釋者James Van Cleve對Allison觀點的批評，以及其為本身立場的辯護：雙重觀點論將為康德的認識論帶來另一種矛盾，而雙重世界論本身就有具有解決刺激問題的能力。上述兩種處理刺激問題的觀點，分別來自於對康德主張的先驗認知機能不同的理解方式— 認識論或存有論的。不同的理解也就決定了物自身與現象的兩種相異的區分方式。在第四章，本文將介紹Nicholas Rescher 所提出的另一種區分物自身與現象的觀點，以及此觀點對刺激問題的處理。此詮釋不同於上述兩者的是，它不從對康德先驗觀念論的解讀去論現象與物自身的區分，而是以理性設準的角度提出康德另外一種進行此項區分的必要性：物自身和現象外部原因的概念是人類心靈本身的設定，我們如果不預設這些概念，就無法提供知識的客觀性，也無法以完備性為指導原則進行知識體系的建構。本文比較了這三種處理刺激問題的不同方式，發現Allison的雙重觀點論是三者中較能在康德認識論內部融貫地詮釋物自身與現象區分、解決刺激問題並賦予物自身積極意涵的理論。
Reference:	中文參考書目 (1) 康德著作翻譯康德《純粹理性批判》，李秋零譯，北京：中國人民大學出版社，2004。 -------.《純粹理性批判》，鄧曉芒譯，楊祖陶校，台北：聯經，2004。 (2)專書 Baumgartner, Has Michael 著，李明輝譯，《康德[純粹理性批判]導讀》，台北：聯經，1988。韓水法《康德物自身學說研究》，台北：台灣商務印書館，1990。外文參考書目 (1) 康德著作 Kant, Immanuel, Kritik der Reinen Vernunft, Stuttgart: Philipp Reclam jun. GmbH & Co., 1966. ------. Translated & ed. by Paul Guyer and Allen W. Wood, Critique of Pure Reason, Cambridge, U.K.; New York: Cambridge University Press, 1998 ------. Translated by Norman Kemp Smith, Critique of Pure Reason, London and Basingstoke: MacMillan and Company, Ltd, 1964 ------. Translated by Gary Hatfield, Prolegomena to any future metaphysics that will be able to come forward as science : with selections from the Critique of pure reason, Cambridge [U.K.] ; New York : Cambridge University Press, 1997 (2) 專書 Allison, Henry E, Kant`s Transcendental Idealism : An Interpretation and Defense, New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press, c2004, Rev. and enl. ed. ----------, Idealism and freedom : essays on Kant`s theoretical and practical philosophy, Cambridge ; New York : Cambridge University Press, 1996 Cleve, James Van, Problems from Kant, Oxford [England] ; New York : Oxford University Press, 1999. Jacobi, Friedrich H. , translated & edited by Brigitte Sassen, On Transcendental Idealism, in Kant`s Early Critics : the Empiricist Critique of the Theoretical Philosophy, Cambridge ; New York : Cambridge University Press, 2000. Langton, Rae, Kantian Humility: Our Ignorance of Things in Themselves, Oxford [England] : Clarendon Press ; New York : Oxford University Press, 1998. Rescher, Nicholas, Kant and the Reach of Reason-Study in Kant’s Theory of Rational Systematization, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000 Strawson, Peter F., The Bounds of Sense- An Essay on Kant’s Kant`s Critique of Pure Reason, London : Methuen, 1966. Vaihinger, Hans; hrsg. von Raymund Schmidt, Kommentar zu Kants kritik der reinen Vernunft, Aalen : Scientia Verlag, 1970. Westphal, Kenneth R., Kant`s Transcendental Proof of Realism, Cambridge, U.K. ; New York : Cambridge University Press, 2004. Wood, Allen W., Kant, Malden, MA : Blackwell Pub., 2005. (3) 期刊論文 Allais, Lucy, “Kant`s One World: Interpreting `Transcendental Idealism`”, British Journal for the History of Philosophy, 12(4) (2004). pp. 655-683. Allison, Henry E, “Kant’s Critique of Berkeley.” Journal of the History of Philosophy 2 (1973), pp. 43-63. -------------. “Kant’s Refutation of Realism.” Dialectica 30 (1976), pp. 223-53. -------------. “Things in Themselves, Noumena and the Transcendental Object.” Dialectica 32 (1978) pp. 41-76. -------------. “Transcendental Realism, Empirical Realism and Transcendental Idealism” Kantian Rewiew, V.11 (2006) Baldner, Kent, “Causality and Things in Themselves.” Synthese 77 (1988), pp. 353-73. Chad Mohler, A Most Affecting View: Transcendental Affection As Causation De-schematized, Minerva-An Internet Journal of Philosophy Vol.8 ( 2004 ) Kitcher, Patricia “Kant’s Epistemological Problem and Its Coherent Solution.” Philosophical Perspectives 13 (1999), pp. 415-441. piche, Claude "Kant and the Problem of Affection", dans : P. Fairfield (dir.), Working through Postmodernity. Essays in Honor of Gary Brent Madison, numéro spécial de Symposium, vol. 8, 2004, Hamilton, 275-297. Rescher, Nicholas, “On the Status of Things in Themselves” Synthese 47. 2 (1981), 289-300. Robinson, Hoke “Two Perspectives on Kant’s Appearances and Things in Themselves” Journal of the History of Philosophy 32 (1994), pp. 411- 41. Tomazweska, Anna, Transcendental Object and the “Problem of Affection”, Diametros nr.11(2007) Werkmeister, W.H. “ The Complementarity of Phenomena and Things in Themselves ” Synthese 47. (1981) pp. 301-331. (4) 相關辭典 Caygill, Howard, A Kant dictionary, Oxford, UK ; Cambridge, Mass., USA : Blackwell Reference, 1995. Edited by Robert Audi, The Cambridge dictionary of philosophy, Cambridge ; New York : Cambridge University Press, 1999. Hrsg. von Joachim Ritter, Historisches Wörterbuch der Philosophie, Basel : Schwabe, 1971.
Description:	碩士國立政治大學哲學研究所 92154008 95
Source URI:	http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0921540081
Data Type:	thesis
Appears in Collections:	[Department of Philosophy] Theses

Files in This Item:

File	Description	Size	Format
54008101.pdf		44Kb	Adobe PDF2	1032	View/Open
54008102.pdf		95Kb	Adobe PDF2	1169	View/Open
54008103.pdf		86Kb	Adobe PDF2	984	View/Open
54008104.pdf		120Kb	Adobe PDF2	1110	View/Open
54008105.pdf		406Kb	Adobe PDF2	1332	View/Open
54008106.pdf		543Kb	Adobe PDF2	1347	View/Open
54008107.pdf		491Kb	Adobe PDF2	1218	View/Open
54008108.pdf		501Kb	Adobe PDF2	1601	View/Open
54008109.pdf		266Kb	Adobe PDF2	1357	View/Open
54008110.pdf		124Kb	Adobe PDF2	2010	View/Open

All items in 政大典藏 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.

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 © - Feedback