How to do things with "the Fact of Reason": A new interpretation of a well-known concept in Kant's philosophy

被引:0
作者
Tong, Shijun [1 ,2 ,3 ]
机构
[1] East China Normal Univ, Shanghai, Peoples R China
[2] Shanghai New York Univ, Shanghai, Peoples R China
[3] East China Normal Univ, Dept Philosophy, Chancellors Off NYU Shanghai, Room E713,567 West Yangsi Rd, Shanghai 200126, Peoples R China
关键词
Kant; the fact of (pure) reason; conceptual distinctions; conceptual dichotomies; the regulative/the constitutive; the descriptive/the prescriptive; the counterfactual presuppositions; Max Horkheimer; Jurgen Habermas; Feng Qi; the human learning process;
D O I
10.1177/01914537241259293
中图分类号
B [哲学、宗教];
学科分类号
01 ; 0101 ;
摘要
There have been numerous studies on Kant's concept of the 'Fact of Reason', drawing on various intellectual resources, ranging from metaphysics to psychology, from Aristotle to Mencius, from analytic philosophy to phenomenology, and beyond. How should we evaluate these studies? Is it possible that these studies can contribute both to an understanding of Kantian philosophy and to an understanding of Western philosophy as a whole, as well as shed light on the development of philosophy after Kant and on the philosophical questions of our own era? In order to at least partially clarify the above questions, this article will draw on the work of philosohers such as Karl-Otto Apel, J & uuml;rgen Habermas, C.I. Lewis, Jin Yuelin and Feng Qi, and discuss how certain presuppositions of communicative action can be both regulative and constitutive, how the same propositions can be both empirical and a priori, how the same concepts can both describe reality and regulate it, and how the 'Fact of Reason' can be understood as the 'Fact of Learning', in order to offer a new interpretation of Kant's concept of the 'Fact of Reason'.
引用
收藏
页码:1289 / 1313
页数:25
相关论文
共 30 条
  • [1] [Anonymous], 2021, KANTS JUSTIFICATION
  • [2] [Anonymous], 1994, KANTS ETHICS RECONST
  • [3] Apel Karl-Otto, 1998, TRANSFORMATION PHILO, P271
  • [4] Beyleveld Deryck, 2020, SOLE FACT PURE REASO
  • [5] Gregor Mary, 1991, KANT METAPHYSICS MOR, P74
  • [6] Grenberg J, 2013, MOD EUR PHILOS, P1, DOI 10.1017/CBO9781139520126
  • [7] NOTES ON THE DEVELOPMENTAL HISTORY OF HORKHEIMER WORK
    HABERMAS, J
    [J]. THEORY CULTURE & SOCIETY, 1993, 10 (02) : 61 - 77
  • [8] HABERMAS J., 1992, POSTMETAPHYSICAL THI
  • [9] Habermas Jurgen, 2018, PHILOS INTRO 5 APPRO, P93
  • [10] Habermas Jurgen, 2001, J HABERMAS JUSTIFICA, P134