Detalhes bibliográficos
Ano de defesa: |
2012 |
Autor(a) principal: |
Chabbouh Junior, Marco Antonio
 |
Orientador(a): |
González Porta, Mário Ariel |
Banca de defesa: |
Não Informado pela instituição |
Tipo de documento: |
Dissertação
|
Tipo de acesso: |
Acesso aberto |
Idioma: |
por |
Instituição de defesa: |
Pontifícia Universidade Católica de São Paulo
|
Programa de Pós-Graduação: |
Programa de Estudos Pós-Graduados em Filosofia
|
Departamento: |
Filosofia
|
País: |
BR
|
Palavras-chave em Português: |
|
Palavras-chave em Inglês: |
|
Área do conhecimento CNPq: |
|
Link de acesso: |
https://tede2.pucsp.br/handle/handle/11617
|
Resumo: |
One of the best-known teachings of the Critique of Pure Reason by Immanuel Kant is that of the ideality of space and time. The present work aims at discussing the relations between the proofs of the apriority of space and time and the proofs of their subjective character. To achieve this aim, the present text takes the form of a comparative and commented exposition of the readings by Norman Kemp Smith, Herbert James Paton and Patricia Kitcher. This exposition is made in three main chapters. The first one is intended to make an approach to the main problem, the second one is a detailed discussion of the mentioned readings and the third one is constituted by the position taking from the offered debate. It intends then, to demonstrate that Paton s interpretation is the most successful among the three, because it is able to solve pressing problems enunciated by Kemp Smith without trespassing, as Kitcher did, the boundaries of the critical text. Hence, it is also shown that the ideality of space and time intended by Kant is not made through a doctrine of innate ideas similar to the rationalist ones, but is only a doctrine that states the existence of an innate capacity responsible for the production of pure spacial and temporal contents once experience begins |