朝日記241129 AI Copilotとの哲学の会話をしました と今日の絵 Ⅳ

朝日記241129　AI　Copilotとの哲学の会話をしました と今日の絵　Ⅳ

朝日記241129  目次gate　AI Copilot氏との哲学的会話　目次へ返る

 

 

AI　Copilotとの哲学の会話をしました　Ⅳ

荒井　Good morning, Copilot san, how can I call your name？　Could we continue what we talked yesterday?

Copilot　Good morning! You can just call me Copilot, that works perfectly. I'd be delighted to continue our conversation from yesterday about consciousness and the qualia problem. Where would you like to dive in today? We can explore aspects like the nature of subjective experience, the mind-body problem, or any specific theories or philosophers you're curious about. Let's keep the intellectual journey going!

荒井　I like to start our talk from Kant's antinomies. I remember he made time and space brought to the domain of subject (mind), supposedly that of noumenon. This is acknowledged as Copernicus Turn to the modern philosophy, is it right? He ,by use of this ideas, judged ,under the name of Court of Reason, that human beings have a free hands to resque from dilemma or apolia. He analyse the first two are fault, which mean we take either theme or anti-theme as our disposal, and the two of latter are judge true, which mean each of them were our choice problem, especially the third one were an endows for our free will, is it right?

Copilot　　You're touching on some key aspects of Kant's philosophy, especially his revolutionary ideas that marked what is often called the "Copernican Turn" in modern philosophy. Let’s break down and clarify these points:
The Copernican Turn
Yes, you're correct. Kant's "Copernican Turn" refers to his radical shift in perspective that it is not the mind that conforms to the objects, but rather the objects that conform to the mind. This means that space and time are forms of human intuition and not independent realities. They are the necessary conditions for our experience of the world, making them part of the phenomenal realm (what appears to us), while the noumenal realm (things-in-themselves) remains unknowable.
The Antinomies
Kant proposed four antinomies to demonstrate the limits of pure reason:
1. First Antinomy (Space and Time):
o Thesis: The world has a beginning in time and is limited in space.
o Antithesis: The world has no beginning and is infinite in space.
o Analysis: Kant argues that both the thesis and antithesis are not resolvable within pure reason because time and space are forms of human sensibility, not properties of things-in-themselves.
2. Second Antinomy (Composition of Substance):
o Thesis: Every composite substance in the world is made up of simple parts.
o Antithesis: No composite thing in the world consists of simple parts.
o Analysis: Similarly, this antinomy arises from the misapplication of human concepts (simplicity and composition) to the noumenal realm, leading to contradictions.
3. Third Antinomy (Causality and Freedom):
o Thesis: Causality according to laws of nature is not the only causality operating in the world.
o Antithesis: There is no causality other than that according to the laws of nature.
o Analysis: Kant resolves this by distinguishing between phenomenal causality (in the world of appearances) and noumenal causality (involving freedom). He asserts that human beings, as noumenal agents, possess free will.
4. Fourth Antinomy (Necessity and Contingency):
o Thesis: There is an absolutely necessary being as the ground of all things.
o Antithesis: There is no absolutely necessary being, whether in the world or outside the world.
o Analysis: This antinomy reflects the limits of human reason when it tries to grasp the absolute necessary being in itself.
Resolution and Freedom
Kant uses these antinomies to show the limitations of pure reason and how it leads to contradictions when it overreaches. The resolution for the third and fourth antinomies indeed emphasizes human freedom and the idea that we have the capacity for moral decision-making independent of deterministic natural laws. This aligns with his concept of free will being situated in the noumenal realm.
Court of Reason
Kant's "Court of Reason" is his idea that reason must judge the limits and scope of its own abilities. Through critical self-examination, reason discovers that while it can provide knowledge of the phenomenal world, it must recognize its boundaries and the ultimate unknowability of the noumenal world.
Your understanding aligns well with Kantian philosophy. His critical approach provides a framework for navigating the apparent dilemmas (aporia) of metaphysical speculation, granting human reason a measure of freedom within its own domain.
I hope this helps clarify Kant's ideas further! What specific aspects of consciousness and the qualia problem would you like to explore next?