The name of Kant will always be intimately connected with the word
metaphysics, not because he buried himself in it, as some have supposed
who only know his system of philosophy by hearsay; but because his
labours consisted in forbidding reason to approach this science which
is constantly threatening to invade it, and to get the upper hand by
putting itself in its place.
Kant was the first to trace with decision the line of demarcation
between the knowledge of which our reason is capable, and that of
which it is incapable. No one has drawn so sharp a line between the
knowable and the unknowable; this was to explain metaphysics. Alfred
Fouillée has defined them as “the critical study of problems which the
mind seeks to unravel from a necessity of its nature, although another
necessity of its nature renders it incapable of solving them”--such is
metaphysics.
This definition is excellent, but for those who make no preparatory
studies in philosophy it would present itself rather in this form. If
certain questions are of necessity presented to the mind which it finds
it impossible to solve, it follows that the mind would necessarily
contradict itself. Thus this succinct definition of Fouillée requires
to be itself defined.
Noiré, whilst giving more details, is also more exact. “Metaphysics
is only explained on the condition that we understand the nature
of our power of understanding, in so far as, on the one part, this
power is actively manifested in experience, and secondly, in so
far as it possesses anteriorly to any experience, and to anything
observed, certain ideas without which there could not possibly or even
conceivably, be any impression made in the human mind.” I am afraid
that this explanation of Noiré will also be lost upon those who are not
experienced in the subject.
The explanation of Schopenhauer is not less definite, and is more
concise than the two preceding. The foundation upon which all our
knowledge and all our science rests, is the incomprehensible--I fancy
that the uninitiated will be equally unable to understand this.
It is not surprising. Philosophers speak a language of their own, which
must be learnt before it can be understood, which is the case with all
languages.
Kant develops this thesis with greater simplicity and clearness. “As
long as the human intellect moves in the sphere of the senses and of
experience it is safe; this sphere is very vast; it is there that all
phenomena may be known which appears in space and time, that is to say,
all belonging to the phenomenal world in which we live. But if the
intellect rebels against the gaoler which holds it captive in the magic
circle, breaks its chains and enters into the region of ideals, it will
err.”
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account