Research Article
BibTex RIS Cite

“Manifoldness” as a Veiled Notion of Critique of Pure Reason: A Clue for Understanding the Transcendental Deductions

Year 2015, Issue: 62, 125 - 149, 15.12.2015

Abstract

The transcendental deduction of the pure concepts or functions of the
understanding is the heart of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason. According to
Kant, a conclusive determination of the boundaries of cognitive powers of
the mind (Gemüth) essentially rests on this kind of special investigation.
What is more, he confidently asserts that transcendental deduction has an
inescapable and indispensable aspect for the constitution of metaphysics
as an exact science. As it is well-known, the first edition of the Critique
published in 1781. Following this publication, in his 1786 dated work
Metaphysical Foundations of Natural Science, Kant mentions some serious
problems about the formulation of deduction. After a while later, at the
second edition of the Critique published in 1787, he completely rewrites
the cornerstone chapter of the text. As a result of this alteration, a major
disagreement arises among commentators of Kant. In this study, focusing
on the “manifoldness” which is a veiled notion of the Critique, we will
try to offer a preparatory discussion for a better understanding of the two
different versions of transcendental deductions.

References

  • • Allison, Henry. Kant’s Transcendental Deduction: An Analytical- Historical Commentary, Oxford University Press 2015.
  • • Buroker, Jill Vance. Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason: An Introduction, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 2006.
  • • Carl, Wolfgang. “Kant’s First Drafts of the Deduction of the Categories,” Kant’s Transcendental Deductions: The Three Critiques and the Opus Postumum, ed. Eckart Förster, Stanford University Press, Stanford 1989, pp. 3-20.
  • • Çitil, A. Ayhan. “Kant’ın Transandantal Felsefesinde Schein Kavramının Sinn ve Bedeutung Kavramlarıyla Temellendirilmesi,” FelsefeLogos, 19, 2002, ss. 87-97.
  • • Çitil, A. Ayhan. Matematik ve Metafizik (Kitap I: Sayı ve Nesne): Kant’ın Transandantal Düşüncesinin Derinleştirilmesi Yoluyla Nesne- Merkezli Bir Matematik Felsefesinin Geliştirilmesi, Alfa Yayınları, İstanbul 2012.
  • • Förster, Eckart. Kant’s Final Synthesis: An Essay on the Opus Postumum, Harvard University Press, USA 2000.
  • • Gardner, Sebastian. Routledge Philosophy Guidebook to Kant and the Critique of Pure Reason, London & New York, Routledge 1999.
  • • Gözkân, Bülent. “Kant’ın Metafizik ve Akıl Eleştirisi Üzerine,” Yeditepe’de Felsefe, 1, İstanbul 2002, ss. 21-79.
  • • Guyer, Paul. “The Transcendental Deduction of the Categories,” The Cambridge Companion to Kant, ed. Paul Guyer, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 1992, pp. 123-160.
  • • Heidegger, Martin. Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, trans. Parvis Emad & Kenneth Maly, Indiana University Press, Indiana 1997.
  • • Henrich, Dieter. “Kant’s Notion of a Deduction,” Kant’s Transcendental Deductions: The Three Critiques and the Opus Postumum, ed. Eckart Förster, Stanford University Press, Stanford 1989, pp. 29-46.
  • • Kant, Immanuel. Critique of Pure Reason, trans. Norman Kemp Smith, Macmillan 1992.
  • • Kant, Immanuel. Arı Usun Eleştirisi, çev. Aziz Yardımlı, İdea Yayınevi, İstanbul 1993.
  • • Kant, Immanuel. Gelecekte Bilim Olarak Ortaya Çıkabilecek Her Metafiziğe Prolegomena, çev. İoanna Kuçuradi ve Yusuf Örnek, TFK, Ankara 1995.
  • • Kant, Immanuel. Critique of Pure Reason, trans. Werner S. Pluhar, Hackett Publishing Company, Indianapolis 1996.
  • • Kant, Immanuel. Critique of Pure Reason, ed. & trans. Paul Guyer & Allen W. Wood, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 1999.
  • • Kant, Immanuel. Correspondence, trans. Arnulf Zweig, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 1999.
  • • Kant, Immanuel. Theoretical Philosophy after 1781, ed. & trans. Henry Allison & Peter Heath, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 2002.
  • • Kovanlıkaya, Aliye. “Tezahürleri Sahiden Bilebilir Miyiz,” Felsefi Düşün, 3, İstanbul 2014, ss. 35-54.
  • • Longuenesse, Béatrice. Kant and the Capacity to Judge: Sensibility and Discursivity in the Transcendental Analytic of the Critique of Pure Reason, trans. Charles T. Wolfe, Princeton University Press, Princeton 2000.
  • • Parmenides. Fragments, trans. David Gallop, University of Toronto Press, Toronto 2000.
  • • Prichard, Harold Arthur. Kant’s Theory of Knowledge, Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1909.
  • • Strawson, Peter Frederick. The Bounds of Sense: An Essay on Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, Routledge, London 2006.
  • • Tuschling, Burkhard. “Apperception and Ether: On the Idea of Transcendental Deduction of Matter in Kant’s Opus Postumum,” Kant’s Transcendental Deductions: The Three Critiques and the Opus Postumum, ed. Eckart Förster, Stanford University Press, Stanford 1989, pp. 193-216.
  • • Waxman, Wayne. Kant’s Model of the Mind: A New Interpretation of Transcendental Idealism, Oxford University Press, New York 1991.

SAF AKLIN ELEŞTİRİSİNİN ÖRTÜLÜ BİR KAVRAMI OLARAK “ÇEŞİTLİLİK”: TRANSANDENDAL DEDÜKSİYONLARI ANLAMAK İÇİN BİR İPUCU

Year 2015, Issue: 62, 125 - 149, 15.12.2015

Abstract

Anlama yetisi kavramlarının veya fonksiyonlarının transendental
dedüksiyonu Kant’ın Saf Aklın Eleştirisi adlı eserinin merkezini teşkil eder.
Kant’a göre, canlandırma melekesinin (Gemüth) bilişsel güçlerine dâir
sınırların nihâî olarak belirlenmesi, temelde, özel türdeki bu araştırmaya
dayanır. Dahası o, kendinden son derece emin bir biçimde, transendental
dedüksiyonun, metafiziğin kesin bir bilim olarak kuruluşu için kaçınılmaz
ve dahi vazgeçilmez bir boyut içerdiğini ileri sürer. Bilindiği üzere
Eleştiri’nin ilk edisyonu 1781’de basılmıştır. Bu basımı müteakiben
Kant, 1786 tarihli Doğabiliminin Metafizik Temelleri başlıklı eserinde,
dedüksiyonun formüle edilmesine ilişkin bazı ciddi problemlerden
bahseder. Kısa bir süre sonra da o, Eleştiri’nin 1787 tarihinde basılan
ikinci edisyonunda, metnin mihenk taşı olan bölümü tamamen yeniden
yazar. Böyle bir değişimin neticesinde, Kant yorumcuları arasında büyük
bir tartışma gündeme gelir. Bu yazıda, Eleştiri’nin örtülü bir kavramı olan
“çeşitlilik”e odaklanma yoluyla, transendental dedüksiyonun iki farklı
versiyonunu daha iyi anlamak için hazırlayıcı bir tartışma tesis edilmeye
çalışılacaktır.

References

  • • Allison, Henry. Kant’s Transcendental Deduction: An Analytical- Historical Commentary, Oxford University Press 2015.
  • • Buroker, Jill Vance. Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason: An Introduction, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 2006.
  • • Carl, Wolfgang. “Kant’s First Drafts of the Deduction of the Categories,” Kant’s Transcendental Deductions: The Three Critiques and the Opus Postumum, ed. Eckart Förster, Stanford University Press, Stanford 1989, pp. 3-20.
  • • Çitil, A. Ayhan. “Kant’ın Transandantal Felsefesinde Schein Kavramının Sinn ve Bedeutung Kavramlarıyla Temellendirilmesi,” FelsefeLogos, 19, 2002, ss. 87-97.
  • • Çitil, A. Ayhan. Matematik ve Metafizik (Kitap I: Sayı ve Nesne): Kant’ın Transandantal Düşüncesinin Derinleştirilmesi Yoluyla Nesne- Merkezli Bir Matematik Felsefesinin Geliştirilmesi, Alfa Yayınları, İstanbul 2012.
  • • Förster, Eckart. Kant’s Final Synthesis: An Essay on the Opus Postumum, Harvard University Press, USA 2000.
  • • Gardner, Sebastian. Routledge Philosophy Guidebook to Kant and the Critique of Pure Reason, London & New York, Routledge 1999.
  • • Gözkân, Bülent. “Kant’ın Metafizik ve Akıl Eleştirisi Üzerine,” Yeditepe’de Felsefe, 1, İstanbul 2002, ss. 21-79.
  • • Guyer, Paul. “The Transcendental Deduction of the Categories,” The Cambridge Companion to Kant, ed. Paul Guyer, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 1992, pp. 123-160.
  • • Heidegger, Martin. Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, trans. Parvis Emad & Kenneth Maly, Indiana University Press, Indiana 1997.
  • • Henrich, Dieter. “Kant’s Notion of a Deduction,” Kant’s Transcendental Deductions: The Three Critiques and the Opus Postumum, ed. Eckart Förster, Stanford University Press, Stanford 1989, pp. 29-46.
  • • Kant, Immanuel. Critique of Pure Reason, trans. Norman Kemp Smith, Macmillan 1992.
  • • Kant, Immanuel. Arı Usun Eleştirisi, çev. Aziz Yardımlı, İdea Yayınevi, İstanbul 1993.
  • • Kant, Immanuel. Gelecekte Bilim Olarak Ortaya Çıkabilecek Her Metafiziğe Prolegomena, çev. İoanna Kuçuradi ve Yusuf Örnek, TFK, Ankara 1995.
  • • Kant, Immanuel. Critique of Pure Reason, trans. Werner S. Pluhar, Hackett Publishing Company, Indianapolis 1996.
  • • Kant, Immanuel. Critique of Pure Reason, ed. & trans. Paul Guyer & Allen W. Wood, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 1999.
  • • Kant, Immanuel. Correspondence, trans. Arnulf Zweig, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 1999.
  • • Kant, Immanuel. Theoretical Philosophy after 1781, ed. & trans. Henry Allison & Peter Heath, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 2002.
  • • Kovanlıkaya, Aliye. “Tezahürleri Sahiden Bilebilir Miyiz,” Felsefi Düşün, 3, İstanbul 2014, ss. 35-54.
  • • Longuenesse, Béatrice. Kant and the Capacity to Judge: Sensibility and Discursivity in the Transcendental Analytic of the Critique of Pure Reason, trans. Charles T. Wolfe, Princeton University Press, Princeton 2000.
  • • Parmenides. Fragments, trans. David Gallop, University of Toronto Press, Toronto 2000.
  • • Prichard, Harold Arthur. Kant’s Theory of Knowledge, Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1909.
  • • Strawson, Peter Frederick. The Bounds of Sense: An Essay on Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, Routledge, London 2006.
  • • Tuschling, Burkhard. “Apperception and Ether: On the Idea of Transcendental Deduction of Matter in Kant’s Opus Postumum,” Kant’s Transcendental Deductions: The Three Critiques and the Opus Postumum, ed. Eckart Förster, Stanford University Press, Stanford 1989, pp. 193-216.
  • • Waxman, Wayne. Kant’s Model of the Mind: A New Interpretation of Transcendental Idealism, Oxford University Press, New York 1991.
There are 25 citations in total.

Details

Primary Language Turkish
Subjects Philosophy
Journal Section Research Articles
Authors

Ümit Öztürk This is me

Publication Date December 15, 2015
Submission Date September 15, 2015
Published in Issue Year 2015 Issue: 62

Cite

APA Öztürk, Ü. (2015). SAF AKLIN ELEŞTİRİSİNİN ÖRTÜLÜ BİR KAVRAMI OLARAK “ÇEŞİTLİLİK”: TRANSANDENDAL DEDÜKSİYONLARI ANLAMAK İÇİN BİR İPUCU. Felsefe Dünyası(62), 125-149.