Kant’s Argumentation Of Freedom In The First And The Second Critique And It’s Problems

The theory of freedom is central to Kant’s philosophy,but Kant’s arguments for freedom are controversial within academia.One of the biggest predicaments is that Kant persisted that freedom is unknowable and incomprehensible,but in fact he constantly tries to argue that freedom is indeed real.We must have a overall view of Kant’s free argument in order to understand his theory of freedom.Kant’s argumentation for freedom can be divided into two parts,the first one is to founded the basic framework of the entire transcendental philosophy system,that is,transcendental idealism,and provide the possibility for freedom in this system.The second,to illustrate the reality of freedom through the reality of moral laws.Through transcendental idealism,our knowledges are bound to empirical phenomena,in this case,freedom can be possible.Although Kant denied knowledge beyond phenomena,he did not deny their possibility.In the other hand,Kant proposed our ability of reason,which is the spontaneous ability of cognitive without relying on experience,a freedom beyond the realm of experience that can be conceived and avoid conflicting with the laws of nature in the phenomena world.Allison explained as such: in Kant’s transcendental idealism,nature belongs to the normative system of theory,while freedom belongs to the normative system of practice,and the two are different interpretations or normative principles of the same state of affairs.Freedom that can be only conceived as possibility is what Kant called transcendental freedom.He was not satisfied with it,but tried to further revealed the reality of freedom through our capacity for moral practice.But Kant’s argumentation for the reality of freedom had many problems,starting with the failure of deduction in The Foundations of Moral Metaphysics,and in the Critique of Practical Reason,Kant abandoned the method of deduction.Instead,he defined the moral law as an indeducible fact of reason,where the moral law itself is independently imposed on us as an innate synthetic proposition.Kant’s argument was reliable to certain extent,but it is often accused of assertiveness.In fact,Kant’s entire critical philosophy suffered from the problem of assertiveness,and he lacked adequate explanation of the core concept of his philosophy: the transcendental ideas.This article will give an argument that,we can find an explanation for those transcendental ideas and the fact of reason in Kant’s doctrine of belief,that is,interpret them as beliefs that possess objective validity rooted in subjective sufficiency.They are something which would be necessarily found in a subject itself,and not in others.