No description available.

Κύριο θέμα αυτής της εργασίας αποτελεί η καντιανή έννοια της αυτονομίας, υπό την αναγκαία προϋπόθεση της ελευθερίας της βούλησης,η οποία καθιστά δυνατή την επιλογή και ως εκ τούτου την ηθική υπευθυνότητα των ανθρώπων. Το ενδιαφέρον εστιάζεται επίσης, και στην προσπάθεια του Καντ να δείξει ότι η ελευθερία και περαιτέρω η αυτονομία, μπορούν να συμβιβαστούν με το αυστηρό αιτιοκρατικό σύστημα. Eπιπλέον, η εργασία προσφέρει μια διεξοδική ανάλυση βασικών καντιανών εννοιών και επιχειρεί να φέρει στο προσκήνιο την αξία της καντιανής αυτονομίας, τονίζοντας ωστόσο τα ερμηνευτικά θέματα τα οποία εγείρονται. Τέλος, παρουσιάζει δυο θεμελιώδεις, αλλά αντίθετες, προσεγγίσεις της καντιανής αυτονομίας. / The main topic of this thesis is the kantian notion of autonomy, under the necessary presupposition of freedom of the will, which enables individuals to make free choices and consequently, to be morally responsible for these choices. Interest also, focuses on Kant's effort to show that freedom of the will, and further autonomy, can be reconciled with the strict deterministic system. Additionally, it offers an extensive analysis of basic kantian notions and undertakes to bring to the fore the value of kantian autonomy, whilst highlighting the interpretative issues which arise. Finally, it presents two fundamental, but different approaches to kantian autonomy.

論文摘要 〈論純粹知性概念之推證〉一章可以說是《純粹理性批判》當中最重要的章節之一。康德在這個章節中企圖證明完全根源於知性自身的純粹知性概念（也就是範疇）運用到經驗對象上的可能性，並藉此劃定認知的有效範圍。這是《純粹理性批判》企圖解決形上學紛爭的一個重要關鍵。然而，這個章節同時也是康德宣稱他花費了最大心力，並在第二版《純粹理性批判》當中完全改寫的篇章之一，在這個短短的五六十頁的篇幅當中卻包含了許多詮釋上的爭議。而本論文則以第二版〈推證〉為主要討論範圍，並嘗試回答其中三個詮釋上的問題：1. 〈推證〉是否包含了一個反懷疑論的論證？2. 第二版〈推證〉可區分出的兩個部份分別負擔了什麼任務？3. 先驗統覺在〈推證〉中扮演了什麼角色？並在確立對以上幾個問題的觀點之後，提供一個的對第二版〈推證〉的細部解釋。 為了回答這幾個問題，筆者比較了Paul Guyer、Dieter Henrich、Henry Allison等幾個詮釋者的觀點。而本論文總共包含了五個章節。第一章作為導論，介紹筆者在本論文中所欲處理的問題以及對論文所安排的架構。在第二章當中，筆者以Guyer作為一個反懷疑論式詮釋〈推證〉的類型，並指出這種詮釋方式與文本的不合之處。在第三章當中，筆者將介紹Henrich針對第二版〈推證〉所提出的「一個證明兩個步驟」的詮釋架構以及對兩個步驟的詮釋，並藉由Allison的批評，介紹另一種同樣在「一個證明兩個步驟」下且筆者認為更適當的詮釋方式。在第四章當中，筆者嘗試回答關於解釋統覺的諸問題，它們包括了統覺的含義、統覺與雜多表象的關係、統覺原理的邏輯地位、統覺原理在〈推證〉中起的作用等。在確立了以上諸觀點後，筆者在第四章和第五章當中，按照兩個步驟的架構提供一個對第二版〈推證〉的完整解釋。 / Abstract "On the Deduction of the Pure Concepts of Understanding" is widely agreed to be the most important chapter in the Critique of the Pure Reason. In this chapter Kant attempts to demonstrate that the pure concepts of understanding, namely, categories, which completely stem from understanding itself, can be applied to empirical objects and thereby define the boundary of cognition. This is critical to resolve the dispute in the metaphysics of his predecessors. However, Kant also claims that this chapter is the part, which costs him the greatest effort and which he entirely rewrites in the second edition of the Critique. There are so many controversial interpretations related to this chapter, which is yet only complied up to 50-60 pages. In this thesis I focus on Deduction in the second edition of the Critique and try to answer the following three questions about these controversies: 1. Whether the Deduction contains an anti-skeptical argument? 2. What are the tasks of the two parts respectively that can be distinguished in B-Deduction? 3. What is the role that transcendental apperception plays in the Deduction? After establishing these answers, I will contribute a detailed explanation of whole B-Deduction. In order to answer the questions, I compare the perspectives of three interpreters of Kant, namely, Paul Guyer, Dieter Henrich and Henry E. Allison. This article is divided into five chapters. Chapter 1 is the introduction, in which I introduce the problems that I hope to resolve and the structure of the thesis. In Chapter 2, I introduce Guyer's interpretation of Deduction, which is an anti-skeptical Model, and I will indicate that his interpretation doesn't conform to the Kant's text. In Chapter 3, I introduce Henrich's famous thesis about the structure of the B-Deduction, namely, the thesis of two-steps-in-one-proof, and his interpretation of the contents of the two steps.Then I introduce Allison's criticism against Henrich and his alternative interpretation of B-Deduction under the frame of two-steps-in-one-proof. I believe this interpretation is more consistent and more conformable to the text. In Chapter 4, I try to answer the questions about the interpretation of apperception, where the issues such as the meaning of apperception, the relation between apperception and manifold, the principle of apperception's logical status, the apperception's role in the Deduction etc. will be discussed. After establishing my perspectives about these interpretative problems, I will present a complete and detailed explanation of B-Deduction according to the two-step structure.