Made available in DSpace on 2016-04-27T17:27:03Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Marco Antonio Chabbouh Junior.pdf: 1163932 bytes, checksum: a475e7e1b94aa998f468457e35783e1d (MD5) Previous issue date: 2012-10-29 / Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico / One of the best-known teachings of the Critique of Pure Reason by Immanuel Kant is that of the ideality of space and time. The present work aims at discussing the relations between the proofs of the apriority of space and time and the proofs of their subjective character. To achieve this aim, the present text takes the form of a comparative and commented exposition of the readings by Norman Kemp Smith, Herbert James Paton and Patricia Kitcher. This exposition is made in three main chapters. The first one is intended to make an approach to the main problem, the second one is a detailed discussion of the mentioned readings and the third one is constituted by the position taking from the offered debate. It intends then, to demonstrate that Paton s interpretation is the most successful among the three, because it is able to solve pressing problems enunciated by Kemp Smith without trespassing, as Kitcher did, the boundaries of the critical text. Hence, it is also shown that the ideality of space and time intended by Kant is not made through a doctrine of innate ideas similar to the rationalist ones, but is only a doctrine that states the existence of an innate capacity responsible for the production of pure spacial and temporal contents once experience begins / Um dos mais célebres ensinamentos da Crítica da Razão Pura de Immanuel Kant é o da idealidade do espaço e do tempo. O presente trabalho tem como objetivo discutir as relações existentes entre as provas a favor da aprioridade do espaço e do tempo e as provas a favor de seu caráter subjetivo. Para levar a cabo a tarefa citada, o presente texto toma a forma de uma exposição comparativa e comentada das interpretações de Norman Kemp Smith, Herbert James Paton e Patricia Kitcher. Essa exposição faz-se em três capítulos. O primeiro é uma aproximação ao problema central, o segundo constitui-se de uma discussão em detalhe das interpretações analisadas e o terceiro consiste na tomada de posição a partir da discussão oferecida. Pretende-se mostrar que a leitura feita por Paton é a mais bem sucedida dentre as três por conseguir dar conta de importantes questões postuladas por Kemp Smith sem extrapolar, como fez Kitcher, os limites textuais. Sendo assim, evidencia-se que a idealidade do espaço e do tempo pretendida por Kant não se constitui a partir de uma doutrina que afirma a existência de ideias inatas nos moldes racionalistas dogmáticos, mas que afirma unicamente a presença de uma capacidade inata responsável por produzir conteúdos espaciais e temporais puros mediante a experiência

康德主張，空間的「先驗的觀念性」，並且此一觀念性是可以與「經驗的實在性」相容。對於「先驗的觀念性」，處於空間的事物被限定於感性的對象上，即是顯象，因此並不適用在那些「當它們得以透過理性其自身，即是毫無顧及我們感性的狀態」的內容。同樣地，「經驗的實在性」所刻劃的是外在顯象，如同康德在上述引文所指，乃是「在考慮一切可能的外在經驗」。據此，所謂空間的「先驗的觀念性」，從「觀念性」而言，空間是先天的直覺形式，故不屬於對象或事物自身的任何屬性。不過此一空間的觀念性，即先天的直覺形式，乃是任何外在顯象得以可能的條件，所以空間的觀念性，雖是感性主體的認知條件，卻不能等同於僅僅是主觀的觀念性，而是具有先驗條件的觀念性，也就是其是一種先天可能的認知模式，因此，空間的觀念性，乃是「先驗的」，這是康德稱空間為「先驗的觀念性」所持的立場。與此同時，對康德來說，空間的「先驗的觀念性」，則蘊含空間的「經驗的實在性」。從康德看來，我們要意識到任何外在經驗，皆必定在空間秩序關係中被呈現或給與出來，如此一來，空間具有「實在性」。不過，空間的「實在性」其效力僅對於我們外感官的經驗對象才能有效，並無法對事物自身產生任何約束，所以空間的「實在性」，就祇能是屬於經驗的，我們不能將空間的「實在性」歸屬在事物自身。 / Kant advocates the view that space is transcendental ideality and empirical realtiy. This article aims at interpretation of Kant’s space thesis. Kant attempts to offer argument transcendental ideality of space mean that space is subjective and limiting condition to which human intuition. This implication that kant asserts transcendental ideality thesis is that space has limited to appearance, and when applied to the things in themselves, space is merely an idea,or equivalently that is transcendental. However transcendental ideality of space does not mean that objects within of space is nothing, only ideas of our mind. In contrast to this, transcendental ideality thesis as equivalent to empirical reality of space ,that is said to regard space is real, but which is objective validity limited by applicable to outer appearances.