【作者】 彭志君；

【导师】 舒远招；

【作者基本信息】 湖南师范大学 ， 外国哲学， 2014， 博士

【摘要】 先天综合判断要成为可能需要一个将其主项和谓项联结起来的第三者。《纯粹理性批判》和《道德形而上学奠基》分别从理论和实践两个视角系统而深入地阐述了此种意义上的第三者。康德在《纯粹理性批判》中较多地涉及了纯粹数学、纯粹自然科学判断的第三者,但对超验的自然形而上学判断的第三者涉及得很少。《纯粹理性批判》的“导言”指明了联结数学判断的主项和谓项的第三者是直观,“先验感性论”和“先验方法论”的一些论述则进一步向我们表明了第三者是先天直观(空间和时间),而不是经验性直观。石里克否定存在着先天直观,这是其否定存在先天综合判断的题中应有之义。石里克以现代数学物理学的发展反驳康德的先天直观理论其实是一种外部反驳,因而他的反驳是不成功的。康德所谓的“纯粹自然科学”指一般自然的形而上学和有形自然的形而上学(理性物理学)。《纯粹理性批判》的“导言”通过一个例子初步提示了联结纯粹自然科学判断的主项和谓项的第三者是单纯概念,“先验分析论”和“先验方法论”中的一些论述进一步向我们表明了范畴就是第三者。虽然在纯粹自然科学中存在着三种不同意义上的第三者,即先验图型、由内感官、想像力和统觉组成的一个条件整体以及范畴,但真正联结纯粹自然科学判断的主项和谓项的第三者是范畴。超验的自然形而上学由理性心理学、理性宇宙学和理性神学三个部分组成。这三个组成部分分别以灵魂、世界和上帝为研究对象。在超验的自然形而上学中不可能形成类似于纯粹数学和纯粹自然科学意义上的具有建构性的先天综合判断,而只能形成具有调节性的先天综合判断,它们是理性的统一性、多样性和连续性这三条原则。可是,康德并没有给出上述三个先天综合判断的逻辑表达式(判断形式),也很少给出它们的第三者的相关论述,这成为研究康德哲学的一个重大难题。在《道德形而上学奠基》中,康德明确指认定言命令是一个先天综合的实践命题(判断)。“一种定言命令是如何可能的?”对此问题的解答涉及到定言命令的第三者问题。围绕着对“定言命令的第三者是什么?”这个问题的解答,学术界形成了两种研究思路,即先天型思路和混合型思路。研究表明,混合型思路是行不通的,研究定言命令的第三者只能采取完全先天的思路；定言命令的第三者是自律的意志。康德提出的“先天综合判断”概念受到了现当代分析哲学的严重质疑。其质疑的主要对象是分析判断与综合判断的区分；质疑的焦点是分析概念。分析哲学的质疑对我们澄清哲学概念具有重要的意义,但也存在一些不容忽视的问题。这些问题包括对分析概念澄清之不足,对综合概念和区分分析和综合判断之意义的忽视以及缺乏对先天综合判断的意义的应有重视。分析哲学的质疑涉及到知识的标准问题。先天综合判断作为一种知识标准有其合理的因素和价值。同样,探究“先天综合判断是如何可能的?”也具有重要的意义。纯粹数学判断、自然形而上学判断(包括纯粹自然科学和超验的自然形而上学)和定言命令的第三者都有形式和对象这两面。第三者作为联结先天综合判断的主项和谓项的中介对先天综合判断具有在逻辑学、认识论和形而上学上奠基的作用。不同学科领域中的第三者是不一样的,因而其具有一定的普遍性。第三者是贯穿康德哲学的一条重要线索,其对我们研究康德哲学乃至现当代的西方哲学都具有重要的意义和价值。更多还原

【Abstract】 The synthetic judgements a priori that can be possilbe need a third thing, which combines the subject and predicate of the judgements. Critique of pure reason and Groundwork for the Metaphysics of Morals interpret deeply and systematically the sense of the third thing.In Critique of pure reason, Kant mainly refered the third thing of pure mathematics、pure natural science, but refered to the third thing of transcendental natural metaphysics a little."The introduction"of Critique of pure reason has clearly showned that the intuition is the third thing which combines the subject and predicate of mathematical judgements. Some discussions in "transcendental aesthetic" and "transcedndental doctrine of method" indicated that the intuition is a priori(space and time), but not empirical. Schlick denied that there is no intuition a priori, which is the due sense of denying the existence of synthetic judgements a priori. In fact, Schlick refuted Kant’s theory of intuition a priori by the developments of contemporary mathematics, which can not be successful because it is an external refutation.Kant’s "pure natural science" is the natural metaphysics as such and the corporeal natural metaphysics(rational physics)."The introduction" of Critique of pure reason by an example has prelimilarily prompted that the third thing is mere concepts which combine the subject and predicate of the judgements of pure natural science. Some discussions in "transcendental analytic"and"transcendtal doctrine of method" which further indicated that the third thing is categories. Although there are three third things which have different meanings in pure natural science, which are transcendental schema, a whole condition which is composed of inner sense、imagination and apperception and categories. Our studying suggests that categories is the third thing which combine the subject and predicate of judgements in pure natural science.The transcendent natural metaphysics is composed of three parts, which is psychology、rational cosmology and rational theology. The three parts respectively study the soul、the world and the god. In transcendent natrual metaphysics, it may not be produced the judgements which are similar to constitutive synthetic judgements a priori in the pure mathematic and the pure natural science, there are only regulative synthetic judgements a priori which are three priciples of reason, i.e. unity、diversity and continuity. But, Kant hasn’t given out the logical expression and little refers to the third thing of them, which has become a major problem in the research of Kant’s philophy.In Groudwork for Metaphysics of morals, Kant clearly identified that the categorical imperative is a synthetic practical proposition(judgement) a priori. How is a categorical imperative(which is a synthetic judgement or proposition a priori) possible? It is concerned with the problem of third thing of categorical imperative. Around "what is third thing of categorical imperative?", there are two trains of thoughts in demostic and foreign scholars, i.e.mixed and a priori. Analytics indicates that the autonomouswill is the third thing of categorical imperative.The concept of synthetic judgements a priori what Kant raised suffered serious suspection from analytic philosophy. The major object of suspection is distinction between analytic and synthetic judgement; the focus of suspection is the concept of analysis. Although analytic philosophy’s suspections has important significances, there are some problems. These problems include the lack of meaning to clarifying the concept of analysis, discriminating the significances of distinction between analytic and synthetic judgement, and lacking the due attention to synthetic judgement a priori. Analytic philosophy’s suspection is related to the criterion of knowledge. The synthetic judgement a priori as a criterion of knowledge has its reasonable factors, which is that not only has university and necessity, but also extend to human’s cogintions. So, the criterion of knowledge shouldn’t has only one, but many.The third thing of synthetic judgemts a priori has double aspects in the pure mathematics、the natural metaphysics (including the pure natural science and the transcendeant natural metaphyiscs). The third thing of categorical imperative has also the double aspects. The third thing as medium has groudwork for the synthetic judgement a priori in logic、 epistemology and metaphysics. In different discipline, the third thing is different. The problem of third thing is universal, it is a clue for Kant’s philosophy and has important significances to study Kant’s philosophy, even to the contemporary western philosophy.更多还原