How Kant overcomes Hume's skepticism

The work of Immanuel Kant represented a turning point in the philosophical debate on knowledge. In particular, his thought stood out for its ability to overcome the skepticism of David Hume, one of the major exponents of English empiricist thought.

Hume argued that it was not possible to know reality in a certain and definitive way, because human experience is always limited and subjective. According to him, humans can never reach an absolute and universal truth, but only formulate hypotheses based on contingent observations.

Kant, on the other hand, developed a theory of knowledge that allows us to overcome this skepticism. He argued that knowledge does not derive solely from sensory experience, but also from innate categories of the human intellect. These categories are universal and necessary in order to understand reality.

• Example: Kant asserts that the idea of cause and effect does not derive from sensory experience, but is an innate concept in the human intellect. Without this category, humans would not be able to understand causal relationships between events.

In this article we will analyze how Kant was able to overcome Hume's skepticism through his theory of knowledge.

The problem of Hume's skepticism

Hume was a philosopher who had a very skeptical view of human knowledge. According to him, we can never have certainty about our knowledge because it is based on experience and induction, two things that cannot guarantee absolute truth.

In other words, Hume claimed that our knowledge is always limited by our sensory perceptions and past experiences. This means that we can never be sure of anything beyond our direct experiences.

This type of skepticism was a major obstacle for many subsequent philosophers who sought to find a solid foundation for human knowledge.

Example:

For example, if we only see white swans throughout our lives, we may mistakenly think that all swans are white. But if we then see a black swan, we must revise our previous belief. This is the idea of induction according to Hume: we can never be sure that what we have seen so far is representative of the whole.

However, Kant found a solution to this problem through his theory of synthetic a priori knowledge.

Kant's criticism of Hume's skepticism

Immanuel Kant developed a strong critique of David Hume's skepticism, demonstrating that Hume's philosophy is not sufficient to answer humanity's fundamental questions. In particular, Kant criticized the Humean idea of causation and proposed a new theory of knowledge.

The idea of causation in Hume

According to Hume, the concept of causation is based on sensory experience. He argued that we can never observe a causal relationship between two events, but only their constant conjunction. For example, we always see the sun rise after dawn, but we cannot say that dawn causes the rising of the sun.

Kant criticized this position by arguing that the idea of causation is innate in humans and cannot be derived from sensory experience. According to Kant, we perceive things in the world through the categories of our mind, including cause and effect. These categories are present in us from birth and allow us to organize our experiences.

Kant's theory of knowledge

Kant proposed a new theory of knowledge, called "critique of pure reason". His theory is based on the distinction between phenomenon (what appears to our consciousness) and noumenon (reality itself).

According to Kant, we can only know phenomena and not noumena. Our mind organizes sensory perceptions in order to create a coherent representation of the world, but this representation does not necessarily correspond to reality itself.

Kant also introduced the distinction between analytic and synthetic judgments. Analytic judgments are a priori truths that can only be known through analysis of the concepts involved (for example, "all bachelors are men"). Synthetic judgments, on the other hand, are truths that add new information to the concepts involved (for example, "the sun rises in the east").

The importance of practical reason in Kant

Kant argues that practical reason is fundamental for overcoming Hume's skepticism. According to the German philosopher, practical reason allows us to act morally and have certain knowledge of the world.

The difference between theoretical reason and practical reason

To understand the importance of practical reason, it is necessary to understand the difference between this and theoretical reason. Theoretical reason allows us to know the world through our cognitive faculties, such as perception and logic. However, according to Hume, we cannot be certain about the existence of the external world or the causal laws that govern events.

Practical reason, on the other hand, concerns our moral behavior. It allows us to distinguish between what is right and what is wrong and act accordingly. According to Kant, this type of reason allows us to overcome Hume's skepticism because it does not depend on our cognitive faculties but on our free will.

The categorical imperative

For Kant, the categorical imperative is the highest expression of practical reason. This moral principle states that we should only act according to those maxims that we could will to become universal laws.

For example, if we wanted to steal, we should ask ourselves if we would be willing to live in a world where theft is allowed. If the answer is no, then we cannot steal without contradicting the categorical imperative.

Certain knowledge of the world

Kant argues that practical reason allows us to have certain knowledge of the world because it allows us to overcome Hume's skepticism. If we act morally, we are sure that there exists an external and rational world governed by causal laws. This is because moral action presupposes the existence of an objective and rational world.

• For example, if we decide to help a person in need, we presuppose that this person exists in the real world and that it is possible to help them.
• In addition, if we believe in the categorical imperative, we presuppose that there is an objective and rational reality to which we must conform.

Conclusion

In this article, we have examined Hume's critique of the concept of causality and how Kant attempted to overcome Hume's skepticism through his theory of knowledge.

Kant argued that the concept of causality is not an empirical idea, but rather an a priori category of the human mind. This category allows us to understand the world around us and make predictions about the future based on past experiences.

Kant's theory of knowledge has had a significant impact on Western philosophy and continues to be studied and debated today. His idea that the a priori categories of the human mind influence our understanding of the external world has been applied in various disciplines, including psychology and linguistics.

In conclusion, although the argument between Hume and Kant may seem abstract, it has important implications for our understanding of the world around us and the nature of knowledge itself. Kant's theory invites us to reflect on the role that the human mind plays in shaping our ideas and on the limitations of our understanding of the external world.