交叉于康德主义、现象学及新经验主义路径的先天、客观性和判断:向朱利奥·普雷蒂致敬

作者认为,意大利哲学家朱利奥·普雷蒂认识论思想的一个难能可贵的方面在于它汇集了来自诸多不同哲学思潮的主题,尤其关注康德主义、现象学和逻辑经验主义之间的相互关联。他对逻辑经验主义与康德主义之间所形成的多重关系进行了广泛的探究,对逻辑经验主义与现象学之间的关系程度进行了探究,阐明了贯穿于鲁道夫·卡尔纳普思想中的现象学要素,评价了石里克对胡塞尔的批判在其知识概念的创制中所产生的作用,进而在胡塞尔现象学与逻辑经验主义之间探寻一种理论综合的路径。作者以先天、客观性和判断作为线索,讨论了康德主义、现象学和新经验主义这些传统的历史异同,以及通过综合这些长期以来被视为不可调和的理论进路来构建客观性理论的可能性,最后指出对现象学、康德传统、新经验主义以及后实证主义进行综合或整合,从而确立一种以可能将真理的形式价值和真理的历史维度接合起来的客观性观念为轴心的科学和知识理论。     

形式先天,或质料先天——论舍勒对康德"先天"概念的批评

先天(a priori)这一概念是康德哲学原则性的主题之一,他将先天等同于形式,这不仅成为其理论哲学的起点,实际上也构成其伦理学的基础.舍勒正是将其对康德伦理学的批判建基在他对康德先天概念的批判之上.本文将主要着眼于"形式先天"与"质料先天"的区分,集中讨论并初步检讨舍勒对康德先天概念的批评.     

观念的关系,或先天的形式——论胡塞尔对休谟与康德"先天"概念的反省

一方面,在休谟的主要著作中,先天(apriori)这一概念很少出现,但胡塞尔却认为休谟的"观念的关系"是惟一真正的认识论上重要的先天概念。另一方面,"先天"是康德哲学原则性的主题之一,"先天的形式"可谓康德对先天的基本理解,但胡塞尔却宣称,康德缺乏真正的先天概念。胡塞尔正是通过对休谟和康德"先天"概念的反省而发现他本人所谓的"本质-先天"概念,并在思想发展史上产生了重大效应。     

论康德的先天综合判断与“第三者”

"第三者"是康德认识论的核心问题之一。在《纯粹理性批判》中,康德借助于一系列的"第三者"使纯粹理性的总课题得以可能,并使其认识论体系得以完善:在先天综合判断中,作为真正形而上学判断的综合判断,借助经验而得以可能;把范畴看作是先天知识得以产生的"第三者";继而,在对范畴的客观有效性进行演绎的过程中,通过"统觉的本源的综合统一"这一"第三者",将感性杂多转换为"客体",从而使范畴的客观演绎得以有效完成。     

康德在认识和真理问题上进退两难

康德在他的著作中,对许多问题作了严格的区分,其中之一便是把先天知识和后天知识加以区别。康德告诉我们,先天知识或是纯粹的,或是混杂的,但无论在哪种情况下,都不会变为后天知识。这一区分对康德所从事的研究是如此的重要,以致他称之为自己在哲学上的“哥白尼式的革命”,他要表明由这两类知识组成的一种知识,即先验的综合知识,何以是可能的。对康德来说,一个不纯粹是分析的先天判断之所以可能,只是根据这一假     

康德自然科学命题的第三者是什么?

康德的自然科学命题分为纯粹的和不纯粹的,即先天综合判断和后天综合判断。先天综合判断的第三者的候选项有四个,分别是:时间图型、可能的经验、范畴和统觉的综合统一,但后三个都不是第三者。第三者只有时间图型。时间图型不仅是连接范畴和知觉的第三者,而且是连接先天综合判断主词和谓词的第三者。两个第三者是一回事,因为连接范畴和知觉的结果就是构成先天综合判断。后天综合判断的第三者是学界相对忽视的部分。本文提出"三个步骤"的解读,指出在后天综合判断的形成过程中,既需要将范畴添加到知觉上,又需要将不同的知觉连接起来,因而它的第三者是时间图型和经验。     

康德论空间直观的统一性——兼谈概念论对康德哲学的误读

在《纯粹理性批判》的先验感性论中,空间被阐明为一种先天必然的直观表象。而到了先验演绎,康德提出在空间的先天表象中存在着统一性。这种统一性既先于一切概念,却又以综合为前提。鉴于综合被一般地理解为属于知性的行动,学界就空间的统一性与综合的关系问题争论已久却鲜有共识。近来,不少学者支持一种“概念论”立场,该立场从先验演绎出发主张空间统一性是知性综合的产物。本文立足于康德文本,通过阐明知性的综合只能产生推论的统一性,而后者并不能把握作为整体的空间表象,以此论证概念论解读与先验感性论中对空间之性质与结构的论述是不相容的,从而反驳概念论的立场。     

康德与弗雷格的分析性观念

历史上,康德第一次较为清晰地指出所有语句要么是分析语句要么是综合语句,同时给出了划分分析性语句与综合语句的依据,并明确认为分析性语句是不扩展知识的。康德给出的区分分析与综合语句的依据会带来明显的问题。弗雷格继承并发展了康德对于分析性观念的基本想法,在《算术基础》一书中给出了自己的对分析性命题的刻画,尝试论证算术真理是发展了的逻辑真理、是分析性命题相。相较于康德对分析性命题的刻画,弗雷格的刻画有明显的优点,克服了康德的定义带来的几个明显问题。同时,弗雷格也明确反对康德的分析命题并不扩展知识的这一想法,尝试着指出在一种意义上分析命题是扩展知识的。     

康德哲学与广松涉"交互主体的共同主观性"理论

广松涉认为,对近代认识论基础的问题式及其构成机制和局限进行反思,首先需要将着眼点放在康德哲学的问题式及其构成机制上。康德哲学的总的问题式就是在以先验逻辑学为基础的逻辑学、认识论和本体论“三位一体”的哲学构架中,探讨人的认识以及纯粹理性的先天综合判断及其能力何以可能。这一问题式潜含着一个意义非常重大的认识论问题——即“主体际共同主观性”问题．需要我们认真地加以研究。     

信息存在论与非领土化的新型权力——对斯蒂格勒《技术与时间》的解读

斯蒂格勒认为,发展着的信息技术和编程工业正在建构出一种新的先天技术综合,它直接替代了康德已经剖析的先天观念综合。先天综合判断中让我们看到的经验世界的基础性的认知构架,在信息-影像的虚拟化建构中发生了根本性改变。由信息技术生成的全新社会存在论和先天媒介综合构架,以及信息商品价值论所带来的"非领土化",将导致一切传统社会权力的深刻改变。     

GIANNI VATTIMO AND RENÉ GIRARD ON THE UNIQUENESS OF CHRISTIANITY

The possibility of a naturalistic explanation of religious phenomena (including Christianity) which is offered by natural science gives the question of the uniqueness of Christianity a new urgency, for it raises the question of whether an irreducible otherness in Christianity vis-à-vis a generally-human, natural religiosity (which may be explained naturalistically) can be demonstrated. In what follows, we shall discuss the answer of two contemporary thinkers to this question: that of the Italian philosopher Gianni Vattimo and that of the French-American literary critic and fundamental anthropologist René Girard. There is also an interesting link between both thinkers, as we shall see below – Vattimo has stated that it was his reading of Girard which made him return to Christianity after having abandoned it earlier in his life.     

Beyond Reasonable Doubt – a paradox of ideological immunity

Abstract

Ideology criticism, like scepticism, calls into question the objective or justified status of beliefs. However, where scepticism only refutes, and never puts forward, a substantive claim about anything, the ideology critic must maintain some criterion for distinguishing ideas which support relations of domination from those that do not, in virtue of her criticism of a particular set of ideas as “ideological”. The trouble for the ideology critic is that the sceptical methods she deploys undermine any critical thesis, including her own. Thus, the theory of ideology tends to undercut ideology criticism with a fundamental problem of self-implication.

This paper draws on the epistemological problem of the criterion to explain and define a basic problem of justification for the theory of ideology. A problem of self-implication is introduced in part one. I argue that the basis for ideology criticism inevitably succumbs to the very doubt it puts forward. I draw on various criticisms of ideology criticism to formulate a specific account of the basic, fundamental problem for the theory of ideology. I show how norms for ideology criticism are vulnerable to an Ancient sceptical problem for epistemic criteria, which brings the ideology critic to a dilemma: either (i) find independent grounds for criticism, immune to ideology, or (ii) show how ideology is self-undermining. Each horn of the dilemma is ideological.     

In the margins of scientific dialogue: Evart Van Dieren contra psychoanalysis

Evart Van Dieren (1861-1940), a Dutch general practitioner who had a passionate aversion against psychoanalysis, wrote two particularly polemical books contra Freud but nevertheless did not succeed in generating much response. In this paper, some of his objections against psychoanalysis are briefly examined and compared with some present day arguments against Freud by Grünbaum and Crews, with the purpose of finding an answer to the question: What does it take to be a successful or unsuccessful critic?     

Turning the Tables with 'Homophobia'

The charge of homophobia, indiscriminately made in a large part of our Western culture today, is ill conceived, illogical and false. This sweeping charge may be pictured as a triangle of informal logical fallacies. The more prominent side, the one which the general public encounters first, is what I shall call the fallacy of turning the tables : the rhetorical device of making the source of criticism the object of criticism. The other side of the charge is the fallacy of equivocation . The boundary of the term 'homophobia' is made so elastic that it can stretch around, not just phobias, but every kind of rational fear as well; and not just around every kind of fear, but also around every critical posture or idea that anyone may have about the practice of homosexuality. At the base of the charge, and undergirding the other two fallacies, is the fallacy of begging the question . A commitment to the complete acceptability of the practice of homosexuality enables its proponents to 'know' beforehand that all criticisms against it must originate in the defective psychology of the critic.     

海德格尔对康德伦理学的批判

相对于康德的其他主要著作而言,海德格尔对于康德第二批判持有一种特殊的看法。他没有直接去探讨它,这实际上隐含着对于它的一种彻底的思考和批判。由于康德伦理学的根本概念是应当,康德把接受了古希腊以来人是理性的动物这个关于人的定义,海德格尔把康德伦理学看作是西方形而上学自身发展线条的一个基本环节,是柏拉图主义理念学说发展进程中一个特殊的点。人的本质的干瘪化也是人道主义最终走向主体主义的根本原因,康德的自由意志和道德律只是这种人道主义思考的必然后果。     

Contextualizing counterintuitiveness: how context affects comprehension and memorability of counterintuitive concepts

A number of anthropologists have argued that religious concepts are minimally counterintuitive and that this gives them mnemic advantages. This paper addresses the question of why people have the memory architecture that results in such concepts being more memorable than other types of concepts by pointing out the benefits of a memory structure that leads to better recall for minimally counterintuitive concepts and by showing how such benefits emerge in the real-time processing of comprehending narratives such as folk tales. This model suggests that memorability is not an inherent property of a concept; rather it is a property of the concept, the context in which the concept is presented, and the background knowledge that the comprehendor possesses about the concept. The model predicts how memorability of a concept should change if the context containing the concept were changed. The paper also presents the results of experiments carried out to test these predictions.     

Corruption as violation of distributed ethical obligations

The ethics of corruption cannot be analysed without simultaneously addressing the legitimacy of public office or entrusted power. This paper introduces a concept of core unethical corruption, defined as violations of distributed ethical obligations for private gain. In other words, it is suggested that what is ethically wrong with corruption is that it entails the violation of certain obligations attributed to agents. By explicitly relating corruption to obligations, this approach helps make ethical sense of the concepts of public office or entrusted power, attending to the question of their legitimacy. Since distributed obligations are implied by a wide range of ethical theories, the concept of core unethical corruption also reflects a (partial) overlapping consensus on the ethics of corruption.     

Dreyfus and Haugeland on Heidegger and Authenticity

This paper tries to read some structure into the perplexing diversity of the literature on Heidegger’s concept of authenticity. It argues that many of the interpretations available rely on views that are false and cannot be Heidegger’s. It also shows that the only correct interpretation of Heidegger’s concept of authenticity emerges from a synthesis of Dreyfus’ later interpretation and Haugeland’s interpretation of this concept. A synthesis of these interpretations yields an interpretation, according to which Dasein’s being is authentic only if it is capable of using tools or language in radically new ways.     

The taxon concept: is it taxonic?

The question of whether the concept of a "taxon" (a nonarbitrary latent category) is itself categorical, or is a matter of degree, has lain dormant within taxometrics. I analyze the problem conceptually. Part of the meaning of "taxon," I hold, goes beyond the manifest statistical properties of admixed probability distributions; any of certain forms of causal nexus leading to admixed distributions are involved as well. I defend the thesis that the threshold question, "Is there a taxon?" has a yes-or-no answer, establishing that "taxonicity" is categorical (taxonic), but also that as some taxa are much more readily distinguished from their complement classes than are others, the taxon question is also quantitative. It is on this basis that Meehl and others held the view that taxonicity is a matter of degree; however, they were wrong to hold that it is only a matter of degree.