Is there among our cognitive abilities such that could direct the activity of the mind, setting before it certain goals? According to Kant, such a faculty exists, and it is called reason. The distinction between reason and reason goes back to Kant, which then plays an important role in all subsequent representatives of German idealism - Fichte, Schelling and Hegel. Reason, according to Kant, always passes from one conditioned to another conditioned, not being able to finish this series with some last - unconditional, because in the world of experience there is nothing unconditional. At the same time, it is natural for a person to strive to acquire absolute knowledge, that is, in the words of Kant, to obtain absolutely unconditional knowledge, from which, as from some kind of root cause, the whole series of phenomena would flow and their entire totality would be explained at once. This kind of unconditional offers us reason in the form of ideas. When we look for the last unconditional source of all phenomena of inner feeling, we, says Kant, get the idea of the soul, which traditional metaphysics considered as a substance endowed with immortality and free will. Striving to rise to the last absolute of all phenomena of the external world, we come to the idea of the world, the cosmos as a whole. And finally, wishing to comprehend the absolute beginning of all phenomena in general - both mental and physical - our mind goes back to the idea of God.
Introducing the Platonic concept of an idea to designate the highest unconditional reality, Kant understands the ideas of reason in a completely different way from Plato. Kant's ideas are not supersensible entities that have real existence and are comprehended with the help of reason. Ideas are ideas about the goal towards which our knowledge strives, about the task that it sets for itself. The ideas of the mind perform a regulatory function in cognition, prompting the mind to activity, but nothing more. Denying a person the opportunity to know objects that are not given to him in experience, Kant thereby criticized the idealism of Plato and all those who, following Plato, shared the belief in the possibility of non-experimental knowledge of things in themselves.
Thus, the achievement of the last unconditional is the task towards which the mind aspires. But here an irresolvable contradiction arises. In order for the understanding to have a stimulus to activity, it, prompted by reason, strives for absolute knowledge; but this goal always remains unattainable for him. And therefore, striving for this goal, the understanding goes beyond the limits of experience; meanwhile, only within the given limits of its category have a legitimate application. Going beyond the limits of experience, the mind falls into an illusion, deluded, assuming that with the help of categories it is able to cognize non-experiential things in themselves.
This illusion, according to Kant, is characteristic of all previous philosophy. Kant tries to prove that the ideas of the mind, which impel the mind to go beyond the limits of experience, cannot correspond to a real object, by revealing the contradictory nature of this imaginary object. For example, if we take the idea of the world as a whole, then it turns out that it is possible to prove the validity of two contradictory statements characterizing the properties of the world. Thus, the thesis that the world is limited in space and has a beginning in time is just as provable as the opposite thesis, according to which the world is infinite in space and beginningless in time. The discovery of such a contradiction (antinomy), according to Kant, indicates that the subject to which these mutually exclusive definitions are attributed is unknowable. Dialectical contradiction, according to Kant, testifies to the misuse of our cognitive ability. Thus, dialectics is characterized negatively: dialectical illusion takes place where, with the help of finite human reason, one tries to construct not the world of experience, but the world of things in themselves.
Phenomenon and "thing in itself", nature and freedom
Claiming that the subject cognizes only what he himself creates, Kant draws a dividing line between the world of phenomena and the unknowable world of "things in themselves" (that is, things as they exist in themselves). Necessity reigns in the world of appearances, everything here is conditioned by others and explained through others. There is no place here for substances in their traditional sense, that is, for that which exists by itself through itself, as some goal in itself. The world of experience as a whole is only relative; it exists by reference to the transcendental subject. Between "things in themselves" and phenomena, the relationship of cause and effect is preserved: without "things in themselves" there can be no phenomena. Kant is not able to get rid of the contradiction here: he illegally applies one of the categories of reason - causality - in relation to "things in themselves."
The world of "things-in-themselves," or, in other words, the intelligible world, could be accessible only to reason, for it is completely closed to sensibility. But the theoretical reason, that is, science, according to Kant, it is inaccessible. However, this does not mean that this world does not at all testify to itself to man: according to Kant, it opens up to practical reason, or rational will. Practical reason is here called because its function is to guide the actions of a person, that is, to establish the principles of moral action. The will allows a person to determine his actions by universal objects (the goals of reason), and therefore Kant calls it practical reason. A being capable of acting in accordance with universal, and not just egoistic, goals is a free being.
Freedom, according to Kant, is independence from the determining causes of the sensuously perceived world. If in the empirical, natural world every phenomenon is conditioned by the previous one as its cause, then in the world of freedom a rational being can “start a series”, proceeding from the concept of reason, without being at all conditioned by natural necessity.
Kant calls the human will autonomous (self-lawful). The autonomy of the will lies in the fact that it is determined not by external causes - be it natural necessity or even divine will - but by the law that it itself sets over itself, recognizing it as the highest, that is, exclusively the internal law of the mind.
Thus, man is an inhabitant of two worlds: the sensuously perceived, in which he, as a sensual being, is subject to the laws of nature, and the intelligible, where he freely submits himself to the law of reason, that is, to the moral law. The principle of the natural world says: no phenomenon can be the cause of itself, it always has its cause in something else (another phenomenon). The principle of the world of freedom says: a rational being is an end in itself, it cannot be treated only as a means to something else. Precisely because it is an end, it can act as a freely acting cause, that is, free will. The intelligible world Kant, therefore, thinks as a set of "reasonable beings as things in themselves", as a world of final causes, self-existing autonomous monads. Man as a being endowed with reason, a thinking being, and not only feeling, is, according to Kant, a thing in itself.
1 Kant I. Soch.: V 6 t. M., 1965. T. 4. Part 1. S. 304.
"Knowledge" of the intelligible world, which opens up to practical reason, is, according to Kant, a special kind of knowledge-call, knowledge-requirement addressed to us and determining our actions. It boils down to the content of the highest moral law, the categorical imperative, which says: "Do so that the maxim of your will may at the same time have the force of the principle of universal legislation." This means: do not turn another rational being only into a means for the realization of your private goals. “In everything created,” writes Kant, “everything and for anything can be used only as a means; only man, and with him every rational being, is an end in itself.”
2 Ibid. S. 347.
3 Ibid. S. 414.
In ethics, Kant acts as an opponent of eudemonism, which declares happiness the highest goal of human life. Since the fulfillment of moral duty requires overcoming sensual inclinations, insofar, according to Kant, the principle of pleasure is opposite to the principle of morality, which means that it is necessary from the very beginning to abandon the illusion that, following the categorical imperative, a person can be happy. Virtue and happiness are two incompatible things, the German philosopher believes.
Although Kant was initially close to the Enlightenment, in the end his teaching turned out to be a critique of the Enlightenment concept of reason. A distinctive feature of the Enlightenment was the belief in the limitless possibilities of knowledge, and, accordingly, social progress, since the latter was conceived as a product of the development of science. Having rejected the claims of science to the knowledge of things in themselves, having indicated to human reason its limits, Kant, in his words, limited knowledge in order to make room for faith. It is the belief in the immortality of the soul, freedom and God, the rational proof of the existence of which Kant rejects, that constitutes the basis that should sanctify the demand addressed to man to be a moral being. The sphere of moral action was thus separated from scientific knowledge and placed above it.
Mind and reason
Reason and mind- in a narrow sense - two types of human mental activity, the difference and mutual relationship of which was understood differently in various philosophical teachings.
Mind is the highest form of activity, in comparison with reason (Bruno, Schelling), etc. Reason is a thinking soul, the ability to think objects and their connections through concepts (Wundt), it is the ability to form concepts, judgments and rules (Kant).
Rational activity is connected with the strict operation of concepts, the classification of facts and phenomena, the systematization of knowledge, while intelligence acts as a synthesizing creative activity, revealing the essence of reality, creating new ideas that go beyond the existing systems. The mind can unite the opposites that the mind has separated. Thus, the mind makes it possible to reason, and the mind - to discover and set goals. While the mind excludes the irrational processes of the spirit, the mind can creatively include them through the consciousness of the contradiction of thinking itself.
Etymology of concepts
The essential difference between the two concepts under consideration is already evident from the fact that there is understanding even without reasoning; one can directly perceive the meaning of something, (intuitive perception). A poetic work composed according to reason is spoken of only in the sense of censure, as well as a scientific treatise inspired by fantasy.
On the other hand, there is no doubt that one can reason without understanding. In general, we reason about some subject in order to comprehend its true meaning; consequently, such understanding as the actual state of thought appears only at the end, and not at the beginning of reasoning. There are thus two kinds of understanding:
- intuitive (inherent in immediate consciousness and exalted by poetic and any other inspiration), not based on reasoning, but powerful, but for completeness and clarity should be accompanied by it
- and discursive understanding, obtained through reasoning.
The normal thought process proceeds, therefore, from direct understanding given in one form or another (at least in the form of a human word), where some mental content is taken in its fusion, and then passes through reasoning, that is, a deliberate separation and opposition of mental elements, and comes to their conscious and distinct connection, or internal addition (synthesis).
The relation of mind and reason in philosophical teachings
The relationship of reasoning to understanding is most accurately and fully represented in the philosophy of Hegel, while in Kant it is obscured by his one-sided subjectivism and various artificial constructions, and in Schelling the significance of the rational side of thinking is not sufficiently clarified and evaluated. Schopenhauer gives the terms Vernunft and Verstand the opposite meaning of the generally accepted one.
Notes
Wikimedia Foundation. 2010 .
See what "Mind and Reason" is in other dictionaries:
Mind and reason- correlative concepts of philosophy. Mind means the mind, the ability to understand, comprehend. In a number of philosophical teachings, the mind is the highest principle and essence, the basis of knowledge and behavior of people. In I. Kant, reason is the ability to form concepts, ... ...
See reason and reason. Philosophical encyclopedic dictionary. Moscow: Soviet Encyclopedia. Ch. editors: L. F. Ilyichev, P. N. Fedoseev, S. M. Kovalev, V. G. Panov. 1983. MIND… Philosophical Encyclopedia
Allegory of Reason. The central figure of the Basilica Notre Dame de Fourvière on the hill in Lyon. Mind (lat. ... Wikipedia
A; m. 1. Human cognitive activity, the ability to think; mind, intellect; reason. Human r. boundless. Collective r. Light of the mind (high) The child surprises with his mind. Get smarter (gain knowledge, become smarter). ... ... encyclopedic Dictionary
Reason- see Reason and reason ... Pedagogical terminological dictionary
Philos. categories that have developed within the classical German. philosophy and designed to distinguish between two supposedly fundamentally different levels of rational cognition. Contrasting Raz., as a higher "ability of the soul" ... Philosophical Encyclopedia
mind is clean- PURE MIND (Latin ratio pura, German reine Vernunft) a concept widely known thanks to the critical philosophy of I. Kant, however, was used earlier as in lat. (Chr. Wolf and others), and in it. variant (I.N. Tetens, M. Hertz and others). IN… … Encyclopedia of Epistemology and Philosophy of Science
See mind without common sense... Dictionary of Russian synonyms and expressions similar in meaning. under. ed. N. Abramova, M .: Russian dictionaries, 1999. reason mind, mind, intellect; intelligence, mental ability, thinking ability, reasonableness ... Synonym dictionary
See the meaning, the mind is above the mind, above the mind, to teach the mind to the mind ... Dictionary of Russian synonyms and expressions similar in meaning. under. ed. N. Abramova, M .: Russian dictionaries, 1999. mind meaning, mind; reason, common sense; intelligence; understanding... ... Synonym dictionary
reason- (reason and mind) in the philosophical and psychological tradition, two types of work of logical thinking. The mind, being one of the moments of the movement of thought towards the truth, operates within the existing knowledge with the data of experience, ordering them according to firmly ... ... Great Psychological Encyclopedia
Books
- Reason. Intelligence. Rationality, N. S. Avtonomova. The monograph is devoted to the consideration of the problems of rationality in the historical and epistemological terms. Accordingly, it analyzes the concepts that most fully expressed the traditions ...
Is there among our cognitive abilities such that could direct the activity of the mind, setting before it certain goals? According to Kant, such a faculty exists, and it is called reason. The distinction between reason and reason goes back to Kant, which then plays an important role in all subsequent representatives of German idealism - Fichte, Schelling and Hegel. Reason, according to Kant, always passes from one conditioned to another conditioned, not being able to finish this series with some last - unconditional, because in the world of experience there is nothing unconditional. At the same time, it is natural for a person to strive to acquire absolute knowledge, that is, in the words of Kant, to obtain absolutely unconditional knowledge, from which, as from some kind of root cause, the whole series of phenomena would flow and their entire totality would be explained at once. This kind of unconditional offers us reason in the form of ideas. When we look for the last unconditional source of all phenomena of inner feeling, we, says Kant, get the idea of the soul, which traditional metaphysics considered as a substance endowed with immortality and free will. Striving to rise to the last absolute of all phenomena of the external world, we come to the idea of the world, the cosmos as a whole. And finally, wishing to comprehend the absolute beginning of all phenomena in general - both mental and physical - our mind goes back to the idea of God.
Introducing the Platonic concept of an idea to designate the highest unconditional reality, Kant understands the ideas of reason in a completely different way from Plato. Kant's ideas are not supersensible entities that have real existence and are comprehended with the help of reason. Ideas are ideas about the goal towards which our knowledge strives, about the task that it sets for itself. The ideas of the mind perform a regulatory function in cognition, prompting the mind to activity, but nothing more. Denying a person the opportunity to know objects that are not given to him in experience, Kant thereby criticized the idealism of Plato and all those who, following Plato, shared the belief in the possibility of non-experimental knowledge of things in themselves.
Thus, the achievement of the last unconditional is the task towards which the mind aspires. But here an irresolvable contradiction arises. In order for the understanding to have a stimulus to activity, it, prompted by reason, strives for absolute knowledge; but this goal always remains unattainable for him. And therefore, striving for this goal, the understanding goes beyond the limits of experience; meanwhile, only within the given limits of its category have a legitimate application. Going beyond the limits of experience, the mind falls into an illusion, deluded, assuming that with the help of categories it is able to cognize non-experiential things in themselves.
This illusion, according to Kant, is characteristic of all previous philosophy. Kant tries to prove that the ideas of the mind, which impel the mind to go beyond the limits of experience, cannot correspond to a real object, by revealing the contradictory nature of this imaginary object. For example, if we take the idea of the world as a whole, then it turns out that it is possible to prove the validity of two contradictory statements characterizing the properties of the world. Thus, the thesis that the world is limited in space and has a beginning in time is just as provable as the opposite thesis, according to which the world is infinite in space and beginningless in time. The discovery of such a contradiction (antinomy), according to Kant, indicates that the subject to which these mutually exclusive definitions are attributed is unknowable. Dialectical contradiction, according to Kant, testifies to the misuse of our cognitive ability. Thus, dialectics is characterized negatively: dialectical illusion takes place where, with the help of finite human reason, one tries to construct not the world of experience, but the world of things in themselves.
| Parameter name | Meaning |
| Article subject: | Reason and mind |
| Rubric (thematic category) | Philosophy |
The process of cognition, according to Kant, presupposes, as we already know, the presence of two abilities - receptivity, which delivers sensory material, and spontaneity, self-activity, carried out by the mind, which, with the help of concepts, unites sensory diversity. Neither sensibility nor reason, taken separately, can give knowledge. Kant is by no means original when he shows that it is the understanding that performs the function unity in knowledge, it was known before him. But here is the thesis that the concepts of the understanding are in themselves empty of content and that only sensibility gives them content, distinguishes Kant's theory of knowledge from the previous one. But from such an understanding of the understanding it necessarily follows that the conclusion of the category of the understanding can only be applied within the limits of experience; every attempt to think in terms of the categories of things as they exist in themselves leads to the errors into which metaphysics has always fallen.
However, at the same time, Kant does not consider reason to be the highest cognitive ability, not to mention that the concepts of reason without sensations are empty, i.e. that the understanding needs material in order to carry out the activity of synthesizing, it also lacks a goal, i.e. a driving stimulus that would give meaning, give direction ᴇᴦο to activity. It is no coincidence that Kant's system of categories of reason does not contain the category of purpose. Here, again, one must think, the fact that in his understanding of knowledge the German philosopher was guided by mathematical natural science, primarily mechanics, did not recognize the teleological approach to nature and completely expelled the concept of purpose from scientific everyday life.
Is there among our cognitive abilities such that could direct the activity of the mind, setting before it certain goals? According to Kant, such a capacity exists, and it is called mind. The distinction between reason and reason goes back to Kant, which then plays an important role in all subsequent representatives of German idealism - Fichte, Schelling and Hegel.
What is reason, according to Kant? This is how our philosopher answers this question: “The transcendental concept of reason always refers only to the absolute totality in the synthesis of conditions and ends only in the absolutely unconditional ... In fact, pure reason leaves everything to reason, which is directly related to objects contemplation... Pure reason retains for itself only absolute totality in the application of the concepts of the understanding and strives to bring the synthetic unity, which is conceived in categories, to an absolutely absolute. intellectual unity.
Human thinking is not a purely natural property, but developed in the course of the history of society and the activities of the social subject, representing their ideal form. Therefore, the principles, categories, laws of thinking are internally connected with the history of social life, ... .
The formation of German classical philosophy took place against the backdrop of radical socio-economic transformations in some European countries, the highest point of which was the French bourgeois revolution of 1789-1794, which proclaimed the principles of freedom, equality and ... .
Reason, according to Kant, is our ability to operate with concepts, filling these forms with the data of sensory experience. Thus, the mind itself constructs the subject of research in accordance with a priori forms - categories. Therefore, scientific knowledge is objective in its source; at the same time, this same scientific knowledge is subjective in form and a priori in its driving force. Reason is the leader of the mind, intuitive in nature, the goal-setter. Reason without reason could never go beyond the individual experience of the subject; it is the mind that ensures the unconditionality and universal validity of scientific (mathematical and philosophical) truths.
Antinomies of the mind
Reason, according to Kant, is not free in its activity. Freedom is the prerogative of the mind. The mind is limited by the data of experience and the goals of the mind. The latter can afford anything. To confirm this, Kant takes the next step. With an equal degree of logical persuasiveness, he proves the validity of the opposite statements: "The world is finite in space - the world is infinite in space"; "The world has a beginning in time - the world is without beginning in time"; "The world was created by God - the world exists by itself, without being created." These and similar statements are called "antinomies of reason" (antinomies - contradictions),
Having discovered antinomies, Kant, who in his youth was a militant atheist, leans towards religious faith: "I have limited knowledge in order to make room for faith." The very fact of the discovery of antinomies, the philosopher believes, shows that the possibilities of science are not unlimited; one should not build illusions that she can do everything.
Kant's agnosticism
Let us imagine for a moment Kant's mental dialogue with himself, in which he would try to express his views in a popular way. Let us assume that the philosopher has chosen the question-answer form.
Question one. “What drives human knowledge,” Kant would ask; - what pushes a person to the need to know?
Kant's answer. - Curiosity and surprise before the harmony of the world.
Question two. - Can the senses deceive us?
Kant's answer. -Yes they can.
Question three. Is our mind capable of making mistakes?
Kant's answer. - Yes, he can.
Question four. - What do we have, besides feelings and reason, for the knowledge of the truth?
Kant's answer. - Nothing.
Kant's conclusion. - Therefore, we can not have confidence, a guarantee that we are able to know the essence of things.
This position has come to be known as agnosticism. ("a" - not; "gnosis" - knowledge). Things that only seem to be "things for us" are actually "things in themselves," the philosopher believes.
The role of practice
Considering the process of scientific knowledge as a specific type of human activity, Kant came close to the concept of practice. However, he did not take the last step. Practice- this is a tool-subject activity aimed at satisfying certain needs of human society. Kant, on the other hand, limited himself to the rational-logical side of activity, not seeing the connection between the logic of knowledge and experiment and industrial production. Not all of his answers to the above questions can be agreed.
So, the analysis of the first answer shows that although the scientist's curiosity is a powerful engine of knowledge, it is not decisive. For example, it was precisely in ancient Egypt that geometry arose not from a “pure contemplation of space,” as Kant believes, but from a completely earthly practical need. In this country, the floods of the Nile in spring and autumn, bringing excellent fertilizer to the fields - river silt, at the same time washed away and silted up the boundaries between land plots (boundaries). Restoring these boundaries in the absence of knowledge was a rather difficult matter, which more than once led to sharp conflicts between land owners. It was this practical circumstance that eventually aroused particular interest in methods for measuring areas of various configurations; the very name "geometry" indicates its origin ("geo" - earth; "meter" - measure).
In exactly the same way, arithmetic did not come from the "pure contemplation of the time series", but from the practical need for an account that arises with the development of trade; the decimal system directly points to the first "calculator" - two human hands. Thermodynamics arose as a result of the strong desire of the owners of the first steam engines to increase their output (COP). Similar examples can be multiplied and multiplied.
It is also difficult to agree with Kant's fourth answer. In addition to feelings and reason, the cognizing subject (Kant considered the subject of an individual, while the community of scientists can also be the subject of cognition) has such a powerful tool as the practical verification of theoretical knowledge. Thus, practice acts not only as the main driving force of knowledge, but also as the main criterion of truth. She, over time, shows the limitations, the relativity of our knowledge.