Views
27
Downloands
1
Bu çalışmada, Kant’ın bilgi anlayışına Salt Aklın Kritiği bağlamında ışık tutulmaya çalışılmış ve Batı metafiziğine yönelik desturksiyonla felsefe mahaline çıkan Heidegger’in Kant yorumu Salt Aklın Kritiği temele alınarak Kant’ın metafiziğinin hudutlarını belirleme deneyiminde “dimağın haritası”, özsel olarak bir metafizik projesinin olanaklı olup olmadığı meselesi nezdinde araştırılmıştır. Bu amaçla öncelikle Kant’ın epistemolojisinde önemli bir rol oynayan, transsendental, transsendent, a priori, a posteriori, sentetik ve analitik yargılar, a priori sentetik yargılar, duyarlığın formları olarak zaman ve mekân kavramları ele alınarak epistemik sorunun ontolojik bir meseleye nasıl dönüştüğü aydınlık kılınmaya çalışılmıştır. Çalışmadaki sorun, Kant’a değin gelen metafizik ve bilim arasındaki ilişkide, metafiziğin bilimden dışlanması ve dogmatik ilkeleri kendisine düstur edindiği savıdır. Bu dogmatik düsturlar, aklın sapkınlığına yol açarak bilginin de gerçek değerini alaşağı etmiştir. Yapılacak şey, metafiziği zararlı otlardan çekip çıkarmaktır. Burada akıl, yardıma çağrılır. Aklın yardıma çağrılması zihnin, nesnenin bilgi elde etmesinde etkin bir rol oynaması anlamına gelecektir ki, bu da zihnin nesne karşısında, bilgiye ulaşmada yol gösterici vasfının olduğunun göstergesidir. Yani, zihin nesneyi belirlemede mihenk taşı olmaktadır. Felsefenin odağı bu anlamda, zihin üzerine olmalı, zihnin akıl eşliğinde anatomisi çıkarılmalıdır. Akıl eşliğinde zihne yönelik araştırma ise aklın kendisini eleştirmesi anlamına gelecektir. Bu, esasen zihindeki salt ilkeleri soruşturan metafizik alanda mümkündür. Kant, akılda deneyimden gelmeyen ancak, tüm deneyimi olanaklı kılacak ilkeleri araştırmayı kendine amaç edinmiştir. Onun “salt” kavramı burada önem kazanmaktadır. Bu ilkeler, sentetik a priori ilkeledir. Onun bu ilkeleri bulma kaygısı, söz konusu ilkelerin tüm bilimlere uygulanacak temel bir dayanak noktası olmasından ileri gelir. Bu anlamda o, metafiziği, bu ilkelerle temellendirme ve ona bilim temeli kazandırmayı amaç edinmiştir. Şu durumda, aklın kendisine yönelik eleştirisi, kendisinde a priori kavramları bulundurması dolayısıyla, salt olanın açığa çıkarmaktır. Bu salt kavramların açığa çıkarılması, bilim olarak kurulacak olan metafiziğin yazgısını belirleyecektir. Salt Aklın Kritiği gelecekte bilim olarak kurulacak metafiziğe; Prolegomena’ya da hazırlık durumundadır. Heidegger’in bu noktada Kant okuması “şematizm” öğretisinden yola çıkarak duyarlık ve anlak arasında kurulan ilişkide “fundemental ontoloji” bağlamında metafiziğin özsel olanağını sorgulamak; varlığın zamansal serimlenişine temel olabilecek olanakları açığa çıkarmaktır. Bu anlamda Heidegger Kant’ın bilhassa iç duyumun iki formu olarak sunduğu zaman ve mekânın epistemik bağlamda önemini vurgulasa da onu, varlığın anlamı sorununu görmezden geldiği gerekçesiyle de eleştiriye tabi tutmaktadır. Bu doğrultuda bu çalışmada Kant’ın bilgi olanaklılığı meselesi Heidegger’in ontolojik ufukla yeniden okuması ve eleştirisi kisvesinde ele alınmış ontik ve ontolojik hakikat ayırımını ileri süren transendental felsefenin ontolojik ve epistemolojik ipuçları metafiziğin özsel imkânının hudutlarını belirleme noktasında açımlanmaya çalışılmıştır.
In this study, Kant's understanding of knowledge was tried to keep light in the context of Salt Mind Criticism and Heidegger's interpretation of Kant, which came to philosophy with disturbance towards Western metaphysics, based on Salt Mind Criticism, in Kant's experience of determining the curves of the metaphysics, the "mapping map" was studied on the question of whether a metaphysical project is possibly possible. For this purpose, first and foremost, transsendental, transsendent, a priori, a posteriori, synthetic and analytical judgments, a priori synthetic judgments, the concepts of time and space as forms of sensitivity, which have played an important role in Kant's epistemology, have been attempted to make it clear how the epistemic problem has become an ontological issue. The problem in the study is that in the relationship between metaphysics and science that is addressed to Kant, the argument is that metaphysics is excluded from science and the dogmatic principles are rejected to him. These dogmatic disturbances have led to the distortion of mind and have undermined the real value of knowledge. The thing to do is to remove metaphysics from harmful herbs. Here the mind is called for help. The call of mind to help will mean that the mind plays an effective role in obtaining information by the object, which is an indication that the mind has a guiding vessel in obtaining information in front of the object. Thus, the mind is a stone in determining the object. The focus of philosophy in this sense should be on the mind, the anatomy should be removed in the mind accompanying the mind. The study of the mind accompanied by the mind will mean that the mind will criticize itself. This is essentially possible in the metaphysical field that investigates the simple principles in the mind. Kant has aimed at researching the principles that do not come from experience, but that will enable the whole experience. His “salt” concept becomes important here. These principles are synthetic a priori principles. His worries about finding these principles arise from the fact that these principles are a fundamental foundation to be applied to all sciences. In this sense, he aimed at founding metaphysics on these principles and giving it a scientific basis. In this case, the criticism of the mind towards itself is to reveal the simple, because it contains a priori concepts in itself. The disclosure of these simple concepts will determine the literacy of the metaphysics that will be established as a science. Salt Mind Critics is prepared for metaphysics that will be founded as science in the future; Prolegomena is also prepared. Heidegger's reading at this point is to question the substantial possibility of metaphysics in the context of "fundamental ontology" in the relationship established between sensitivity and angle, starting from the doctrine of "chematism" of Kant; to reveal the possibilities that may be the basis for the temporary cementation of the existence. In this sense, when Heidegger Kant presents as two forms of inner sensation and emphasizes the importance of space in the epistemic context, he is also subject to criticism for the reason that he ignores the problem of the meaning of the existence. In this regard, Kant’s information possibility issue, Heidegger’s oncological horizon re-read and criticism, the oncological and oncological truth distinction of transendental philosophy, the oncological and epistemological clues of transendental philosophy, which were discussed in the oncological and oncological horizon, were attempted to open up at the point of determining the substantial possibility of metaphysics.
In this study, Kant's knowledge understanding was attempted to shed light on the Critique of Pure Reason, and the Kant interpretation of Heidegger, who came to the place of philosophy with the destruction of Western metaphysics, was investigated the issue whether the foundation as the projection of the intrinsic possibility of metaphysics, in the experience of determining the boundaries of the metaphysics of Kant, “the map of mind” basing on Critique of Pure Reason. For this purpose firs of all has been tried to be lightened dealed with how to turn the epistemic problem into an ontological question concepts transsendental, transsendent, a priori, a posteriori, synthetic and analytical judgments, a priori synthetic judgments, time and space as forms of intuition (Anschaung) which plays an important role in Kant's epistemology. The problem in the study is the argument that metaphysics is excluded from science and the dogmatic principles have adopted it in the relationship between metaphysics and science that goes back to Kant. These dogmatic principles overthrown the true value of knowledge that led to the heresy of reason. What to do is to extractl the metaphysics out of ill weeds. Here the mind is called to help. Calling the mind to help means that the mind plays an active role in this is an indication that there is a guiding character in accessing information opposite the object of the mind. That is, mind is the touchstone in determining the object. In this sense, the focus of philosophy should be on the mind and the mind should be removed from the anatomy with reason. The exploration mind-directed with reason will mean that the mind will criticize reason itself. This is possible in the metaphysical field, which essentially researchs the pure principles in mind. Kant aims to explore the principles that do not come from experience in the mind but which will be possible the whole experience. His the concept of “pure” is important here. These principles are synthetic a priori. His concern about finding these principles comes from the basic premisefact that these principles are a fundamental to apply to all sciences. In this sense, he aims to base metaphysics with these principles and to give him a science foundation. In this case, Kant’s the criticism of the reason is to reveal the pure in which has concepts pure a priori. The reveal of these pure concepts will determine the fate of metaphysics to be established as science. The Critique of Pure Reason is the preparation for metaphysics to be established as science in the future (Prolegomena). At this point Heidegger’reading on Kant reveals to research the projection of the intrinsic possibility of metaphysics; the possibilities that is basic the exposition temporal of being that on Kant's “schematism” reveals in the relation of intiution and mind, which deals with on the basis of “fundemental ontology”. In this sense, Heidegger who emphasizes the importance of time and space in the epistemic context of Kant, which presents as two forms of inner sense, still criticizes Kant who has ignored the problem of existence meaning. In this respect, in this study deals with the question of Kant's possibility of knowledge was discussed in the perspevtive of Heidegger's re-reading and criticism on the ontological horizon and ontological and tried to explain epistemological tips of transcendental philosophy which asserts a distinction between ontic and ontological truth In the context of determining the boundaries of the intrinsic possibility of metaphysics.
Journal Type : Uluslararası
Article Detail 
Similar Articles
Download PDF
Journal Information
Listen Paper
Cite
Print This Page
Share
Mendeley
