Antinomy of Causality and the Problem of Freedom in the Critique of Pure Reason
Özet
The aim of Kant’s philosophical thought as a whole rests on establishing a firm system about a sempiternal bi-polar problem: how is possible of the faculty of reason in its pure use addressed to cognition (erkennen) and how is possible for the same faculty in its pure use addressed to acting in respect of thinking (denken) in unison? The first use of reason is called theoretical while the second one is practical. It is also described that the objects of theoretical reason are phenomena while the objects of practical reason are noumena. There must be a legitimate ground for the sake of these two different uses of reason without collapsing the transcendental illusion (Schein) as well as enable a transcendental unity due to the restrictions of Kant’s philosophical taxonomy. In this study, how analysed the problem of antinomy of causality and the matter of freedom related with this issue in the Critique of Pure Reason as a constitutive background of mentioned case will be discussed within the axis of notions of “Sinn” and “Bedeutung.”
Anahtar Kelimeler
- OpenAlex
- 1
- TR Dizin
- 3
Tam Kayıt
| Alan | Değer | Dil |
|---|---|---|
| dc.contributor.author | Öztürk, Ümit | |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2026-10-22T10:45:08.948094101Z | |
| dc.date.available | 2026-10-22T10:45:08.948094101Z | |
| dc.date.issued | 2018 | |
| dc.description.abstract | The aim of Kant’s philosophical thought as a whole rests on establishing a firm system about a sempiternal bi-polar problem: how is possible of the faculty of reason in its pure use addressed to cognition (erkennen) and how is possible for the same faculty in its pure use addressed to acting in respect of thinking (denken) in unison? The first use of reason is called theoretical while the second one is practical. It is also described that the objects of theoretical reason are phenomena while the objects of practical reason are noumena. There must be a legitimate ground for the sake of these two different uses of reason without collapsing the transcendental illusion (Schein) as well as enable a transcendental unity due to the restrictions of Kant’s philosophical taxonomy. In this study, how analysed the problem of antinomy of causality and the matter of freedom related with this issue in the Critique of Pure Reason as a constitutive background of mentioned case will be discussed within the axis of notions of “Sinn” and “Bedeutung.” | |
| dc.identifier.doi | 10.20981/kaygi.410562 | |
| dc.identifier.eissn | 2645-8950 | |
| dc.identifier.endpage | 82 | |
| dc.identifier.issn | 1303-4251 | |
| dc.identifier.issue | 30 | |
| dc.identifier.startpage | 67 | |
| dc.identifier.uri | https://rdlopen.rawdatalibrary.net/r/gumushane/18282 | |
| dc.identifier.volume | 0 | |
| dc.language.iso | tr | |
| dc.relation.ispartof | Kaygı. Uludağ Üniversitesi Fen-Edebiyat Fakültesi Felsefe Dergisi | |
| dc.rights | info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess | |
| dc.subject | Felsefe | |
| dc.title | Antinomy of Causality and the Problem of Freedom in the Critique of Pure Reason | |
| dc.type | Article | |
| rdl.citation.openalex | 1 | |
| rdl.citation.trdizin | 3 | |
| rdl.oa.status | gold | |
| rdl.oa.url | https://dergipark.org.tr/en/download/article-file/448924 | |
| rdl.source.index | TRDIZIN |

