Philosophy
David Hume and Immanuel Kant have both had tremendous impact on the field of philosophy. Their contributions, especially "A treatise of human nature" by Hume and the "Critique of pure reason" by Kant are masterpieces in philosophical literature. Both of them have left their own novel ideas and concepts, which deeply influenced and gave a new understanding to domains as diverse as philosophy, politics and religion. Let us study the ideas of Hume and Kant in a little detail and try to have a comparative study of their philosophies.
Hume's Matters of Fact and Relations of ideas
Hume's analyses of human mentality is based on two different components namely impressions and ideas. Impressions are vivid and strong creations of our experiences while ideas are feeble reflections of the impressions. According to Hume all ideas have a preceding impression. All human belief systems are a result of the linking or the association that we perceive between the different ideas in our mind. Human understanding and his learning process are mostly based on what are called the "matters of fact." Hume proposes that our casual reasoning does not have rational justification. His main contention is that our beliefs in 'matters of facts' do not have any real rationale. He argues that the belief that we import from our past observations hold no guarantee of their certainty in future. As an example Hume states that people believe that the sun will rise every day. This belief has as its origin the firm faith in the relation between the rotation of earth with respect to the sun, which again is based on our experiences in the past. Hume's proposition is that our assumption of the continuity of the 'matters of fact' based on past criterion are not rationally justified. That is to say that Hume considers inductive reasoning as not having a rational basis.
Knowledge (Priori)
Hume was one of the first philosophers who found out a discrepancy in the assumption that all knowledge a priori must be purely analytical. In particular he found out that the relationship between the 'cause and effect' is purely synthetic rather than analytical. That is, philosophers before Hume were of the opinion that any effect could be correctly deduced or ascertained from the cause provided we have the knowledge. Hume differed here from them in that he dismissed the notion of a priori knowledge pertaining to the connection between the cause and effect. It is necessary to note that Kant's idea of synthetic judgement is in response to Hume's rejection of the possibility of a priori knowledge pertaining to cause and effect.
According to Hume we can never know the relationship between a cause and effect by way of priori knowledge. Continuing in the same vein even 'matters of fact' which we accept based on our memory and our sensory perception cannot be cognized by knowledge a priori. In short, a priori knowledge is possible in case of propositions where the 'contraries create a contradiction'. [David Hume] This implies that matters of facts can only be understood by way of posteriori knowledge. Hume's famous elucidation "the sun will rise' is an excellent example of 'matter of facts' which depend on posteriori knowledge. 'Matters of facts' differ from 'relations of ideas' in that they cannot be deduced from priori knowledge. Relations of ideas are totally discernible propositions and can be proved by way of reasoning. [David Hume]
Kant's Definition of Knowledge
Accumulation of knowledge is a process, which involves sensory input together with innate cognitive response. Kant argues that the operation of this cognitive faculty is very subtle and hence difficult to perceive. Kant identifies two separate forms of knowledge namely priori and posteriori. He defines knowledge, which falls beyond the realm of experience as a priori. What is a priori for a person might just be a posteriori for another person in a different period of time. That is to say that experience garnered by people in the past might just be accepted as priori...
Kant and Rousseau Reducing Conflicts Between States The Theories of the Great Philosophers Rousseau and Kant The great philosophers of the 18th century were the first of their kind to fully encapsulate what it meant to be an ethnocentric state, rather than a simple nation or territory, and also were the first philosophers able to address the question of war between states as not merely individual struggles for dominance, but rather persistent frictions
Kant and David on Causality; Rousseau and Adam Smith on Social Order Compare and contrast Rousseau and Adam Smith, on the importance of economic or political mark in their account of social order. Rousseau saw the development of organized political life as synonymous with generating social inequality. As "individuals have more contact with one another and small groupings begin to form, the human mind develops language, which in turn contributes to the
According to Aristotle, a man's true worth is known by his deeds that is how he acts and reacts in certain situations. He holds the view that a person's actions can be judged by a certain standard of perfection which he calls 'good'. Conclusions Critique of Judgment is a masterpiece of Kant that attempts to correlate aesthetic and moral judgments. In his work he tries to find moral dimensions to concepts
Since right now computers are non-living, they must be programmed with knowledge (facts). If we used the analogy of a human who somehow was devoid of experience (senses, etc.) then that human would have to be retaught evertyhing in order to interpret the universe. However, computers of today are basically supercharged calculators; they respond to stimuli that is programmed in by taking a voluminous number of facts and processing those
Pure Reason underscores the theory of Immanuel Kant that cognition depends on the employment of transcendental processes, which are contingent of the concept of categories. Kant's categories describe the phenomenon of pure understanding. For Kant, pure understanding is the state that permits and defines the corridor of reality as it is realized in the human mind. In The Critique of Pure Reason Kant seemed more interested in stating the
All the people know what the brain is, what it looks like and where it is located. This does not however constitute the basis for the idea of min, yet the concept exists and is powerful enough to give birth to endless debate. Kant on the other hand underlines the fact that the properties which the mind has and which allow it to create meaning depend exclusively on the physical
Our semester plans gives you unlimited, unrestricted access to our entire library of resources —writing tools, guides, example essays, tutorials, class notes, and more.
Get Started Now