Kant and Wittgenstein on Thought Experiments and the Matter of Transcendental Arguments

Author:

Fuentes González Sergio Alberto1ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Immanuel Kant Baltic Federal University

Abstract

It is necessary to reconsider P. M. S. Hacker’s assessment of Kant and Wittgenstein’s philosophical affinities and the question concerning Wittgenstein’s alleged use of “transcendental arguments”. First, Alfred Norman’s reading of the Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus as a thought experiment receives revision to develop a view of the Critique of Pure Reason as a large-scale thought experiment that shares important logical features with the Tractatus. Then the question is addressed whether the middle Wittgenstein and the pre-critical Kant employed any thought experiments that could be equally characterised as “transcendental arguments”. A rational reconstruction of both thinkers’ arguments is carried out in the light of the contemporary literature on thought experimenting. The novelty and relevance of this approach is the emphasis laid upon a largely neglected affinity between Kant and Wittgenstein, namely the systematic use of thought experiments in their epistemological pursuits. The conclusions are: i) Wittgenstein’s and Kant’s magna opera can be seen as philosophical thought experiments that attempt to try out the limits of language and the limits of possible experience respectively; ii) Both philosophers developed arguments that can be designated as transcendental if only from a methodological standpoint; and iii) some key arguments put forward by the middle Wittgenstein in the determination of the structure of visual space could be characterised better as thought experiments than transcendental arguments.

Publisher

Immanuel Kant Baltic Federal University

Subject

Philosophy

Reference30 articles.

1. Brendel, E., 2004. Intuition Pumps and the Proper Use of Thought Experiments. Dialectica, 58(1), pp. 89-108.

2. Brown, J. R., 1991. Thought Experiments: A Platonic Account. In: T. Horowitz and G. J. Massey, eds. 1991. Thought Experiments in Science and Philosophy. Savage, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.

3. Brown, J. R., 2004. Why Thought Experiments Transcend Empiricism. In: C. Hitchcock, ed. 2004. Contemporary Debates in Philosophy of Science. Malden, MA: Blackwell Pub, pp. 23-43.

4. Broyles, J. E., 1974. An Observation on Wittgenstein’s Use of Phantasy. Metaphilosophy, 5(4), pp. 291-297.

5. Buzzoni, M., 2018. Kantian Accounts of Thought Experiments. In: M. T. Stuart, Y. Fehige and J. R. Brown, eds. 2018. The Routledge Companion to Thought Experiments. London & New York: Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group, pp. 327-341.

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3