KANT AND THE PSYCHO-PSHYSICACL TRADE: the influx between body and soul
Facing up Kantian criticism raised to metaphysical conceptions on soul doctrine, we will seek an account psycho-physical commerce question (information exchange), between supersensible and sensitive world, or, between soul, body and spirit. The psycho-physical commerce problematic is treated by Kant...
| Autor: | |
|---|---|
| Tipo de recurso: | artículo |
| Estado: | Versión publicada |
| Fecha de publicación: | 2013 |
| País: | Brasil |
| Institución: | Universidade de Brasília (UnB) |
| Repositorio: | Pólemos (Brasília) |
| Idioma: | portugués |
| OAI Identifier: | oai:ojs.pkp.sfu.ca:article/11537 |
| Acceso en línea: | https://periodicos.unb.br/index.php/polemos/article/view/11537 |
| Access Level: | acceso abierto |
| Palabra clave: | Influxo psico-físico. Alma e Corpo. Swedenborg. Pshycho-physical influx. Soul and body. Swedenborg. |
| Sumario: | Facing up Kantian criticism raised to metaphysical conceptions on soul doctrine, we will seek an account psycho-physical commerce question (information exchange), between supersensible and sensitive world, or, between soul, body and spirit. The psycho-physical commerce problematic is treated by Kant in Dreams of a Spirit-Seer Elucidated by Dreams of Metaphysics (1766), in reason of Swedenborg, an enthusiastic of supersensible world, a Swedish visionary, which asserts has contact with the world of spirits. Therefore, Kant approaches the spirit concept definition, as the soul/body problem, into the impenetrability question: how an immaterial being occupies a material being? In Dissertation of 1770, Kant recovery the question about the relations that establishes between physical bodies and between bodies with a plausible unity of World found in a outside world being, or a common cause (unique): God. Those relations, in a sense, make reference to the psycho-physical commerce question established Dreams of a Spirit-Seer. In Critique of Pure Reason, in turn, the question is retaken in reason of Kantian criticism to traditional theories of Soul’s pure doctrine, which are nothing beyond “paralogism of transcendental doctrine of soul, which is falsely understood as science of pure reason about the nature of thinking being” (KrV, B 403). In this sense, we will treat the question between the three works mentioned, seeking, at least, raise the question of communication possibility between the two worlds and, maybe, between one being and another one. |
|---|