CSW History class discussions Forum Index CSW History class discussions
Discussion and debate of topics for our classes
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 




Kant and Hegel on Cause and Effect/ Questions about K and H

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    CSW History class discussions Forum Index -> Art of Prediction
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
rhirsch
Site Admin


Joined: 13 Oct 2010
Posts: 74

PostPosted: Wed Sep 14, 2011 2:11 pm    Post subject: Kant and Hegel on Cause and Effect/ Questions about K and H Reply with quote

Please post your thoughts on what Kant and Hegel each have to say about cause and effect. Question each other and really dig in.

Also, ask each other general questions or pose theories about Kant and Hegel as part of the prep for tomorrow's seminar (don't forget to read through and follow the instructions for preparing for the seminar - either in your packet or on mycsw)...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Free Forum






PostPosted:      Post subject: ForumsLand.com

Back to top
kscrimshawhall



Joined: 07 Sep 2011
Posts: 13

PostPosted: Wed Sep 14, 2011 7:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Anyone else having trouble preparing? I'm kind of stuck. There's so much to cover that I'm not sure what to focus on. Could someone tell me a little of what they've been doing? thanks!!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
dylanh



Joined: 03 Jan 2011
Posts: 48

PostPosted: Wed Sep 14, 2011 7:40 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

i get Kant a lot better than Hegel, so i was thinking of focusing most of my preparation on just him, with a little hegel thrown in. there's so much to cover, and i think it would be easier if we all focus on what makes sense to us, and then discus/present/debate tomorrow. maybe?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
kscrimshawhall



Joined: 07 Sep 2011
Posts: 13

PostPosted: Wed Sep 14, 2011 7:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

thanks dylan! that's a good idea. I agree it would be better to understand one thing completely than a bunch of things vaguely.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
lpeper2012



Joined: 14 Oct 2010
Posts: 13

PostPosted: Wed Sep 14, 2011 8:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I was also thinking the same thing, I also understand Kant better than Hegel so I'm mainly preparing my notes on Kant.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
PeterLafreniere



Joined: 07 Sep 2011
Posts: 12

PostPosted: Wed Sep 14, 2011 9:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

yeah I like this, I think I am going to focus on Kant, but try to still get specifics on Hegel.

I hope that more people read and post so we can get an idea of who is doing what. Mainly so we don't have 15 people who have gotten the same Kant points and 5 with Hegel research.

I am not sure this is the best approach to starting but I was having trouble starting so I just started going through the text, looking for quotes than could lead to answers of questions.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
rhirsch
Site Admin


Joined: 13 Oct 2010
Posts: 74

PostPosted: Wed Sep 14, 2011 9:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I agree with Peter - it's probably best to put your energies into the one you're less clear on - if you understand Kant then you can probably understand what others will say. But if you want to understand what other say about Hegel, I'd suggest you at least try to get more clear on what your questions are.

Also - where's everyone's thinking on cause and effect? Might this specific task help you dig in better?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
dylanh



Joined: 03 Jan 2011
Posts: 48

PostPosted: Wed Sep 14, 2011 9:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

i spent a reallllly long time on Kant, and then saw rachel's post about doing the one we understand least, so this is a little awkward. But the good part about focusing on something I thought I understood, is that I really feel comfortable with it now. So, here are some of my notes on Kant and cause and effect.

Kant believes that there are some predictable and some unpredictable elements of cause and effect. The predictable elements are a priori knowledge, or things we accept to be true. (We know red exists, but we can't get a bucket of it.) This a priori knowledge is the framework for other causes and effects; Kant bases other predictions off of facts he believes to be true. I tired to relate this to Aristotle's ideas of cause and effect, too. On page 5 of our packet, the author describes Aristotle's view on change and order. It's no surprise he is very set in one reaction for one cause, or a process of acquiring knowledge and repeated sense (Galileo?) experience leading to intuition and comfortability. (5) I also thought Kant was a little bit of a risk taker with his logic, unlike Aristotle or Hobbes. He accepts logic, but only after a lot of questioning. I have another weird conclusion I came to about the knower and the known, but I'll wait until tomorrow.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
yamsham



Joined: 31 Mar 2011
Posts: 26

PostPosted: Thu Sep 15, 2011 7:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

i was gonna focus mostly on hegel cause he's my favorite and i fid him the most interesting, but i figure having a well rounded grasp on everyone is probably the best bet.

it seems to me that with Kant and the previous fellows that there's really only the possibility of one world and we are beings in it perceiving it. i also feel like with his version of things, the things we realize as truths through experience will eventually be a priory knowledge. unless I'm misquoting him and that's a Hegel thing, which is correct but there's more to it than that with Hegel.

For him it's like there's only the world we are creating in our brains, so our world is in our brains (which is probably why it's so terrifying when movies have someone's brains crushed, spewed or blown out, like in David lynch films or that sort of thing) but where i'm getting stumped is teh whole there are other brains out there too. so there is not an outside world, we are in the world and creating it? or maybe we are the world haha. As a whole being, just with different ideas and chis. tat wuold make sense cause in order for a collective world to be created there would have to be some conflict which goes back to the whole battle over good and evil thing, but evil would be subjective to the other beings, some would feel they were eveil whle others would feel they were allright. also with out conflict there wouldn't be ballance and i fele like ballance is really what is keeping our world together, with out ballance it doesn't really make sense for the world to exist. javascript:emoticon('Shocked')

yeah i just realized that was a whole large rant. sorry.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Mrdevid



Joined: 17 Sep 2011
Posts: 1

PostPosted: Sat Sep 17, 2011 12:51 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Your site its really interesting. I am visiting many sites but i really like this site. Thanks a lot for the sharing. Good work.
_________________
Cheap Essay
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Free Forum






PostPosted:      Post subject: ForumsLand.com

Back to top
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    CSW History class discussions Forum Index -> Art of Prediction All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Forum hosted by ForumsLand.com - 100% free forum. Powered by phpBB 2.