tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1860307875990258501.post765608382340504084..comments2024-02-12T09:12:21.978-06:00Comments on Non-Kantradiction: What Does Kant Mean by Dogmatism?Erik Christiansonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15747258914239065813noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1860307875990258501.post-62646594516585470112023-01-19T09:13:41.010-06:002023-01-19T09:13:41.010-06:00Glad I could be of some help.Glad I could be of some help.Erik Christiansonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15747258914239065813noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1860307875990258501.post-75243593173450937972023-01-19T05:14:07.159-06:002023-01-19T05:14:07.159-06:00Thanks for this. This is very helpful in my exam.Thanks for this. This is very helpful in my exam.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06211437765270213344noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1860307875990258501.post-57660021950696975722012-11-01T11:21:46.085-05:002012-11-01T11:21:46.085-05:00Thanks for your comment.
I agree that it is helpf...Thanks for your comment.<br /><br />I agree that it is helpful to get a view of the relationship and use of Dogmatism, Skepticism, and Critique. The dogmatist is held in check by the skeptic, but only able to start advancing once the critic has performed their work clarifying the object.<br /><br />In fact, the exact problem I was addressing here was that it seems that many take Kant's work to be a rejection of any kind of dogmatic thought; but for Kant that just means thought that reasons from grounds it has taken up to conclusions. The article I linked to at the start of this post was an example of the sort of fearful reaction many have to Kant, which would be justified <b>if</b> Kant actually did want to reject all advancing in Metaphysics.Erik Christiansonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15747258914239065813noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1860307875990258501.post-44638666559788640942012-11-01T07:34:30.297-05:002012-11-01T07:34:30.297-05:00Nice summary. It might be helpful to link this up...Nice summary. It might be helpful to link this up with Kant's short 'histories' of reason's development from dogmatism through skepticism to criticism in the Antinomy and in the Doctrine of Method. As you note, dogmatic procedure and dogmatic claims are distinct from dogmatism as a kind of predisposition to "run riot in the transcendent" when we go looking for knowledge from a priori principles. These little stories about reason --wherein dogmatism is less than reflective, skepticism is reflective only enough to observe endless battles -but not see their roots- , and criticism goes beyond skepticism and reflects upon the deep roots of human dogmatism -- provide a handy way (esp. in the classroom) to show in what sense Kant wants to move beyond dogmatism and skepticism, and in what sense he thinks dogmatic procedure and skeptical method valuable, worth incorporating into the critical philosophy... if not important, un-abandonable parts of what it means to be human. <br /><br />Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01950796608765270169noreply@blogger.com