Kants Theory of Judgment First published Wed Jul 28, 2004; substantive revision Sun Aug 4, 2013 Theories of judgment, whether cognitive (i.e., object-representing, thought-expressing, truth-apt) judgment or practical (i.e., act-representing, choice-expressing, evaluation-apt) judgment, bring together fundamental issues in semantics, logic, cognitive psychology, and epistemology (collectively providing for what can be called the four “faces” of cognitive judgment [see also Martin 2006]), as well as action theory, moral psychology, and ethics (collectively providing for the three “faces” of practical judgment): indeed, the notion of judgment is central to any general theory of human rationality. But Kants theory of judgment differs sharply from many other theories of judgment, both traditional and contemporary, in three ways: (1) by taking the innate capacity for judgment to be the central cognitive faculty of the rational human mind, (2) by insisting on the semantic, logical, psychological, epistemic, and practical priority of the propositional content of a judgment, and (3) by systematically embedding judgment within the metaphysics of transcendental idealism . Several serious problems are generated by the interplay of the first two factors with the third. This in turn suggests that the other two parts of Kants theory of judgment can be logically detached from the strongest version of his transcendental idealism and defended independently of it. This entry also includes five supplementary documents covering (i) the debate about Kants conceptualism vs. Kants non-conceptualism, (ii) the epistemology of Kantian judgment and the ethics of Kantian belief, (iii) Kants logic in relation to his theory of judgment, (iv) kinds of use for judgments, and (v) completing the picture of Kants metaphysics of judgment.
Posted on: Sun, 07 Dec 2014 14:36:19 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015