Kant’s “Copernican Revolution” is a term that denotes a significant shift in his philosophical thoughts as captured in his work titled “Critique of Pure Reason.” The word Copernican described a shift in perspective when a polish astronomer asserted that the earth was the one revolving around the sun rather than the other way around. Like this shist in the astronomical perspective, Kant’s Copernican Revolution upended his theorem that the mind was a passive of sensory inputs. Instead, Kant argues that the mind plays a central role in shaping people’s experience of the world (Kant 156). Consequently, Kant held that the human mind organizes sensory information in a way that makes it possible for people to make sense of what they are seeing. Thus, he concluded that structures and categories of people’s minds were central to shaping their world experience. Therefore, by amending his philosophy on the role of the mind in how people experience the world, Kant took on empiricism and rationalism that downplayed the mind’s role in how people experience events around them.
Before this revolutionary change in perspective on the role of sensory organs in acquiring knowledge, rationalism, and empiricism prevailed and were the dominant thought on knowledge acquisition. Rationalists believed that knowledge originated from innate ideas and logical reasoning. In particular, they believed that certain laws of logic and mathematics were clear for all to see and thus did not need to be verified by empirical observation. They also believed that human beings have some inherent knowledge that is not dependent on one’s experience and that the knowledge is naturally occurring. On the other hand, empiricists firmly believed that knowledge came about because of sensory experiences rather than innate knowledge ideas. In addition, they believed that all knowledge is derived from human interaction with the world through their senses. In this regard, they believed that even the most basic knowledge was gained due to human interaction with their surroundings through the sensory organs. Thus, empiricism and rationalism were deeply opposed to one another in their assertion of how knowledge was gained. Later works on the subject by individuals such as Immanuel Kant attempted to reconcile these two schools of thought.
Kant’s target
Kant’s “Copernican Revolution” targeted the dominant philosophical thoughts at the time, rationalism and empiricism. Rationalists held that the origin of knowledge was innate ideas and logical reasons. To them, sensory organs, such as the mind, played a secondary role. On the other hand, empiricists asserted that knowledge was derived from sensory experience. In their wisdom, the mind was a blank slate to which experience was written. These two philosophical thoughts were the dominant thoughts before Kant’s “Copernican Revolution.” Thus, it was apparent that his work in “The Critique of Pure Reason” was directed at these philosophical thoughts. Rather than completely discredit these philosophies, his work sought to reconcile the seemingly opposed views on knowledge. He believed that the mind was not a passive receiver of sensory information (Kant 154). Rather, the mind actively shapes people’s experience of the world. Consequently, he held that the mind has innate structures that organize data into coherent experiences allowing people to make sense of what they see. Therefore, while his work did not target any philosopher, it was critical of empiricism and rationalism, which until then, had downplayed the role of the mind in shaping people’s experiences.
How Kant differentiates his view from his predecessors
While Kant sought to reconcile the differing views on knowledge held by empiricists and rationalists, his work differed from his predecessors in several ways. One of the ways in which his work differed from his predecessors is that, unlike them, he did not hold the view that reason and experience were mutually exclusive (Kant 192). Instead, he held that reason and experience were necessary for any meaningful knowledge. He believed the mind was actively arranging sensory information into coherent experiences that allowed knowledge formation. In addition, he rejected the notion that the earth was composed of substance that traditional philosophers had held. According to Kant, the earth had no reality, and substance resulted from the mind’s organization of sensory experiences (Kant 156). His views on substance were part of his broader usurpation of the traditional beliefs that emphasized metaphysical speculation. According to him, metaphysical speculation was a source of confusion and controversy (Kant 191). Thus, Kant differed from his predecessors in that he sought to reconcile empiricists and rationalists and his rejection of metaphysical speculation.
One of the things that set Immanuel Kant from his predecessors was his critique of reason. Kant appeared more self-aware of the limits of reason, unlike his predecessor, who saw it as the panacea of all knowledge. In effect, the traditionalists had held reason to unsustainable regard and saw it as the key to unlocking all mysteries in the world. However, Kant maintained that reason had its limits and could thus only operate within particular boundaries. He called these boundaries “the limits of reason” (Kant 194). Therefore, he claimed that reason could not make any meaningful claim of the world outside these limits. Thus, his awareness of the limitations of reason set him apart from his predecessors.
The problems that Kant’s views overcome
Kant’s “Copernican Revolution” overcomes several problems that until then had been prevalent. These problems include empiricism, rationalism, scepticism, and moral relativism. Until then, empiricists believed that even the most basic knowledge could only be derived from sensory experiences. In their view, the mind was a blanket space that learned with each experience. However, Kant emphasizes the central role of the mind in shaping how people perceive the world around them. On their part, rationalists believed that knowledge could only be derived from reason. In contrast, Kant emphasized that reason and experience were central to meaningful knowledge. Kant’s views also sought to overcome scepticism, a common problem with philosophical thought at the time. Sceptics argue that people could never know anything about certainty. Kant sought to undercut them by providing foundational knowledge and truth. Finally, Kant overcame the problem of moral relativism, which views moral values as subject to change from one person to another. Kant maintained that some morals were objective and rooted in reason and should apply to all people equally.
In conclusion, Kant’s “Copernican Revolution” was a fundamental shift in philosophical thought on knowledge at the time. Like the polish astronomer from whom the word “Copernican” was derived, Kant provided a new way to explain the origin of knowledge. According to him, experience and reason were complementary, while the mind played a central role in shaping how people perceived their surroundings. Kant’s view differed from previous views of rationalists and empiricists and was thus seen as targeted at them. However, rather than differ completely from empiricists and rationalists, he sought to reconcile their opposite views into one coherent perspective on how knowledge is derived.
Work Cited
Kant, Immanuel. Critique of Pure Reason. OTBE Book Publishing, 2022.