Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Original/inverse
    See Original
    Inverse View

    It is not the case that Aesthetic and teleological judgment together offer a solution to the problem of how free moral choice can be efficacious within the phenomenal world.

    ?Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Kant's regulative use of teleological judgment in the third Critique explicitly prohibits constitutive claims about noumenal causality in the phenomenal world.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A merely regulative principle cannot do the metaphysical bridging work required to make free moral choice causally efficacious in nature.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Schopenhauer and later Strawson argue that Kant conflates epistemic and ontological bridging, leaving the causal gap structurally unresolved.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Aesthetic judgment in the Critique of Judgment is grounded in subjective universality and pleasure, not in any causal relation between noumenal freedom and phenomenal events.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Hegel's critique in the Phenomenology identifies Kant's appeal to aesthetic and teleological judgment as a retreat into subjective formalism that cannot ground objective moral efficacy in history.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.The first two Critiques leave unsolved the problem of how free moral choice in the noumenal realm can produce real effects in the phenomenal world.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A third Critique linking aesthetic and teleological judgment is apparently structured to address this unsolved problem.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Aesthetic and teleological forms of human experience and judgment together somehow bridge the gap between the noumenal and phenomenal realms.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.