The main principle of the establishment, development and decline

 Outline the main principles: the principle of subjectivity; I think therefore I am; Copernican revolution; subjectivity evening
one of the main principles of
from Greek philosophy Western philosophy since the beginning of its basic principles established This is the Learning to know, to grasp the object of knowledge as the primary means. Thus, rationalism, scientism, and epistemology constitutes the tradition of Western philosophy or basic disciplines. Corresponding to this, will become the main issues It is one of the basic issues. However, despite the problem of subjectivity is an important issue in Western philosophy, but it really stands out, as valued by philosophers, but mainly modern philosophy for the future. because the ancient Greek philosophers in the pursuit of knowledge While not out of simple and intuitive, they do not realize the main issues. With the progress of modern science, the rapid expansion of human knowledge and expansion to a deeper level, has become an issue of epistemology and philosophy of science priority. corresponding to the modern Enlightenment, finally became the main principle of the basic principles of philosophy.
to the pursuit of knowledge of Western philosophy as the ideal, and therefore more developed theory of knowledge, and constitute one of its basic features. Since it is the pursuit of knowledge, the awakening of subjectivity into the development process for a necessary stage: When scientific knowledge has developed to a certain stage, if the subject's own lack of understanding of further understanding, it is difficult to move forward the development of scientific knowledge. The results, main principle is not only the basic principles of modern philosophy, but also constitute the basic concepts of Western civilization, its influence still play a role in.
However, both the length of all things, there is always the short. one of the main is based on the principle of separation of subject and object, based on, but which determines the unity of the two is impossible; the other hand, developed from the principle of subjectivity out of a false and exaggerated anthropocentrism. Therefore, 20 century Western philosophy to counteract the main principles of this mission, following Nietzsche shouted .
, of course, the main issues is not only epistemological issue, but also ethics, history, philosophy and other disciplines, problems, which is one of the basic problems of Western philosophy, but this chapter we discuss the main subject on the epistemological issues, as it constitutes the main contents of this issue.
Second, I think, therefore I
Although the main issues in philosophy was born as early as the beginning has been in existence, but this issue has become philosophers consciously think the main problem, but it is only the beginning of modern philosophy.
Greek philosophy Western philosophy from the beginning of a study that established the concept of knowledge, it is generally necessary to obtain knowledge as a goal, so the epistemological problems - of course, include the main issues - the basic problem is that it should be. However, when the ancient philosophers began to philosophical thinking, they are still in with the natural world, regardless of the realm of things I do not know How many arduous efforts of sensory experience from the concept of abstract universal, so although there are certainly concerned to understand the main issues, but the problem for a long time for the philosophers are not conscious. from the Renaissance beginning, science has expanded rapidly in the differentiation of the various disciplines gradually established their own research, both in depth and in breadth have made remarkable achievements. Therefore, the epistemological problem becomes one of the important issues of philosophy , which is why the beginning of modern philosophy of experience there and Rationalism debate on the question of understanding the causes.
Usually we call the awakening of subjectivity or self-consciousness principle is the basic spirit of modern philosophy, but the basic spirit of the founder of the French philosopher Descartes.
boarded the philosophy of Descartes the date of the stage, it is the decline of scholastic philosophy, philosophy, when undone. before him the difficult task of metaphysics is to rebuild the entire human re-lay the foundation for building knowledge. So, how can we determine the basis for human knowledge, it? philosopher Descartes is not only a scientist, he found that the geometry can help him solve this problem. We only perform strictly in accordance with the method of geometry type reasoning, knowledge can ensure that the truth of the universal necessity, the question is how do we determine the basic premise for reasoning, that is, the starting point or basis of knowledge. In the case of knowledge difficult to distinguish between true and false, Descartes advocated the use of universal doubt methods to clear the doubts of all things slightly, to exclude all knowledge of suspicious, no doubt looking for the basis of self-evident. In his I feel that since I put a lot of errors from an early age as a real acceptance of views over, and then on some very unreliable in accordance with the principles of things are not built up is not very suspicious, very unreliable, So I think that if I want to establish a firm scientific and reliable, enduring things, I would not in my days be careful to put all the ideas I have always believed all cleared out, and from the fundamental can not be re-started. Always hesitant of skeptics, because on the contrary, my whole plan is sure to be sought for their own reasons, to eliminate surface dust and sand in order to identify the rocks and clay. On First of all, we have been as real and reliable perceptual knowledge is not reliable. Despite feeling a lot of things to us about the report, but sometimes the senses can be deceiving. For example the same as the distance of an object is different in the sense that it becomes different things. Therefore, once these things to fool us Do not believe, is certainly prudent behavior. However, despite the sensory distance of things, size, etc. may deceive us, but in other ways may be no reason to doubt it. For example, I sat by the fire, dressed in winter coats, etc., how can I deny these hands, this body is for me? However, this is also suspicious. because I am a man, in sleep may be dreaming. I whether sitting here, being sober is uncertain or in the dream, so also can be questioned. That being the case, we can thus infer that all things depend on the scientific study such as physics, astronomy, medicine, and so are suspicious, because they exist in reality if the object is uncertain. Cartesian doubt is so complete that he even believes that his beloved mathematics, geometry is also questionable, because people often make mistakes when reasoning and God created the world also may be a liar, and he intended that we are fooled: We think that 2 times 2 equals 4, and in fact is equal to 5. Not only that, even the vision of God does not exist is also allowed. Thus, we which is very easy to assume that neither God nor heaven, nor the object, it is easy to assume that not even our own hands, no feet, and finally there is not even the body. In short, the past, all we could ascertain is illusory.
However, when we doubt this way all the time, the suspicion itself is no doubt that a truth that I can not doubt that It is thought Shique not exist, it is self-contradictory. In other words, those who suspect that there must be a doubt in doubt, thinking there must be a thought in the mind. So, ) but a true and reliable, even skeptics of any one of the most arrogant presumption of the truth does not make the shake, there is no doubt that we can put it as the first principle of metaphysics. As for ; the understanding, affirmation, denial, willing, or not, think, feel and so on.
Descartes insisted that On the idealist, which is obviously a misunderstanding. Descartes is not to say, all things are dependent on the think will find it difficult to distinguish between true and false in the case of knowledge, Descartes's Doubt may be the only feasible way out. because any arbitrary decision of the French are able to escape suspicion, we can do is to suspect exclusion of knowledge one by one, take a look at what is left. In other words, any positive knowledge are lost in this role, we can only rely on a negative way, but the end result is only one negative, that is negative itself. Therefore, the Cartesian method by suspected seek self-evident, unquestionable knowledge of the process, in fact, that is, exclude the contents of knowledge, and eventually found the main body of knowledge in the form of which is the process of understanding. When Descartes completed thinking I walk, confirm my existence. Indeed, we might try, there is no knowledge of a positive self-assurance can be no doubt of its own, it is obviously impossible. Let us think about what more than suspected good solution, enabling us to establish self-consciousness, apparently not. because of ego or self-consciousness only to distinguish with other things is possible, in other words, we can only difference with other thing to realize that I own. Thus, Descartes's ontological proposition, the only the power of cow tigers raised this proposition, it is a little fuss: We who do not know my own existence? However, the key is to know but that does not prove or claim in accordance with Descartes, nor is it intuitive proof of it to determine my existence, because if it is to prove that there is the premise, which is not the first principle. There is no doubt that Descartes simply a proposition to last forever, and it has great significance because it is reflective of modern philosophy laid, the main principles and basic characteristics of rationalism, marking the beginning of modern philosophy. Thus, Hegel praised Descartes: take the lead in rebuilding the foundation of philosophical heroes, philosophy in the rush for a thousand years later, now back to the basis of the above. 1978, p. 63] great contribution to philosophy of Descartes is that he suspected this by way of negative thoughts and ideas in the form of content (object) separately, thus establishing the independent status of the main body, and take it as the basis of all thought or knowledge. However, when he transformed into a reflection of the epistemology of ontology results, that ; the conversion. As Kant said, I think, as a thinking entity will be made a logical error, it is equivalent to determine the on the understanding of the subject can only be seen as a form of conditions, it is everything to me to judge the In other words, it must be judged to be a judge the as a basic condition for understanding, but can not know it philosophers have thought and exists in solving the identity problem has always been difficult to shake off the dilemma. Descartes is thinking through the content (object) and the form of thinking (the subject) to distinguish the way to establish the principle of subjectivity, which makes him unable to extricate themselves into a dualism. In his view, the mind and body are two mutually independent, unrelated entity. mind attribute is extension, is indivisible; objects can not be thought, is infinitely divisible. Descartes Although the established principle of subjectivity, but also caused a soul and body, the relationship between mind and body, the whole of modern philosophy has always been for this Recognizing the problem is plagued by deadly. because it is set up in the main body of the distinction between subject and object of its premise and, therefore, when the philosophers, which set out to prove the identity of thinking and being, when it was bound can not solve the problem. result, not only rationalism and empiricism can not cross this final barrier: Descartes had to ask the Lord to help coordinate limit, but also into the that the Cartesian subject is linked to the awakening, then, finally established the principle of subjectivity and completely clear the name of another great link, he is Immanuel. Kant. Compared with the Cartesian , Kant's philosophical questions facing more complex, they include science, freedom and metaphysical problems, which are mainly metaphysical issue that runs through all of his Philosophy.
the stage when the philosophy of Kant, when board , is in trouble when modern philosophy. Western philosophy from Greek philosophy began to take shape, a rationalist, it is, only through rational understanding of activities on the natural world form a universal necessity of knowledge, accessible to the fact that truth, this concept evolved into modern philosophy in a scientific spirit, and greatly promote the development of epistemology. Renshi Lun to solve things we know about how to produce what is, and thus the knowledge of the general form come from necessity, or truth, and its scope and so on. It should be said, as long as we pursue knowledge, such problems are inevitable. But for the ancient philosophers, these issues have not yet entered their field of vision . As people gradually in-depth understanding of the world, epistemological issues of concern to philosophers become more and more problems in modern philosophy there has finally become one of the main problems of philosophy. early modern philosophers to explain the scientific knowledge source of epistemological certainty and scope of the problem is divided into two major factions, and this is the experience of the UK and mainland rationalism.
experience of starting from experimental science, all knowledge claims are derived from perceptual experience and based on experience It attempts to generalize on the experience of the natural law of induction to. rationalism starting from theoretical science, sensory experience that is ultimately the individual, relative and accidental, and therefore generally not necessary as a solid foundation of scientific knowledge, so knowledge is by some rational deduction from the concept of inherent talent, and not so can not explain the universal necessity of knowledge. So the question of epistemology, the two factions split on one end of the philosopher, engaged in a fierce debate, and their one-sidedness is determined by who can not ultimately solve the problem, Hume's skepticism of modern philosophy is the best portrayal of the troubled. His skepticism not only the experience of the experience of attempting to obtain a general sum of knowledge of natural law ultimately shattered this ideal, but also make rationalism into a corner. Hume knowledge into two categories, one is about the relationship between the concept of knowledge, one is the knowledge about the external facts. On the relationship between the concept of knowledge has nothing to do with external things they meet the rules of their own contradictions to be universal and not inevitable. knowledge of the facts is different. As the knowledge of the facts must be established on the basis of sensory experience, so such knowledge can only be probable. Thus, the ideal of experience of course shattered, the same ideal of rationalism in trouble: the only rational theory inherent in trying to deduce a number of innate ideas all human knowledge, and Hume had proved the concept of rationality only to the inherent associated with the external things themselves nothing.
empiricism and rationalism of the dispute to the issue of philosophy in the theory of knowledge into a dead end, the consequences are very serious. Modern Philosophy and Enlightenment reason to advocate and promote the scientific and advance knowledge of their responsibility, however, between empiricism and rationalism debate while filling the danger of these ideals have come to nothing. It means that we not only can not prove that the universal necessity of scientific knowledge, but also as a rational basis of scientific knowledge itself occurred shaken. as the product of scientific knowledge is rational, whether it is the universal necessity of scientific knowledge can not be confirmed, or reason, could not confirm the universal necessity of scientific knowledge, the result is the same, it means that reason itself has become a problem.
course For modern philosophy, this is not the most serious problem. The more serious problem is that in the basic spirit of the Enlightenment took place within the conflict, and this is the conflict between reason and freedom.
modern philosophers as The main reason advocated is a scientific reason, which makes the philosophy of natural science formed under the influence of a mechanical determinism of Nature. in the booming encouragement of natural science under the science philosophers have tried to method is extended to all areas of human knowledge, they believe that both nature and society all human beings to obey their own rules in a unified, that is the natural law of causality, all things can thus be a reasonable description. Therefore, there is no man and the natural world What is the difference, as subject to the common law of nature, he is just a more sophisticated and more complex machines only. results, the two pillars of the Enlightenment - reason and freedom to place a sharp contradiction: when philosophers of science rational implementation of all areas of human knowledge, when not only free but also the value and dignity of their own into question. In this context, the French thinker Jean Jacques Rousseau in its own way reveals the inherent contradictions of this Enlightenment. When Rousseau tried to that the origin and basis of human inequality, he put the state of nature and social status against each other, that human beings had to live in carefree, natural state of freedom and equality, and when he entered the state of society will be lost when freedom and equality. This means that those who advocate the Enlightenment culture, science and progress, when Rousseau began a profound reflection of the Enlightenment.
for Kant, no matter the issue or the freedom of knowledge, in fact with another more important issue related to that metaphysical question. We have said in the first chapter, metaphysics is the core of classical philosophy department, which must be resolved are the basis of a unified universe, nature and based on issues, they have been seen as a solution to all philosophical basis and premise. As has been advertised metaphysical science, or that it is the highest ideal is to become a science and even is science, then the building of human knowledge based on the risk of losing face, and now it is facing philosophers such danger. in the metaphysical issue, philosophers have different opinions in the divergent philosophical debate, almost become a people of all against all concept, although this on the philosophical question, we can summarize his problems in a strict compliance with the laws of nature in the world, people have the freedom, there is no independent value and dignity. For Kant, these problems are related to knowledge problems, so he begins with knowledge of the problem to start to solve these problems.
issues in epistemology, Kant advocates must be derived from experience, it also endorsed the rationalism of the criticism of experience - experience of scientific knowledge, it only is not enough, they can only be innate universal necessity. But this way, we caught dilemma: if knowledge must be built on the basis of experience, knowledge, there can be no universal necessity; if there is widespread knowledge of necessity, it must be innate and can not be established on the basis of experience. Kant put in one sentence put out of this dilemma: how can we experience the first world object? [[Germany] Kant: (apriori) and This means that independent of experience and is a prerequisite for the experience, knowledge in terms of performance for the universal and inevitable, Kant also known as it must also have the experience and innate factors in these two areas, however, seem to acquired experience and innate factors that are incompatible.
So, how can we experience the first world object? If in accordance with the knowledge must be consistent The traditional concept of the object, we can never prove the universal necessity of scientific knowledge. because we not only external things and their properties can not explain how consciousness can be moved to, but can not prove that the basis must be built on the knowledge of how the experience has universal necessity. After a long deep thinking, Kant developed a strange idea: Since the year of Copernicus can the relationship between the earth and the sun reversed, imagine not the sun around the earth, but the earth revolves around the the sun, which made the and reversed the relationship between objects and look for the object to meet the knowledge that is inherent in the understanding of the main form of the result. In Kant's view, the problem which would have been perfect solution: on the one hand, our knowledge indeed must be built on the basis of experience, but on the other hand, the understanding of the main activities of the form itself also has a set of knowledge, as these forms of knowledge and the experience of the first experience of the conditions as exist in our minds, Thus the knowledge they have of the innate or universal necessity. In other words, knowledge and experience to provide material, while the principal was to provide knowledge of the processing order of these materials in the form of knowledge is experience in terms of its content, but its form and statement is innate. the universal necessity of scientific knowledge which proved to be.
which is to be known as the confined to the field of epistemology, it has a more important role.
Kant proved in its own way the universal necessity of scientific knowledge, highlighting the main in understanding the status, role and initiative, but at the same time produce a very serious negative consequences. because if it is not the object but the object of knowledge must be consistent with the understanding must be consistent with the main form, it means something for us to be divided into two aspects: one is through the understanding of the main forms of understanding of things, Kant called the thing on our Dingeansich) Natural Science requirements only in accordance with the natural features of the original understanding of the principles of nature have wavered, but, more seriously, the metaphysical attempts to transcend the limitations of the natural universe, to grasp the essence of unity of nature and laws of the ideal is bound to be impossible. This is said that natural science is possible, and metaphysics is not possible. From this perspective, the In Kant's view, this can limit the negative into a positive outcome, or that he is open to the limit by another of our rational ability. While recognizing the limitations embodied in the form of cognitive ability limited, but on the other hand it also shows that our knowledge is not recognized outside the field there is a limited form of freedom which can be seen as an infinite field. So, on the rational understanding of capacity constraints as the reason for the other kinds of capabilities that is practical ability to open up vast world of infinite, because the practical reason or German but said its based on a free. If something is not on our performance in two aspects, we can understand things universal and necessary to form their own scientific knowledge, it means that everything is under the constraint of the form in which knowledge can be no freedom there. But if things for us, is divided into two aspects, the result is completely different: the thing into the performance and Two aspects of the things themselves, man is the same. the one hand, as the natural existence of people subject to the universal and necessary laws of nature, in this area he is not free; while the other one is not subject to the laws of nature also has limited side. In other words, people with a dual nature, he is a necessary things and people lost their freedom. and when we limit the ability of rational understanding of the time, this will keep the place in the world for free. So, Kant think that we need to limit knowledge in order to leave the site of moral beliefs. [more See Kant's the other hand, cognitive ability is limited by opening the way for free. Thus, in the philosophy of Kant, the subject of the content has been expanded, the main subject is not only understanding, but also the will of the subject. Kant philosophy into practice, and claims the priority of practical reason, thereby Hegel, Marx eventually carried forward to form a new philosophy.
As mentioned above, Kant's great contribution in the history of philosophy is one of the main initiative of Praise . But the difference is, Kant, the principal activity of the carry forward is not only the epistemological sense, especially in the sense of ethics, and even can be said that his understanding of the main areas of activity truly reflected in the practice of not understanding domain. Reason There are two functions, namely, the theory of cognitive ability as a reason, and as the operational capacity of practical reason. Corresponding to this, there are two rational legislative power: the legislative and rational intellect is a natural for their own legislation. [usually people say, Kant argues must be distinguished intellectual and rational, because the different intellectual, the main activity, in fact, on the contrary, it reflects a person's limited. intellect is a natural legislation does not mean we can decide and control the natural law, because lawmakers and law-abiding here are separated: a priori knowledge in the form of legislation law-abiding is the experience of objects. Therefore, as we do not experience the object can not because of intellectual limitations intellectual law, which is a necessary field. and this is different from the field in practice, the rational for their own legislation, its own their compliance with legislation, lawmakers and law-abiding persons are unified, so it is self-discipline that is free. Therefore, the main activity is not truly reflect the cognitive capacity but the will. from Kant, practice has become much attention of area.
to Kant as a guide, the German philosopher who finally established on the basis of rationalism to an extreme the main activity, thus also indicates that the main fate of the 20th century.
Kant successors are not from the Germany's main initiative thought, but he thinks Kant's philosophy is not complete, because it assumes an unknown outside the one hand, the physical self, including also assumed a priori unknowable self. In Fichte seems philosophy is epistemology, which is things in themselves do not assume that knowledge of the case of the universal necessity. That is to say, Fichte that not only knowledge but also knowledge of the contents of the form from all the main itself. So, he will combine theoretical and practical reason to said,