The critics maintain that this kind of arguing is mere subtrefuge

The critics maintain that this kind of arguing is mere subtrefuge

Info iconThis preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
The critics maintain that this kind of arguing is mere subtrefuge, covering up Kant's personal prediliction for orderliness. In many cases, Kant's views on a subjects are summarily dismissed as due to his "passion for architectonic." But in fairness, we must point out two things. First, Kant was working in the tradition of Leibniz, who tried to reduce all principles of reason to two: contradiction and sufficient reason. Second, that same tradition (following Wolff) generated a bewildering array of categories with no apparent justification for the arrangement. Concepts got into the system because they had some use within the system or simply were traditional. For example, the concepts "one," "true," "perfect" are at one point introduced arbitrarily under the concept of "being." That these concepts should have any place at all was due to their long- standing presence in scholastic philosophy (or so Kant claimed). This said, we shall now examine the "single principle" that Kant proposed as means to
Background image of page 1
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

This note was uploaded on 11/09/2011 for the course PSY PSY2012 taught by Professor Scheff during the Fall '09 term at Broward College.

Ask a homework question - tutors are online