Kant’ın İdealizmi Reddi

Year 2017, , 11 - 25, 01.03.2017

Aykut Küçükparmak

https://doi.org/10.18506/anemon.294998

Cited By: 2

Abstract

Bilen özneden bağımsız ontolojik bir gerçekliğin var olup olmadığı konusu felsefenin önemli problem alanlarından biridir. Bu sorun Kant’ın eleştirel felsefesinde de önemli bir yere sahiptir. Bu çerçevede Kant, idealizmi problematik ve dogmatik idealizm olarak ikiye ayırır. O, Descartes’e atfettiği problematik idealizmle mekânsal objelerin varlığının şüpheli olduğu iddiasını kast eder. Diğer taraftan dogmatik idealizm ile mekânsal objelerin varlığının imkânsız olduğunu dile getiren Berkeleyci idealizmi kast eder. Kant idealizmin bu iki formuna karşı transendental idealizm tezi üzerinden dış dünyanın varlığını ve bunu bilmenin mümkün olduğunu göstermeye çalışır. Kant’ın bu bağlamda öne sürdüğü argümanlar hem idealizm tartışmaları hem de eleştirel felsefenin anlaşılması açısından önemli bir yere sahiptir.

Keywords

Kant, İdealizm, Transendental İdealizm, Mekân, Dış Gerçeklik

Kant’s Refutation of Idealism

Abstract

Topic of whether there is ontological reality independent from the subject who knows is one of the important problem areas of philosophy. This problem also has an important place in Kant’s philosophy. In this framework, Kant distinguishes between problematic and dogmatic idealism. By problematic idealism which he ascribes to Descartes he means to the hypothesis that existence of spatial objects is doubtful. On the other hand, by dogmatic idealism which is attributed to Berkeley he means to claim that existence of spatial object is an impossibility. Against these two forms of idealism Kant tries to show existence of spatial object and the possibility to know them through transcendental idealism. In this context, arguments which Kant put forward have an important place for understanding both idealism discussions and the critical philosophy.

Keywords

Kant, Idealism, Transcendental Idealism, Space, External Reality

References

• Allison, H. E. (2009). Kant’s Transcendental Idealism An Interpretation and Defense. New Haven and London: Yale University Press.
• Banham, G. (2006). Kant’s Refutation of idealism.
• Bennet, J. (1975). Kant’s Analytic. Cambridge: Cambridge Universty Press.
• Buroker, J. V. (2006). Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason. Cambridge: Cambridge Universty Press.
• Dicker, G. (2004). Kant’s Theory of Knowledge. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Emundts, D. (2010). The Refutation of Idealism and Distinction between Phenomena and Noumena. The Cambridge Companion to Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason. (Ed. by Paul Guyer). Cambridge: Cambridge Universty Press, 168-189.
• Guyer, P. (1983). Kant’s Intentions in the Refutation of İdealism. The Philosophical Review, XCII, No. 3, 329-383.
• Guyer, P. (1987). Kant and Claims of Knowledge. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Guyer, P. (2006). Kant. London: Routledge.
• Hartnack, J. (2001). Kant’s Theory of Knowledge. (Trn. M. Holmes Harsthorne). New York: Hackett Publishing Company.
• Kant, I. (2002). Gelecekte Bilim Olarak Ortaya Çıkabilecek Her Metafiziğe Prolegomena. (Çev. İonna Kuçuradi-Yusuf Örnek). Ankara: Türkiye Felsefe Kurumu Yayınları.
• Kant, I. (2005). Notes and Fragments (Trn. Curtis Bowman, Paul Guyer, Frederick Rauscher). Cambridge: Cambridge Universty Press.
• Kant, I. (2009). Critique of Pure Reason. (Trn. Paul Guyer and Allen Wood). Cambridge: Cambridge Universty Press.
• Mader, R. B. (2012). The Role of Kant’s Refutation of İdealism. Archiv für Geschichte der Philosophie 94(1), 53-73.
• Mattey, G. J. (1997). Existence of the External World. hume.ucdavis.edu/mattey/phi175/refutationlechead.html.
• Sidgwick, H. & Caird, E. (1880). Kant’s Refutation of Idealism. Mind, Vol. 5, No. 17, 111-115.
• Smith, N. K. (1918). A Commentary to Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason. London: Macmillan.
• Wood, A. W. (2009). Kant. (çev. Aliye Kovanlıkaya). Ankara: Dost Yayınları.