An Introduction to Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason

Immanuel Kant is an 18th century philosopher, belonging to the era of the Enlightenment. The Enlightenment is an intellectual epoch where reason triumphed over faith. Kant is arguably one of the greatest intellectuals of all time, and his Critique of Pure Reason is considered his magnum opus. It was published when he was 57, so he had a whole lifetime to meditate upon the nature of reason. So don’t expect the book to be an easy read. It is precisely for this reason that an introduction to it can be helpful, to understand what his project is about and its broad strokes.

Kant wrote Critique to enquire into the nature of reason, laying the path for that by first examining how we perceive and understand things.

Meno: Plato on Ethics and Epistemology

While Plato’s Meno is ostensibly about ethics since it discusses virtue, it is also about epistemology, i.e. the theory of knowledge. Written in 385 BC,[1] the plot is about a man, Meno, who is talking to Socrates about the nature of virtue. Meno wanted to know if virtue can be taught, gained through practice or is inborn.

How We Learn, According to Augustine

According to Augustine (d. 430), we do not learn about the things themselves through words, since if we did not already know what words like green, room and cabinet mean, the word will not teach it to us. However, words do have a function – they prompt us by directing our attention to “remind us to look for things.” (The Teacher, p. 137, l. 170) We have to be prompted, to compare what we have been told, to consult our “inner light” (p. 140, l. 31), that is, God, to make the judgement if what is told is true. 

The Myth of Certainty

Image by Gordon Johnson from Pixabay

Do you feel that there is one correct way for you to lead your life and if only you make the right decisions, you will succeed?

Are you then frustrated by the uncertainties you face, nagged by a feeling that there must be a correct way but you just do not know what way that is? Do you wish that life have the mathematical certainty of 1+1=2?

Justifying Knowledge: Coherentism vs Foundationalism

How do we justify our true beliefs so that they can become knowledge? The classical account of knowledge considers knowledge to be justified true belief (JTB): to have knowledge, one believes something that is true and can justify that belief. Post-Gettier, the three conditions of justification, truth and belief are considered necessary but not sufficient for knowledge.[1] The condition of truth belongs to the domain of metaphysics while the nature of belief is in the domain of the philosophy of mind. The condition of justification belongs to epistemology. Epistemological theories to justify true beliefs include infinitism, coherentism and foundationalism.[2] Given a true belief, such as ‘Brussels is the capital of Belgium,’ how can we justify it?

The Nature of the Atman

What is the nature of reality, according to Indian philosophy? To answer this question, I turned to the Upanisads, which is considered the source of Indian philosophies and religions. According to Radhakrishnan, the aim of the Upanisads is “not so much to reach philosophical truth as to bring peace and freedom to the anxious human spirit [...] express[ing] the restlessness and striving of the human mind to grasp the true nature of reality.”[1] To investigate the nature of reality, the Upanisads philosophically analyse the nature of the self or Atman in Sanskrit, which means breath or vital essence in the Rg Veda. It could also be understood as the Self, with a capital S – the ultimate and true Self, or Soul.[2]

Does Everything Have a Reason?

Do you agree that everything has a reason? That there are no brute, unexplainable facts? Then you believe in the Principle of Sufficient Reason or PSR.