Synopsis

Fidelmar Perez
Fr. Renieri
10/03/06
PLTL1411AA
Critique of Pure Reason
Preface to the Second Edition

Knowledge as is attained whether by scientific method or not, will be determine in the results. Bu if those participants in the research for knowledge are in disagreement in choosing a way to carry on the research, they have embarked in an unsecured path to knowledge. In such case shouldwe compromise the very aim so to find the right path or discard the accomplishments?
Logic from the beginning has fallowed a path of assurance and does not require being trace back unless we want to present the grace rather then the sureness of science. Therefore, those who want to expand science by means of introducing psychology, metaphysics, or anthropology; they are acting from the basis ofignorance of logic, thus the outcome is the watering down of science. Since logic only concern is to exposed rules applicable to all thought, which independently of the path taken whether it be a posteriori or a priori or any other path.
The success of logic rest in the narrowness its own subject, thus logic is oblige to obstruct all the objects it their totality thus, leaving the understandingo deal with itself and its own preservation. On the other hand, reason is hard to place in the scientific method since it must consider itself and objects. Thus, logic is only a introductory mean to science, since logic is only that which critique and estimate object but do not actually posses them, therefore we must depend on objective science as such. However, if science is to be determine byreasoning then it must have an a priori cognition which it must determine or at least establish its reality. Thus, all that reason is able to establish, the object must be a priori any other method which do not leads to reductions will only lead to confusion.
From the beginning of human reason mathematics have had a sure path in the sciences, nonetheless, it was not as easy for mathematics as itwas for logic to embark such path. Nonetheless, the act of one man has determined the path which science must fallow, but far important than the name of such man is the outcome of his work. For he found that is not enough to conceptualized the figure of any given object or even its properties as it come to the senses. Rather, to create those properties a priori and not to attribute any otherproperty other than those which had himself, in accordance with his conception, had place in the object. Also, natural science which was introduced not to log a go, due Bacon to the ingenuity, natural science found its path in the realm of science. it is also the result of an intellectual movement.
From the previous planning of Galileo’s techniques to that of Torricelli or even Stahl, students learnthat reason reveals that which has previously plan it self and that reason will answer its own questions and not those of an accidental nature. Reason can be seen as a principal or law which seeks self understanding. While reason seeks it nature, it must be self taught but not with a pupil attitude but that of a judge which answers its own questions. In this way, natural sciences, which finallyafter centuries of loosely searching have finally, arrived to a secure scientific method.
Although metaphysics is by far the oldest of all the sciences, it has not yet entered into a secure scientific method. Thus, when reason tries to be obtain a priori is forever held, thus there is a constant necessity to retrocede and often this result in abandoning the subject due to lack of accomplishments.There is no one who had engage in any metaphysical pursuit have ever come to a mutual agreement even with themselves, thus no one has attain any solid grounds in the subject. Thus it if fallows that the searching for metaphysics has been up to now a loosely searching. If there is no scientific method to be found in through this why have this be so persistent as if we have to place our confidence...