(Descartes Ve Hume’da “Şüpheli Bilgi” Fikri
Loading...
Files
Date
2017
Authors
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Access Rights
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
Abstract
Bilginin kesinliğinden, nesnelliğinden ve evrenselliğinden ödün vermek istemeyen her filozof, Descartes ve Hume'un ortaya koyduğu şüpheci argümanları, bilginin olanağı için bir tehdit olarak algılamaktadır. Bir yandan Descartes'ın şüpheci argümanı tüm bilgi iddialarımıza eşlik eden hata olasılığını gündeme getirirken, diğer taraftan Hume'un argümanı, neden ve sonuç arasında var olduğu düşünülen tüm zorunluluğu, şüpheli bir olumsallığa indirger. Böylece bu iki argüman bilginin tesisi adına aşılması gereken temel engeller olarak görülür. Ancak mevcut çalışma, bu iki argümanı, aşılması gereken birer engel olarak değil, fakat bilginin şüphe ile birlikte yaşamasına olanak tanıyan birer deneme olarak göstermek ister. Dahası bize göre bu argümanlar; şüphe ile bilgi arasında var olduğu düşünülen keskin karşıtlığı ortadan kaldırır ve şüpheyi bilgiden kovmak yerine, ona hak ettiği saygıyı göstererek şüpheyi bilginin temel bir öğesi haline getirir
Any philosopher who does not want to compromise the certainty, objectivity and universality of knowledge, perceives the sceptical arguments which are put forward by Descartes and Hume as threats against the possibility of knowledge. While Descartes’ sceptical argument brings to light the possiblity of an error which accompanies all our claims of knowledge, Hume’s argument, on the other hand reduces all necessity which is thought to exist between cause and effect into a sceptical contingency. Thus both arguments are seen as obstacles which have to be overcomed in order to establish knowledge. However the present work wishes to show these arguments not as obstacles which we have to overcome but as experiments that allow suspicion and knowledge to live together. Moreover we conclude that these arguments will abolish the assumed sharp edged contrariness between doubt and knowledge and instead of expelling doubt out of knowledge they will show respect to suspicion by making it one of the fundamental elements of knowledge
Any philosopher who does not want to compromise the certainty, objectivity and universality of knowledge, perceives the sceptical arguments which are put forward by Descartes and Hume as threats against the possibility of knowledge. While Descartes’ sceptical argument brings to light the possiblity of an error which accompanies all our claims of knowledge, Hume’s argument, on the other hand reduces all necessity which is thought to exist between cause and effect into a sceptical contingency. Thus both arguments are seen as obstacles which have to be overcomed in order to establish knowledge. However the present work wishes to show these arguments not as obstacles which we have to overcome but as experiments that allow suspicion and knowledge to live together. Moreover we conclude that these arguments will abolish the assumed sharp edged contrariness between doubt and knowledge and instead of expelling doubt out of knowledge they will show respect to suspicion by making it one of the fundamental elements of knowledge
Description
Keywords
Felsefe
Journal or Series
F L S F / Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi Felsefe Dergisi
WoS Q Value
Scopus Q Value
Volume
12
Issue
24
