Immanuel Kant's Critique Of Reason

PART A Immanuel Kant’s essays Critique of Pure Reason and Critique of Practical Reason led to his critique Religion Within the Limits of Reason Alone. In Critique of Pure Reason Kant discusses the dispute between rationalism and empiricism. The empiricists argued that all ideas are derived from sensation, and that objects of sensation are the only proper objects of knowledge. The rationalists argued that some ideas are not derived from sensation but are instead innate to reason, and that these ideas provide one with knowledge of supersensible realities such as God. Kant argues how knowledge is devoted to the power of demonstrating the truth or falsity of an idea, and that this power is restricted to the domain of sensibility. He stated that
objects of empirical knowledge are facts situated in the world of the phenomena and therefore the truth or falsity of a fact can be proven by observation and reasoning, what later came to be called “the scientific method”. By this he meant that empirical knowledge can help one distinguish the truth about an idea, and that this can be proven by observation (mainly the senses).
Kant states that objects of belief are based on a priori reasoning, that the idea of a maximally great and omnipotent God is an a priori idea about a supersensible reality in the world of the noumena. A priori elements of cognition are innate to reason, whereas a posteriori elements are derived from sense, and he argues that both are equally crucial for knowledge. A priori perceptions and concepts also provide some a priori knowledge. For something to become an object of knowledge, it must be experienced, primarily, as Kant argues, by the senses. He concludes that it is impossible to prove the truth about God or any other supersensible concept such as the immortality of the soul or the freedom of the will which belong to the world of the noumena as theses supersensible concepts are matters of faith and therefore objects of belief – it is a common error to employ a priori reason beyond the domain of the senses and beyond the facts of empirical knowledge. God is not a fact, as facts are given by empirical knowledge, observation and the
senses. Therefore God is an object of belief, which could be true or false, making God an ideal of absolute belief, as He is the ideal of moral perfection. In Critique of Practical Reason Kant states that practical reason is the rational faculty concerned with human conduct and that the will is the rational faculty for moral actions. Freedom of the will is an ideal that is often compromised by the phenomenal world of causal necessity, in other words, human situation. Freedom of the will is necessary for interrelationships and human behavior and is also the first presupposition of practical reason. As an ideal, absolute freedom of the will belongs to the noumenal world but unless the freedom of the will is presupposed it makes no sense to talk of the moral worth of human contact. He claims that freedom and morality are indistinguishable, as freedom of the will cannot be merely random, but must base itself upon some sort of law, a moral law. When one is following the moral will, one is acting freely. Kant concludes by stating that the ideal of the freedom of the will means willing obedience to the moral law, to ethics, to moral behavior established by practical reason. He wanted to create a universal law of moral and ethical behavior, similar to a universal law of science as one validated by scientists.
PART B Friedrich Nietzsche’s philosophical interpretation of religion, God, ethics, and morality is based heavily on his most famous quote “God is dead”. He believed in nihilism, a philosophical viewpoint in which one rejects religious and moral principles, believing in the absence of truth, of reason, and generally extreme skepticism of life itself. What Nietzsche called “The Death of God” was not only a cultural event but also a philosophical development.
Nietzsche witnessed the decay of institutional Christianity, claiming that “churches are tombs of God” and “we are all God’s murderers”, as more people turned to atheism and had a disbelief in God in general. He accepted Kant’s critique of pure reason but rejected his one argument for God and freedom of the will as postulates of practical reason. Nietzsche refers to Charles Darwin, who developed the theory of evolution of a species by natural selection. He claimed that this natural selection denies humans as special and that God was a creator. His quote “God is dead” means that the idea of God can no longer provide
values.
In Nietzsche’s Thus Spoke Zarathustra, a man named Zarathustra wanders around in a village asking if anyone has seen God. Zarathustra discusses the Übermensch, an opposition to Jesus Christ, translating to over-man, as a creator of new values. This presents a solution to the problem of the death of God and nihilism, as the Übermensch acts to create new values while still employing nihilism. The Übermensch represents a higher humanity and a higher morality, a humanistic ethic based on the belief of the free will of humans and not on God. In Zarathustra’s prologue, Nietzsche says through Zarathustra that there is no devil, God, heaven, or hell, and that by doing this, one is taking a risk by living an authentic life without God. Neitzsche believed that it was possible for anyone to become the Übermensch by freedom of the will, as humans have innate power within themselves to choose the will to power, and in Thus Spoke Zarathustra, Zarathustra himself states that the Übermensch should be a goal that humanity sets for itself.