I studied Kant (a little) in college & was always confused about some basic things in his thought. This video pointed me to answers that make sense. A lot of people talk about Kant as if he's a radical subjectivist. I even started to watch a video lecture by a different college professor who started by saying that for Kant, knowledge is "subjective". Which I knew was wrong but was having trouble understanding why. More often, Kant's categories are portrayed as features of the brain that shape sense data into "knowledge".... which sounds quasi-subjectivist. But this video makes it clear that Kant's project was about showing that reason by its nature is a human activity that yields "objective" knowledge in the sense that it's true for everyone who reasons. --Which, as the last question in the video makes clear, is different from saying that the world in itself, apart from human rational engagement, is always already shaped according to human reason. I haven't quite got it yet, but I'm getting it. Slowly.
Theory of reasoning--universal elements of reasoning, by Dr. Richard Paul: 1) Purpose; 2) Point of view; 3) Question; 4) Concept; 5) Information; 6) Inference; 7) Implication; and 8) Assumption. These elements are present within any system of reasoning, they are universal. Whenever you reason, you can always ask what's the purpose? Point of view? Etc. They are always present within a system of meaning. A system of meaning cannot be fully understood without addressing each element (that's what an analysis is, a breaking down of the fundamental elements). That is reason. It is not a mystery. We've been using these elements of reason for many thousands of years. Anyone could learn this with a little study and practice. How do you know this is correct? Explore it yourself inductively. After a time I think you'll be convinced as to the fundamental truth that reason necessarily consists of these elements. You'll discover that you can't really reason (figure things out) without necessarily using these elements in constructing a system of meaning to make sense of the world.
So far, I am loving this video series. Informative and thought provoking.
I studied Kant (a little) in college & was always confused about some basic things in his thought. This video pointed me to answers that make sense. A lot of people talk about Kant as if he's a radical subjectivist. I even started to watch a video lecture by a different college professor who started by saying that for Kant, knowledge is "subjective". Which I knew was wrong but was having trouble understanding why. More often, Kant's categories are portrayed as features of the brain that shape sense data into "knowledge".... which sounds quasi-subjectivist.
But this video makes it clear that Kant's project was about showing that reason by its nature is a human activity that yields "objective" knowledge in the sense that it's true for everyone who reasons. --Which, as the last question in the video makes clear, is different from saying that the world in itself, apart from human rational engagement, is always already shaped according to human reason.
I haven't quite got it yet, but I'm getting it. Slowly.
I am just starting the video series and I love it.
Great job!
Theory of reasoning--universal elements of reasoning, by Dr. Richard Paul: 1) Purpose; 2) Point of view; 3) Question; 4) Concept; 5) Information; 6) Inference; 7) Implication; and 8) Assumption. These elements are present within any system of reasoning, they are universal. Whenever you reason, you can always ask what's the purpose? Point of view? Etc. They are always present within a system of meaning. A system of meaning cannot be fully understood without addressing each element (that's what an analysis is, a breaking down of the fundamental elements). That is reason. It is not a mystery. We've been using these elements of reason for many thousands of years. Anyone could learn this with a little study and practice. How do you know this is correct? Explore it yourself inductively. After a time I think you'll be convinced as to the fundamental truth that reason necessarily consists of these elements. You'll discover that you can't really reason (figure things out) without necessarily using these elements in constructing a system of meaning to make sense of the world.
What about thinking of an argument as any attempt at proof?
What happened to lecture 6?
I am guessing that practical reasoning is what we do everyday with decision making.
Fast & slow thinking sounds like a different angle on Heidegger.
I thought science was understanding how the world functions?