7/21/2019 EfLazos - Refut Id K

1/9

Kants Reaction to Cartesian Skepticism(Draft)

Efran Lazos (UNAM, Meico Cit!)"# $%at is Kants reaction a&ainst Cartesian skepticism' %is *estion si&na+s an area%ere inner tensions are manifest in t%e Criti*e of -*re Reason"# Kants praise for

Cartesian skepticism as .t%e taskmaster of t%e /o&matic sop%ist for a %ea+t%! criti*e of t%e*n/erstan/in& an/ of reason,01 re2ea+s t%at %e fo*n/ somet%in& ort%! in it, 3*t %isprotestations a&ainst .t%e scan/a+ of p%i+osop%! an/ *ni2ersa+ %*man reason0 s%o t%at %ea+so t%o*&%t t%ere as somet%in& profo*n/+! *nsatisfactor! a3o*t it, an/ t%at some sort ofar&*ment as re*ire/ to pro2e it ron

4n t%e face of t%ese tensions, t%ere is a common rea/in& of Kants critica+p%i+osop%! as 2irt*a++! in/istin&*is%a3+e from Cartesianism# 4n t%is 2ie, Kant insistencet%at e cannot co&nize 5%at is t%ere an!a!6in/epen/ent+! of o*r t%o*&%ts an/perceptions6 conce/es t%e skeptics point t%at rea+it! stan/s 3e!on/ o*r ken7 an/ 3!restrictin& %*man kno+e/&e to t%e rea+m of mere appearances8, %e seems to propose t%ate take t%e eperience of a or+/ of o39ects an/ persons it% m*+tifario*s properties to 3e

a pri2ate 5pro/*ct of a t!pica++! %*man, s*39ecti2e apparat*s# Not s*rprisin&+!, man!amon& t%e first &eneration of p%i+osop%ers t%at recei2e/ t%e Criti*e conc+*/e/ t%atcriticism as 2irt*a++! in/istin&*is%a3+e from Cartesian skepticism#: %is conc+*sion isseemin&+! a+so c*rrent amon& t%e present &eneration of p%i+osop%ers# ;ere is a samp+e)%ere is kno+e/&e, Kant ass*res *s, 3eca*se t%e %*man min/ imposes a concept*a+sc%eme on t%e /ata of sense, an/ t%is concept*a+ sc%eme 6since it is of t%e min/son makin& in t%e first p+ace6 ren/ers t%e /ata inte++i&i3+e an/ knoa3+e# (>)Str*ck

3! %at is 2a+i/ in Kants attempt to 3ri/&e interna+ an/ eterna+, %istorians ma! t%inkof Kant as makin& t%e /ecisi2e mo2e 3e!on/ Descartes# ?*t note t%at Kant is sti++orkin& it%in t%e recei2e/ pro3+ematic7 for %e accepts t%e Cartesian ass*mption t%at%at e are imme/iate+! in to*c% it%, e2en in t%ose states e ca++ 5kno+e/&e of t%eor+/, is somet%in& pri2ate an s*39ecti2e7 Kant ca++s it 5eperience#@0

4n t%is rea/in&, Kant accepts t%e skeptica+ c%a++en&e, an/ is *na3+e to anser it#;ence, %is reaction to Cartesian skepticism is, in fact, a nonreaction7 an/ %is .criti*e0 an/.ref*tation0 of i/ea+ism amo*nts to an a/option, an/ ra/ica+ization, of so+ipsism 6in t%eform of a re/*ction of rea+it! to representations or states of t%e in/i2i/*a+ s*39ect# Bor, ifm! eperiences, an/ t%eir o39ects, cannot 3e sai/ to /epen/ on an!t%in& %ic% is not

m!se+f an/ t%ose representations t%at 4 can ca++ mine, an/ if, moreo2er, 4 cannot te++ %att%ere is (an/ if t%ere is somet%in&) 3e!on/ m!se+f an/ m! eperiences, t%en not%in& canco*nt as rea+ ecept %at 4 am a3+e to represent to m!se+f# %is is %! t%e scan/a+ of

"1A @ ? F7 A FG ? G#8.>o39ects in t%emse+2es are not knon to *s at a++, an/ > %at e ca++ o*ter o39ects are not%in& ot%er t%anmere representations of o*r sensi3i+it!,0# A 8H? :@:Sc%*+ze an/ Maimon7 an/ +ater Bic%te an/ ;e&e+# Ii/e< ?eiser "GG< c%aps# G J"H#@Ca2e++ "GG8< "@"F#

7/21/2019 EfLazos - Refut Id K

2/9

p%i+osop%! ma! 3e *+timate+! si+ence/, for t%e eterna+ or+/ ceases to 3e a pro3+em %ene rea+ize t%at e2en %at e take as somet%in& act*a+ in space 6for instance a !o*n& treet%at 4 see o2er t%ere 6is .somet%in& pri2ate an/ s*39ecti2e0# 4n s%ort, accor/in& to t%isrea/in&, Kants a! o*t of skeptica+ i/ea+ism is more i/ea+ism< to take .onese+f as t%e%o+e or+/0#

4f t%is rea/in& is correct, e m*st accept t%at t%e Kantian startin& point in metap%!sics is afirstpersona+ one 6i#e#, from t%e *ni*e perspecti2e of a person 5+ookin& at or consi/erin&t%e contents of %er on min/7 an/ e m*st accept t%at .+ike Descartes, Kant 3e&ins %isin2esti&ations into t%e nat*re of t%e min/, t%o*&%t an/ kno+e/&e from a firstperson 2ie,tr!in& to ork %is a! from t%e insi/e o*t#0F 4 ant to ep+ore an a+ternati2e rea/in& ofKants reaction to Cartesian skepticism#4 s*&&est, 3! contrast, t%at Kants metap%!sica+in2esti&ations procee/ an/ /e2e+op in me/ia res, in t%e mi/st of t%in&s, an/ t%at t%is is animportant sense in %ic% Kant /oes make a /ecisi2e t*rn 3e!on/ Descartes#

1# Kant took skepticism serio*s+! 3eca*se %e sa t%ere is somet%in&p%i+osop%ica++! important in t%e in*ir! a3o*t t%e rationa+ cre/entia+s of o*r or/inar!3e+iefs an/ eperiences, an/ t%at /o*3ts concernin& t%eir 2a+i/it! cannot 3e ansere/ it%

a /o&matic affirmation of %at t%e skeptic /enies, e# 3! a//*cin& t%at e /o makeassertions a3o*t t%in&s aro*n/ *s on t%e 3asis of o*r eperience, t%at e app+! certainconcepts to sensi3+e partic*+ars, an/, &enera++!, %a2e t%e 3e+iefs an/ t%o*&%ts e /eem to%a2e#%is is, at +east in part, %at %e means %en %e rites t%at t%e skeptica+ i/ea+ist is a3enefactor of %*man reason, since %e re*ires *s to open o*r e!es 2er! e++ e2en in t%esma++est steps of common eperience, an/ not imme/iate+! to take for a e++earne/possession %at e per%aps o3tain on+! s*rreptitio*s+!# %e *ti+it! create/ 3! t%osei/ea+istic pro9ects is no c+ear+! 3efore o*r e!es# %e! /ri2e *s forcef*++! 6if e /o notant to 3ecome tan&+e/ in conf*sions in o*r commonest assertions6 to re&ar/ a++perceptions, %et%er t%e! are ca++e/ inner or o*ter, mere+! as a conscio*sness of somet%in&t%at /epen/s on o*r sensi3i+it!, an/ to re&ar/ t%eir eterna+ o39ects not as t%in&s in

t%emse+2es 3*t on+! as representations, of %ic% e can 3ecome imme/iate+! conscio*s+ike an! ot%er representation, 3*t %ic% are ca++e/ eterna+ 3eca*se t%e! /epen/ on t%atsense %ic% e ca++ o*ter sense7 its int*ition is space, 3*t it is itse+f not%in& ot%er t%an aninner mo/e of representation, in %ic% certain perceptions are connecte/ it% one anot%er#A8

%e ort% of skepticism, accor/in& to t%is passa&e of t%e fo*rt% para+o&ism, +ies int%e fact t%at it forces *pon *s a certain 2ie a3o*t %at e ca++ o39ects of perception, +iketrees, %o*ses, an/ snakes# Kant, as e kno, ca++s t%em o*ter appearances, or o39ectsempirica++! o*tsi/e of *s# Let *s ca++ t%em percei2a3+es# $e m*st first note t%atpercei2a3+es fo++o %at e ma! ca++ t%e +o&ic of appearances< an!t%in& %ic%, *n/ernorma+ percept*a+ circ*mstances, is *n/istin&*is%a3+e from a tree, a %o*se or a snake,

mi&%t t*rn o*t not to 3e so# No %! o*+/ t%e skeptic, as Kant rites, compe+ *s toconsi/er t%at percei2a3+es are ./epen/ent on o*r sensi3i+it!07 or, as %e a+so p*ts it, t%ato*ter appearances are i/ea+ 6i#e# 5mere representations or s*39ecti2e entities of some

FCa2e++ "GG8< ""#S*&&este/ 3! Stro*/ "G8 an/ "GG:#Like =#E# Moore %en %e sa!s 5;ere is one %an/, %ere is anot%er %an/> t%erefore< 4 kno for s*re t%att%ere are t%in&s o*tsi/e me# Ii/e< Moore .A Defense of Common Sense0 an/ .Ref*tation of 4/ea+ism0 in?a+/in "GG8#

7/21/2019 EfLazos - Refut Id K

3/9

kin/' %e ke! +ies in t%e transcen/enta+ 2ariet! of rea+ism # ;ere Kant rites a propos t%etranscen/enta+ rea+ist t%at %e consi/ers

o*ter appearances as t%in&s in t%emse+2es, %ic% o*+/ eist in/epen/ent+! of *san/ o*r sensi3i+it! an/ t%*s o*+/ a+so 3e o*tsi/e *s accor/in& to p*re concepts of t%e*n/erstan/in After %e %as fa+se+! pres*ppose/ a3o*t o39ects of t%e senses t%at if t%e! are

to eist t%e! m*st %a2e t%eir eistence in t%emse+2es e2en apart from sense, %e fin/s t%atfrom t%is point of 2ie a++ o*r representations of sense are ins*fficient to make t%eir rea+it!certain# A8FG

%e transcen/enta+ rea+ist c+aims t%at to percei2e an o39ect, e# a snake o2er t%ere,m*st 3e to percei2e %at is t%ere an!a!, %et%er it is act*a++! percei2e/ 3! someone ornot# %ere m*st 3e somet%in& t%ere, t%e transcen/enta+ rea+ist c+aims, in/epen/ent+! of its3ein& percei2e/ or ot%erise represente/, if e are to %a2e perception of somet%in& rea+#No it is of co*rse tr*e t%at e m*st kno %at a snake is in or/er for *s to percei2esomet%in& as 3ein& a snake o2er t%ere# ?*t if e remem3er t%at an!t%in& t%at e percei2eas 3ein& a snake mi&%t t*rn o*t not to 3e a snake, t%en e m*st accept t%e pec*+iar res*+tt%at %at e percei2e as 3ein& a snake cannot 3e i/entifie/ it% %ate2er is t%ere an!a!#A snake t%at e percei2e can ne2er 3e a rea+ snake# %is opinion mi&%t strike man! asa3s*r/,G3*t 4 t%ink it eemp+ifies %e sort of tro*3+es t%at Kant t%inks e m*st face %ene a/opt t%is 2ariet! of rea+ism#

A+t%o*&% perception is %ere t%e center of t%is metap%!sica+ positionin&, an/correspon/s to t%at from of co&nition %ic% Kant ca++e/ empirica+ int*ition# 4 3e+ie2e t%eset*p ma! 3e eten/e/ to co2er empirica+ kno+e/&e &enera++!# %*s, t%e transcen/enta+rea+ist o*+/ ar&*e, %at e c+aim %en e sa! t%at e kno t%at t%ere is a snake o2ert%ere is t%at, e2en if e /o not e2en consi/er it, or represent it %ate2er fas%ion, t%ere is asnake o2er t%ere an!a!# 4t o*+/ 3e sense+ess to c+aim t%at e kno t%at t%ere is a snakeo2er t%ere, 3*t t%at it 9*st mi&%t 3e t%at t%ere is not a snake o2er t%ere# %is a++os *s toep+ain %! transcen/enta+ rea+ism ma! 3e consi/ere/ as a form of /o&matism# Bor t%e

*estion %ere o*+/ 3e, Can e not 3e mistaken in o*r c+aims a3o*t percei2a3+es' Cante2en t%e most certain of o*r or/inar! assertions a3o*t t%e or+/ aro*n/ *s t*rn o*t to 3efa+se' ?*t t%e transcen/enta+ rea+ist procee/s *ntro*3+e/ 3! t%e possi3i+it! of i&norancean/ error, as if e %a/, in o*r kno+e/&e an/ perception, *npro3+ematic access to t%e+a!o*t an/ str*ct*re of t%e or+/# At t%e same time, %oe2er, transcen/enta+ rea+ism p+acesan *n3ri/&ea3+e a3!ss 3eteen %at e kno an/ see or ot%erise percei2e t%in&s to 3e,an/ %at t%e! are in/epen/ent+! of *s knoers an/ percei2ers#

%is is %ere t%e 2a+*e of skepticism comes to t%e fore# 4f t%e or+/ m*st stan/3e!on/ kno+e/&e an/ &enera++! 3e!on/ %*man epistemic capacities, t%en it is 3ecomes am!ster!, in/ee/, %o can e e2er c+aim to kno t%e or+/# %is a3!ss is %at s*pports t%eskeptics t%o*&%t t%at o*r eperience of t%e or/inar! or+/ of peop+e an/ t%in&s o*+/remain 9*st as it is e2en if t%at or+/ is *nima&ina3+! /ifferent from %at, on t%e 3asis oft%ose eperiences, e 3e+ie2e it to 3e, an/ e2en it%o*t its 3ein& t%e case t%at it act*a++!eiste/# An/ if e a/opt t%is t%o*&%t e m*st s*re+! consi/er 5t%e eterna+ or+/ as apro3+em< for %o, t%en, can e e2er aspire to pro2e t%at t%ere is a or+/ .o*t t%ere0, %ic%is in/epen/ent, in its eistence an/ str*ct*re, from o*rse+2es an/ o*r eperiences' $ecannot conc+*/e, from t%e appearance of a /ark an/ sma++ snake o2er t%ere, t%at t%ere is

G4t %as, ne2ert%e+ess, 3een a/opte/ 3! p%i+osop%ica+ t%eories t%at constr*e precei2a3+es 6an/ representa3+es&enera++!6as s*39ecti2e entities %ic% me/iate 3eteen a min/ an/ t%e or+/ it percei2es an/ represents#

7/21/2019 EfLazos - Refut Id K

4/9

act*a++! a snake, nor t%at it is /ark an/ sma++# 4t is tr*e t%at from its appearin& to one t%atsomet%in& is s*c% an/ s*c% it /oes not fo++o t%at it is s*c% an/ s*c%# ?*t s%o*+/ e %a2eto infer t%e eistence of an o*ter o39ect of perception from m! percei2in& it'"H n+! if epre2io*s+! accept t%at %at is t%ere an!a! m*st stan/ 3e!on/ %*man kno+e/&e an/eperience#

So t%ere is, after a++, a common 3asis for skepticism an/ transcen/enta+ rea+ism< t%e!3ot% a/mit an a3!ss 3eteen t%e or+/ an/ o*r eperiences an/ 3e+iefs a3o*t t%at or+/#No, t%e skeptics t%o*&%t t%at o*ter appearances are i/ea+, Kant s*&&ests, .is reasona3+ean/ in accor/ance it% a t%oro*&% an/ p%i+osop%ica+ mo/e of t%o*&%t#0 nce e accept, ase are +e/ to 3! transcen/enta+ rea+ism, t%at percei2a3+es 6sensi3+e partic*+ars as snakes,%o*ses, etc6 are not rea+, t%en it seems t%at t%e on+! a! to start *p in metap%!sics is fromone of t%e peaks of t%e a3!ss, t%e min/ an/ its contents, or empirica+ se+fconscio*sness,an/ tr! to car2e o*r a! from t%e insi/e o*t#

;ence e ma! sa! t%at Kant fin/s ort% in skepticism, in so far as it constit*tes a+e&itimate p%i+osop%ica+ response to transcen/enta+ rea+ism# An/ %e conse*ent+! /oes nott%ink t%at t%ere is an anser to p%i+osop%ica+ skepticism if e pre2io*s+! accept t%at %o

t%in&s are, facts, stan/ 3e!on/ %*man epistemic capacities# $it% skepticism, Kant p+e/&esi&norance of %o t%in&s ma! 3e in/epen/ent+! of o*r perceptions an/ concepts# 4n t%issense, %e of co*rse 2in/icates an i/ea+ist response to /o&matic rea+ism# Brom t%e o*tset, %isre2o+*tion in metap%!sics proc+aims t%e 2ersion of t%e /octrine of t%e i/ea+it! of o*terappearances t%at, in or/er for t%ere to 3e empirica+ kno+e/&e, o39ects of kno+e/&e an/perception m*st 3e in some a! /epen/ent on o*r %*man sensi3i+it! an/ *n/erstan/in

Kant, %oe2er, /oes not &o a++ t%e a! it% t%e skeptic# 4n partic*+ar, *ti+izin& %ison 3ran/ of i/ea+ism %e inten/s to esta3+is% t%e .possi3+e certaint! of o39ects of o*tersense0, %ic% is 9*st to /en! i/ea+ism as %e /escri3es it in t%e conc+*sion of t%e fo*rt%para+o&ism, name+! as t%e /octrine t%at t%e eistence of a++ o39ects of o*ter sense is*ncertain, an/ on t%at acco*nt, pro3+ematic A8F# Kants strate&!, 4 take it, is to conce/e

to t%e skeptica+ i/ea+ist t%at if e ass*me t%at t%e or+/ is somet%in& of %ic%, at most, ecan %a2e on+! an imperfect &rasp, t%en in/ee/ o39ects of perception an/ kno+e/&e cannot3e pro2en to eist o*tsi/e t%e min/#""?*t %! /o e %a2e to conce/e t%at' 4t is of co*rsetr*e t%at man! facts, remote in /istance an/ time, t%at e can ne2er &et to kno 6e# for+ack of appropriate con/itions or means to fin/ o*t a3o*t t%em# 4t is a+so possi3+e t%at,*n3eknonst to *s, facts are *tter+! /ifferent t%at %at t%e! seem to *s to 3e# ?*t %!s%o*+/ e t%erefore accept t%at rea+it! +ies 3e%in/, as it ere, t%e or+/ t%at e kno an/percei2e' $%! s%o*+/ e accept t%e possi3i+it! of a or+/ t%at co*+/ 3e /ifferent to o*ror+/ in a!s %ic%, if act*a++! o3tainin&, e co*+/ not epistemica++! &rasp' 4n ot%eror/s, %! are e force/ to c%oose 3eteen transcen/enta+ rea+ism an/ skeptica+ i/ea+ismas t%e on+! a!s to procee/ in metap%!sics# 4f e /o not conce/e t%at, t%en it 3ecomes

possi3+e to re9ect /o&matic rea+ism 6an/ to preser2e t%e 2a+*e of skepticism6 %i+ere9ectin& t%e skeptica+ c%a++en&e as s*c%# 4n ot%er or/s, e are free to acco*nt forempirica+ kno+e/&e in a /ifferent a!# -er%aps t%is is %at +e/ Kant to see %is critica+p%i+osop%! as makin& a /ecisi2e 3reak in metap%!sics#

8# At +east part of t%e test a3o*t %et%er Kants re2o+*tion +i2es *p to its am3itions

"HCfr#, $itt&enstein "GFG< 1< .Brom it seemin& to me 6or to an!one6 to 3e so, it /oesnt fo++o t%at it isso# $%at e can ask is %et%er it can make sense to /o*3t it#0""Different+! p*t, if t%ere are properties of t%in&s %ic% e cannot kno t%in&s to %a2e, t%en of co*rse eare 9*stifie/ in c+aimin& t%at e can e ne2er kno t%at t%ose properties o3tain or not#

7/21/2019 EfLazos - Refut Id K

5/9

is meas*re/ in its stan/ 2isO2is skeptica+ i/ea+ism# 4n ot%er or/s, Kant m*st sti++esta3+is%, in or/er to si+ence t%e scan/a+ of p%i+osop%!, t%e .possi3+e certaint! of o*terappearances0 %i+e maintainin& t%at t%e! are i/ea+, or some a! min//epen/ent# %eiss*e of skepticism is not, t%erefore, .i/+e0, at +east not 3efore some sort of ar&*ment %as3een pro2i/e/#"1%e conse*ence is, in effect, t%at one m*st 3e an i/ea+ist, after a++, in

or/er not to 3e one, 3eca*se t%e ref*tation of i/ea+ism is an ar&*ment for a certain rea+ism%ic% can on+! procee/ *n/er i/ea+ist ass*mptions#"8$e /o not %a2e a para/o %ere, atan! rate not in t%e Kantian set*p7 for t%e i/ea+ism t%at s%o*+/ 3e accepte/ is5transcen/enta+ i/ea+ism, an/ t%e rea+ism t%at a/e*ate+! pict*res o*r p+ace in t%e or+/ is.empirica+0 rea+ism# %is is important eno*&% for Kants on critica+ metap%!sics#Consi/er, if t%e t%eor! can pro2e t%at kno+e/&e of ones on min/ an/ its contents is on+!possi3+e on t%e ass*mption t%at kno+e/&e a3o*t t%e eterna+ or+/ is a+so possi3+e, t%ennot on+! i++ Cartesian skepticism 3e s*fficient+! ref*te/ (no minor accomp+is%ment) 3*tan! s*spicion a3o*t a compromise of transcen/enta+ i/ea+ism it% so+ipsism i++ t%ere3!3e remo2e/# 4n ot%er or/s, 3! s%oin& t%at %at Cartesianism accepts (t%e certaint! oft%e eistence of t%e t%inkin& se+f) is necessari+! connecte/ it% t%at a3o*t %ic% it

accommo/ates /o*3ts (t%e eistence of eterna+ t%in&s) Kant is t*rnin& t%e ta3+es onDescartes, an/ &*ar/in& its on 3ack a&ainst 3ein& i/entifie/ it% t%e 2ie t%at se+fconscio*sness an/ its s*39ecti2e mo/ifications constit*te a++ t%e rea+it! t%at can 3eesta3+is%e/ 3e!on/ /o*3t, an/ t%at, t%erefore, t%e eterna+ or+/ is in *estion#

Kant frames %is task as t%at of esta3+is%in&t%at e %a2e eperience an/ not mere+! ima&ination o*r o*ter t%in&s, %ic% cannot

3e accomp+is%e/ *n+ess e can pro2e t%at e2en o*r inner eperience, *n/o*3te/ 3!Descartes, is possi3+e on+! *n/er t%e pres*pposition of o*ter eperience# (? 1@)#

4t is e++knon t%at t%e ar&*ments in %is ref*tation of i/ea+ism, an/ in t%e criti*eof t%e fo*rt% para+o&ism, eemp+if! t%e transcen/enta+ st!+e of ar&*ment omnipresent in t%eritin&s of t%e -r*ssian#": ?efore makin& some comments on specific parts of t%is

ar&*ment, +et me 9*st note t%at it is not meant to /emonstrate t%e act*a+ eistence of apercei2a3+e or set of percei2a3+es 6 e# t%is piece of paper, t%is fire, t%is %an/, etc6 an/ar&*e t%at since e can kno t%ere is at +east one (or a &ro*p of) .eterna+ o39ect0, t%en itcannot 3e tr*e t%at e can +e&itimate+! /o*3t t%e eistence of an! eterna+ o39ect# %ato*+/ 3e to miss t%e point of t%e skeptic t%at an! partic*+ar c+aim to kno+e/&e ofpercei2a3+es is *ncertain7 for in or/er to esta3+is% t%at t%ere is fire o2er t%ere, t%at t%is is apenci+, etc> e nee/ to appea+ to o*r eperience, t%e &enera+ re+ia3i+it! of %ic% isprecise+! in *estion# %*s, Kants strate&! procee/s nonempirica++!7 it is meant to s%o%o in or/er to t%ink certain kin/s of t%o*&%ts, or &enera++! to eercise certain kin/s ofcapacities of representation, e m*st possess an/ 3e a3+e to eercise certain ot%er kin/s# Soe can epect t%at %is ar&*ment is re2ea+in& of t%e or&anization an/ interconnections

amon& t%e /i2erse a!s of t%inkin& an/ eperiencin& o*rse+2es an/ t%e or+/#:# %e 3asic str*ct*re of Kants ar&*ment ma! 3e represente/ as fo++os