Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Knowledge, Morals and Practice in Kant’s AnthropologyAnthropology from a Logical Point of View: The Role of Inner Sense from Jungius to Kant

Knowledge, Morals and Practice in Kant’s Anthropology: Anthropology from a Logical Point of View:... [The concept of inner sense plays a prominent role in Kant’s attempts to define the character and scope of anthropology. Moreover, Kant denounces the terminological confusion between inner sense and apperception as a source of paralogisms. Who were his targets? In recent years, scholars have pointed to the existence of a German tradition on inner sense (perhaps independent of Locke) as a plausible source for Kant’s elaboration. However, some specific aspects of the German treatment of inner sense have been so far completely overlooked. This paper focuses on Jungius, Leibniz, Wolff, and Lambert, to show that they all referred to inner sense or inner experience as a privileged source of knowledge, immune to error and free from the ontological limits of the external senses. In this tradition, inner sense was ascribed with the epistemological function of providing a foundation not only for psychology but also for logic and metaphysics. Such a radical empowerment of the role of inner sense, which culminated in Lambert’s work, is the most plausible target of Kant’s criticism. Relegating the contribution of inner sense to the fields of anthropology and empirical psychology was part of Kant’s effort to purify logic and metaphysics from any reference to inner experience or sensation.] http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png

Knowledge, Morals and Practice in Kant’s AnthropologyAnthropology from a Logical Point of View: The Role of Inner Sense from Jungius to Kant

Editors: Lorini, Gualtiero; Louden, Robert B.

Loading next page...
 
/lp/springer-journals/knowledge-morals-and-practice-in-kant-s-anthropology-anthropology-from-xFzoriqOjI

References (16)

Publisher
Springer International Publishing
Copyright
© The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s) 2018
ISBN
978-3-319-98725-5
Pages
43 –61
DOI
10.1007/978-3-319-98726-2_4
Publisher site
See Chapter on Publisher Site

Abstract

[The concept of inner sense plays a prominent role in Kant’s attempts to define the character and scope of anthropology. Moreover, Kant denounces the terminological confusion between inner sense and apperception as a source of paralogisms. Who were his targets? In recent years, scholars have pointed to the existence of a German tradition on inner sense (perhaps independent of Locke) as a plausible source for Kant’s elaboration. However, some specific aspects of the German treatment of inner sense have been so far completely overlooked. This paper focuses on Jungius, Leibniz, Wolff, and Lambert, to show that they all referred to inner sense or inner experience as a privileged source of knowledge, immune to error and free from the ontological limits of the external senses. In this tradition, inner sense was ascribed with the epistemological function of providing a foundation not only for psychology but also for logic and metaphysics. Such a radical empowerment of the role of inner sense, which culminated in Lambert’s work, is the most plausible target of Kant’s criticism. Relegating the contribution of inner sense to the fields of anthropology and empirical psychology was part of Kant’s effort to purify logic and metaphysics from any reference to inner experience or sensation.]

Published: Oct 18, 2018

Keywords: Philosophia Rationalis Sive Logica; Psychologia Empirica; Nouveaux Essais; Perceptual Apperception; Logica Docens

There are no references for this article.