日々楼 nichinichiro

About the assertion

 

＊　This sentence is a republishing one that was written on September 1, 2013. In places which are mentioning in the sentence, it includes the sentence which are not yet translated into English.

 

Ａ. At beginning

1. Previously, I wrote about Kant on June 26, 2011. I will also make a subject the same problem today.
2. At its time (June 26, 2011), I took up “Critique of Practical Reason” and wrote as “the criticism of Hume” and “the view (explanation) of Kant”.
3. The historical fact that the first edition of “Critique of Pure Reason” of Kant had been published is Year 1781. The publishing of “Critique of Practical Reason” is Year 1788. Regarding Hume, the publishing of “A Treatise of Human Nature Vol. 1, About Intellect” is year 1739. And his survival year is from 1711 to 1776. In other words, Hume did not see the publication of Kant’s “Critique of Pure Reason”.

 

4. However, saying about the living year of two philosophers, Hume is 1711 – 1776 and Kant is 1724 – 1804. A birth day of Hume and Kant is different of only about 13 years. Kant wrote “The first principle of metaphysical recognition” in 1755, and wrote “The only possible basis of the evidence on the existence of God” in 1763. The caused problem by Hume had impacted on Kant. Therefore, Kant wrote “Critique of Pure Reason”. This thing has a great meaning in the history of civilization of the human being.

＊ It is not certain when Kant read Hume. According by a translator commentary of Kant’s all book collections which is No 3 volume (Iwanami Shoten, October 2001), when Kant ‘s “First principle of metaphysical recognition” had been published in 1755, the translation of Hume’ s works that say “Investigation” ( original spelling of title is unspecific) was published in German. Kant wrote “the time which had interrupted of his own snooze by receiving influenced the method of Hume’s philosophy” as “vor vielen Jahren”. And he confessed this in “Prolegomena”. Depending on how reading “vor vielen Jahren”, Hume’s method existed in Kant’s consciousness relatively early, it seems.

 

5. In other words, the problem that Hume and Kant in the 18th century had grappled with is meaningful, even if in today too, and this blog is thinking that it is the theme which must be repeatedly asked. In this sense, what this blog wrote as “the criticism of Hume” and “the assertion of Kant” shows the attitude that will be going to try and treat the theme which Hume and Kant thought about, as a human problem in the history of civilization. Together with the sincerity that Kant showed to Hume, this blog thinks that it would want to say this thing.

 

Ｂ.  Re-posting of “the criticism of Hume” and “the assertion of Kant”

Hume: The combination of someone A and some other thing B is given by the perception, the logical right, and the experience. In the combination of “A and B” that doesn’t experience this recognition process, for example when it is declared A is B, even though there is no things which mediates the cause or subject A and the contents of assertion or predicate B, if the inevitable combination of A and B, or a-priori (transcendental) recognition of A is told, the concept itself of this A is a falsehood and is a deception and is an illusion.

Source: Kant ‘ Critique of Practical Reason’ Part 1, First part, Chapter 1, Section 8-2

 

Kant: Speaking of the concept of the Being who would be owned pure will (free will), it is the concept of the cause such as Noumenon (Being who create the Existence and the Nature=Universe). Moreover, the concept of this cause, if considering its origin, does not concern any emotional conditions at all. In addition, such method cannot corroborate by the intuition that is possible only to be emotional always. Therefore, the cause such as Noumenon, even if it is possible about the theoretical use of the reason, and even if the concept that it can be thought, it is nothing but the concept that is emptiness (no contents). However, besides, as far as a certain Rational Being has pure will, more than this, in the other words, I ‘m not asking that I know theoretically what this Being is. As for me, it merely display such Being as such a thing by this concept, and therefore it is enough that tie a concept of the causativeness to a concept of the freedom, that is, the moral law as rule basis of the causativeness, and this cannot separate from the concept of the freedom. And I am surely being given the competency to dare to do such a causal coupling.

Source: Kant ‘ Critique of Practical Reason’ Part 1, First part, Chapter 1, Section 8-2

 

1. Here, Kant describes about the existence of God as the basis that he and a human being are moral. A difficult problem occurs here. That is, it is the problem that says whether or not the human assertion grounded on God is able to establish without the proof. Jesus is so. I would say sincerely so that there would be no misunderstanding, what I’m saying here is not about a miracle.

 

2. The Jesus would be done many assertions by the basis of this God. Enlil of Sumer has the old proto-form of this God. About this, please refer to an article of July 31, 2011 of this blog (Japanese version), “Moses’ Ten Commandments”.

 

3. In association with this, I looked over Max Weber’s “Ancient Judaism”. Although I did not care at that time, in his description there is a place that must read carefully compared to the scripture of the Bible.

 

4. Weber wrote, “When this God was accepted by Israel, it had been already worshiped outside Israel. The tribes that had worshiped this God by organized manner were Bedouin tribes and several tribes of the oasis that bordered Israel in the south.” (” Ancient Judaism Ⅰ” Misuzu Syobou 1962 P196 ) However, we can see that it is not so, if we read the Bible. When Terra, the father of Abraham, had left from Ur, there was already a God in the clan, and the saying that same God would be been appeared as Yahweh at the time of Moses is the correct context of history.

 

5. Today’s theme is about “the assertion”. However, the subject of today is not the question to say whether or not the human assertion grounded on God is able to establish without the proof. The main subject is the assertion that the human being does. However, I think before that, about the assertion which bases on God, and want to put to touch a little. The branch point of permission of this assertion is whether it makes alive all human beings and creatures or it is the one which is going to destroy human beings and creatures. I would be thinking so.

 

Ｂ. The assertion in today

 

1. Today’s assertion has not its number limit. There are assertions both always where there is conflict.

 

2. The modern world is established on the historical accumulation of human daily acts.

 

3. Wittgenstein says, “1. The world is a sum of the facts in logical space. The world is the whole of an established matter.” (“Logisch-Philosophische Abhandlung” 1921 Germany), (Japanese version: Hosei University Publication Bureau 1968).

 

4. The basis of judgment to say that the assertion is true or false, and that we adopt it or abandon it, it is whether the assertion is able to contribute to development of the freedom and democracy of human beings. And it is whether its assertion is able to give hope and backbone to live to people or not. In this way, history is stacked, and advances forward.

 

5. Freedom and democracy are one set of value judgments. If it is only democracy, any dictatorship states always assert that own country is a democracy state.

About the hope

＊ This sentence is part of the Japanese version “nichinichiro” on November 20, 2013. Here is writing about that equality of opportunities of education and occupation which is basic rights of human beings and the basis for society’s development.

 

A. About the hope

 

1. What is the one that is called the hope? If thinking it, in the case of a human being, it seems like saying a purpose that a human being produces a good outcome that is different from a state that is now today, at later time of after a state that is now.

 

2. I want to do it this way tomorrow. I will do it this way tomorrow. This is the will. And the continuation of this intention, and the continuation and accumulation of action by will is made toward the achievement of hope. The hope of this case is also called a goal. Then, when we achieved our hopes, we picture a next new hope in our minds. And we will continue to walk.

 

3. What are hopes of society? A birth of a new life (baby) in society becomes a hope of the society. If it is the ancient times, its child grows up and may go to journey of the founding of a new country with leading his clan. If it is modern or recent ages, its baby does new invention or discovery and may change the society until then. Its baby has the possibility that may build a new system like the United Nations and EU, and build a new social frame like TPP. However, there is also the opposite case. Its child becomes a dictator and delate the people’s vigor and may annihilate a country. Its baby may degenerate to the bad guy. This parable is not a fictitious story. Rather it is the reality of our world.

 

4. However, the future of children who are born is the same in that their children’s future possibility is infinite if the society in which their children were born is a society with homogeneous ethical norms. How its child grows depends on what its child encounters in the process of growth and how its child digests social norms and how its child is aware of responsibility for the future of society. It is the persons and education that teaches them social norms in their youth. And in there, the principle that students and learning children that have not enough learning financial resources are given the opportunity to receive scholarships and are given the opportunity to learn and to challenge equally is necessary.

 

5. The society is unequal. From the time that children were born, depending on their parents’ financial strength and status, the range of that children’s choices, it is wide or narrow, is already different. The principle which corrects this unequalness is the principle of equal opportunity of society. And it is the principle of equal opportunity of occupations which all opportunities that can get all professions are being given to every human beings. We can call the society in which this principle is consistent as a society where we can have hope.

 

6. Shall the hope of society that this equality of opportunity penetrates overlap our hope? It is overlapping. The world is, the hope of the people have been coming to pull the society. And there is current now. Hope has been changing the world.

 

B. People with hope change the world.

 

1. The human beings are always together with the hope. And, people with hope will change the world and society.