判断力批判
- 言語:
- 英語
- 状態:
- 完全な作品
- 著者性:
- 著者自身による
- テキストの状態:
- 良好なテキスト
- 分量:
- 約 130,000 語 · 629 節
この作品を引用
- APAイマヌエル・カント. (n.d.). 判断力批判. SigPhi. https://sigphiai.com/ja/works/immanuel-kant/kant-s-critique-of-judgement
- MLAイマヌエル・カント. "判断力批判." SigPhi, https://sigphiai.com/ja/works/immanuel-kant/kant-s-critique-of-judgement.
- Chicagoイマヌエル・カント. 判断力批判. SigPhi. https://sigphiai.com/ja/works/immanuel-kant/kant-s-critique-of-judgement.
何についての本か
カント第三批判（一七九〇年）の英訳。美的判断と、自然における合目的性を論じる。
背景と歴史
本目録にはドイツ語原典もあり、拠るべきはそちらである。本書は二つの半分から成り、その同居は意外の感を与える。前半は趣味の理論だ。あるものを美しいと言うとき、我々は事実を述べているのでも、私的な好みを言い立てているのでもない。概念によらずに判定し、それでいて他人にも同意を求めている。この「主観的普遍性」こそ本書の発見である。崇高の理論もあり、天才とは自然がそれを通じて芸術に規則を与える者だ、という考えもある。後半は有機体を論じる。目的をもつ「かのように」してしか理解されえないもの、しかしその目的を我々が主張することはできないもののことだ。認識の批判と道徳の批判とを架け渡す書である。
これは編集上の背景であり、引用できる典拠ではありません。作品本文の一節とは異なり、これらの記述はコーパスで検証できません。
We may call the faculty of cognition from principles _a priori_, _pure Reason_, and the inquiry into its possibility and bounds generally the Critique of pure Reason, although by this faculty we only understand Reason in its theoretical employment, as it appears under that name in the former work; without wishing to inquire into its faculty, as practical Reason, according to its special principles. That [Critique] goes merely into our faculty of knowing things _a priori_, and busies itself therefore only with the _cognitive faculty_ to the exclusion of the feeling of pleasure and pain and the faculty of desire; and of the cognitive faculties it only concerns itself with _Understanding_, according to its principles _a priori_, to the exclusion of _Judgement_ and _Reason_ (as faculties alike belonging to theoretical cognition), because it is found in the sequel that no other cognitive faculty but the Understanding can furnish constitutive principles of cognition _a priori_. The Critique, then, which sifts them all, as regards the share which each of the other faculties might pretend to have in the clear possession of knowledge from its own peculiar root, leaves nothing but what the _Understanding_ prescribes _a priori_ as law for nature as the complex of phenomena (whose form also is given _a priori_). It relegates all other pure concepts under Ideas, which are transcendent for our theoretical faculty of cognition, but are not therefore useless or to be dispensed with. For they serve as regulative principles; partly to check the dangerous pretensions of Understanding, as if (because it can furnish _a priori_ the conditions of the possibility of all things which it can know) it had thereby confined within these bounds the possibility of all things in general; and partly to lead it to the consideration of nature according to a principle of completeness, although it can never attain to this, and thus to further the final design of…