Kant’s Categories of Quantity and Quality, Reconsidered: From the Point of View of the History of Logic and Natural Science
Kant’s Categories of Quantity and Quality, Reconsidered: From the Point of View of the History of Logic and Natural Science
复制标题
重新思考康德的数量和质量范畴：从逻辑史和自然科学史的角度
DOI：
10.1007/s11406-022-00563-3
复制
发表时间：
2022
期刊：
影响因子：
0.5
通讯作者：
Tomida Yasuhiko
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
篠原成彦;篠原成彦;Tomida Yasuhiko
康德认为，范畴的划分“不是偶然地追求纯粹概念的结果”，而是从传统逻辑发展出的判断的“完全”分类中派生出来的。然而，他在他的判断表中所列举的判断种类并不都是传统逻辑所处理的判断种类;因此，我们必须说，他选择所讨论的判断种类是有某种意图的。此外，我们知道，他对判断和范畴的选择受到他完全接受的某些自然科学观点的强烈影响。由于这个原因，他的论点有时是严重不一致的。关于康德的范畴论证，人们已经指出了许多问题，但本文重新提出量与质的范畴，并从逻辑史和自然科学史的角度，阐明康德的论证所隐含的逻辑及其扭曲。首先，我确认，在他的解释中存在着不可忽视的问题，大意是他的数量和质量范畴的推导是基于判断的数量和质量。其次，我重新考虑他把量和质的范畴作为知性的纯粹概念的意义。最后，我的结论是，通过求助于量和质的范畴，康德试图不公正地先验的“广泛的数量”和“密集的数量”之间的区别，有一个长期的形成历史，因为亚里士多德。
According to Kant, the division of the categories “is not the result of a search after pure concepts undertaken at haphazard,” but is derived from the “complete” classification of judgments developed by traditional logic. However, the sorts of judgments that he enumerates in his table of judgments are not all ones that traditional logic has dealt with; consequently, we must say that he chose the sorts of judgments in question with a certain intention. Besides, we know that his choice of judgments and categories is strongly influenced by certain views of natural science that he fully accepts. For this reason, his argumentations are sometimes seriously inconsistent. As to Kant’s argumentations of categories, many problems have already been pointed out, but in this paper, I take up the categories of quantity and quality once more, and make clear his argumentations’ hidden logic and its distortion from the point of view of the history of logic and natural science. First, I confirm that there are non-negligible problems in his explanation to the effect that his derivation of the categories of quantity and quality is based on the quantity and quality of judgments. Next, I reconsider the meaning of his treating the categories of quantity and quality as pure concepts of the understanding. Finally, I conclude that by having recourse to the categories of quantity and quality Kant tried unjustly to apriorize the distinction between the “extensive magnitude” and “intensive magnitude” that has a long formational history since Aristotle.