Knowledge, reason, noumenon: The rational legitimacy of religious belief and meta-empirical thought in the light of Kant's critique of Pure Reason

The objective of this contribution is to present a counterargument to the view that religious faith is inherently incompatible with reason due to its lack of scientific evidence. To this end, it will draw upon the insights of Immanuel Kant's Critique of Pure Reason. It will be demonstrated that...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Marchegiani Giulio
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: University of Belgrade - Faculty of Philosophy - Institute for Philosophy 2024-01-01
Series:Belgrade Philosophical Annual
Subjects:
Online Access:https://scindeks-clanci.ceon.rs/data/pdf/0353-3891/2024/0353-38912402229M.pdf
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1850084192861290496
author Marchegiani Giulio
author_facet Marchegiani Giulio
author_sort Marchegiani Giulio
collection DOAJ
description The objective of this contribution is to present a counterargument to the view that religious faith is inherently incompatible with reason due to its lack of scientific evidence. To this end, it will draw upon the insights of Immanuel Kant's Critique of Pure Reason. It will be demonstrated that the distinction between the meta-empirical sphere and that of the scientific understanding does not imply the irrationality of the former for Kant. This is because, while reason encompasses understanding, it is not constrained by it. On the contrary, defining the boundaries of the sphere accessible to scientific investigation implies recognising the space outside those boundaries, the definition of which is made possible by the operational instrument of noumenon. While this result does not contradict scientific reason, it does allow the boundaries of the two spheres to be defined in a non-conflicting way and implies that the metaempirical sphere is a legitimate area of endeavor. The result of these considerations is to demonstrate that any stance which, in the name of a misconceived scientificity, denies in principle any possible metascientific or religious perspective on reality, is ultimately unreasonable. Rather, such a stance is based on implicit metaphysical assumptions.
format Article
id doaj-art-4eb2005c8c7740a7b70c6102b7eefc5f
institution DOAJ
issn 0353-3891
2956-0357
language English
publishDate 2024-01-01
publisher University of Belgrade - Faculty of Philosophy - Institute for Philosophy
record_format Article
series Belgrade Philosophical Annual
spelling doaj-art-4eb2005c8c7740a7b70c6102b7eefc5f2025-08-20T02:44:08ZengUniversity of Belgrade - Faculty of Philosophy - Institute for PhilosophyBelgrade Philosophical Annual0353-38912956-03572024-01-0137222924510.5937/BPA2402229M0353-38912402229MKnowledge, reason, noumenon: The rational legitimacy of religious belief and meta-empirical thought in the light of Kant's critique of Pure ReasonMarchegiani Giulio0Bergische Universität Wuppertal, Wuppertal, GermanyThe objective of this contribution is to present a counterargument to the view that religious faith is inherently incompatible with reason due to its lack of scientific evidence. To this end, it will draw upon the insights of Immanuel Kant's Critique of Pure Reason. It will be demonstrated that the distinction between the meta-empirical sphere and that of the scientific understanding does not imply the irrationality of the former for Kant. This is because, while reason encompasses understanding, it is not constrained by it. On the contrary, defining the boundaries of the sphere accessible to scientific investigation implies recognising the space outside those boundaries, the definition of which is made possible by the operational instrument of noumenon. While this result does not contradict scientific reason, it does allow the boundaries of the two spheres to be defined in a non-conflicting way and implies that the metaempirical sphere is a legitimate area of endeavor. The result of these considerations is to demonstrate that any stance which, in the name of a misconceived scientificity, denies in principle any possible metascientific or religious perspective on reality, is ultimately unreasonable. Rather, such a stance is based on implicit metaphysical assumptions.https://scindeks-clanci.ceon.rs/data/pdf/0353-3891/2024/0353-38912402229M.pdfkantreligious belieflimits of scientific knowledgefaith and reasoncritique of scientism
spellingShingle Marchegiani Giulio
Knowledge, reason, noumenon: The rational legitimacy of religious belief and meta-empirical thought in the light of Kant's critique of Pure Reason
Belgrade Philosophical Annual
kant
religious belief
limits of scientific knowledge
faith and reason
critique of scientism
title Knowledge, reason, noumenon: The rational legitimacy of religious belief and meta-empirical thought in the light of Kant's critique of Pure Reason
title_full Knowledge, reason, noumenon: The rational legitimacy of religious belief and meta-empirical thought in the light of Kant's critique of Pure Reason
title_fullStr Knowledge, reason, noumenon: The rational legitimacy of religious belief and meta-empirical thought in the light of Kant's critique of Pure Reason
title_full_unstemmed Knowledge, reason, noumenon: The rational legitimacy of religious belief and meta-empirical thought in the light of Kant's critique of Pure Reason
title_short Knowledge, reason, noumenon: The rational legitimacy of religious belief and meta-empirical thought in the light of Kant's critique of Pure Reason
title_sort knowledge reason noumenon the rational legitimacy of religious belief and meta empirical thought in the light of kant s critique of pure reason
topic kant
religious belief
limits of scientific knowledge
faith and reason
critique of scientism
url https://scindeks-clanci.ceon.rs/data/pdf/0353-3891/2024/0353-38912402229M.pdf
work_keys_str_mv AT marchegianigiulio knowledgereasonnoumenontherationallegitimacyofreligiousbeliefandmetaempiricalthoughtinthelightofkantscritiqueofpurereason