Posted Sep 22, 2002 by Noggin the Nog
Entry: The Metaphysics of Immanuel Kant - an overview - A768864
Author: Noggin the Nog - U196230
Entry: The Metaphysics of Immanuel Kant - an Overviw: A768864
Author: Noggin the Nog U196230
This has been languishing in the Writing Workshop for longer than I intended, but is now finished (I hope).
Any comments?
|
 
|  | |
|
|
Posted Sep 26, 2002 by Otto Fisch (14 shirt)(Now moved under the Bosman ruling)
Hi Noggin!
This is greatly improved 
I particularly enjoyed the bit at the end about the link between Kant's metaphysics (of which I have a mere passing acquaintance) and his ethics (about which I know rather more). This hadn't occurred to me before!
I wonder if you couldn't make it a bit more accessible still? I'm having to work quite hard in places to work it all out. Can you think of some examples that might illustrate some of the arguments?
Perhaps you could use something like a girl looking at a football. Is her knowledge about the football gained entirely from the world (empiricists) or could some of the physics of what will happen when she kicks it be known without experience (rationalists). I've tried to think how this could be extended (if it could be extended) to demonstrate some of the later stuff, but I really don't know enough about it. I'll keep thinking, though.
I think the "background" section is really clear, and I think it would be useful to refer to this later if you can, as it seems like it's just dropped. I do think that the article moves too quickly eg - there's so much content in the first paragraph of "Kant's solution" that I've lost count of how many times I've read it!
Finally, there's a few rogue "I"s in there - all guide entries have to be in the third person.
I should say that I admire you for taking this on! Writing an introduction to metaphysics for a generalist audience is a huge undertaking, and I think this has promise, though it's not quite there yet. I do think examples are the way forward
TTFN
Otto
|
| | |
|
|
Posted Sep 26, 2002 by Noggin the Nog
Thanks Otto.
I'll have to give it a bit of think.
Noggin
|
| | |
|
|
Posted Oct 24, 2002 by Trout Montague
Noggin.
Did you "give it a bit of think" yet?
Dr Trout (PR Hoover)
|
| | |
|
|
Posted Nov 5, 2002 by Lucinda (et al) - Dun Researchin'
It's rather confusing, I'm afraid. Yeah, concrete examples would be nice. 
What about Kantian Ethics? A493607 - Ethics discusses this a little under "Logical Ethics", but I'm sure it's very shallow compared to what Kant *really* thought...
good luck
-Martin
|
| | |
|
|
Posted May 1, 2005 by rico12484
I think it would be worth while to address the synthetic/analitic distinction, the catagories of the understanding, and how under them how sytnetic a priori principles are possible.
|
| | |
|
|
|
|
Key |  |  |
A: An older reply to the parent Posting
B: The parent Posting, to which this is a reply
C: A newer reply to the parent posting
D: The first reply to this Posting
| | |
Click on this icon to make a complaint about a specific Posting | |
Home
Reply
