The aim of this paper is to show that there is no significant difference between knowledge and understanding in science and religion, since the epistemic approach in both these fields is idealistic. After presenting the meaning of the term ‘real’, the idealistic approach of Kant, Fichte and Schelling will be adduced and its relevance for the contemporary science will be demonstrated. Subsequently the term ‘scientific realism’ will be introduced together with some ideas proving that it should be considered as idealism sui generis.
Then some examples from the history of science will be given proving that many discoveries were preceded by an a priori idea. In the last part of the paper the human I will be depicted as the predominant ‘space’ of the religious experience. Since a human can discover God within him/herself, s/he is also able to discover God in and within the exterior world. Since, both in science and religion, knowledge and understanding originates from the I, there is no significant difference between scientific and religious approach.
Table of Contents
What is real?
The idealistic turn and approach of Kant, Fichte and Schelling
Kant’s way from things to representations
Fichte’s way from I to the Absolute I
Schelling’s way from idealism to realism and back
The significance of German idealism for science
a) Kantian approach
b) Fichtean approach
Scientific realism as idealism sui generis
Scientific discoveries made from the idealist approach
Human mind as “inner space” of science and religion
Objectives and Topics
This paper aims to demonstrate that there is no fundamental difference between the epistemic processes in science and religion, as both operate through an idealistic framework where knowledge originates from the human subject. It explores how the German idealist tradition informs modern scientific understanding and reinterprets scientific realism as a form of idealism.
- The role of the subjective "I" in shaping the phenomenal world.
- The application of Kantian, Fichtean, and Schellingian epistemology to scientific practice.
- Reinterpreting scientific realism and the "theoretical entity" as idealism sui generis.
- The relationship between the internal mind (inner space) and religious experience.
Excerpt from the Book
Kant’s way from things to representations
In the epistemology before Kant it was generally claimed that the subject, although recognizing something beyond and therefore, in a way, alien to itself, has to have certain interior “instruments,” let us call them “categories,” making this cognition possible. This view starts in the similia similibus cognoscuntur – doctrine, according to which something similar can be recognized by something similar. It can be found among the Presocratics (Anaxagoras, Empedocles, Heraclitus, Diogenes from Apollonia) described by Aristotle, in Plato and, in a way, in the Aristotelian epistemology itself, which starts with the sensual and ends in the theoretical cognition. This epistemological tradition was handed down to the Middle Ages and adopted in the classical sentence quod recipitur in modo recipientis recipitur – “everything, which is recognized, is recognized in the way of recognizing subject.” It stresses the subject’s role in the processes of cognition and indicates that the latter is possible only then, if the subject internalizes something objective. Hence, as the short historical sketch shows, cognition before Kant was never regarded as purely receptive. In the Pre-Kantian epoch, however, such categories as substance, quantity, relation, etc. were primarily found in things and secondarily in minds recognizing them. Since Kant, categories were transferred into mind, where, as independent from things, they became ways of experiencing things.
Summary of Chapters
What is real?: Defines the core issue of reality and realism in science and theology, challenging the strict separation of subject and object.
The idealistic turn and approach of Kant, Fichte and Schelling: Examines the evolution of German idealism, specifically how Kant, Fichte, and Schelling relocated the source of knowledge within the subjective "I".
The significance of German idealism for science: Applies the idealistic framework to scientific categories and the scientist's subjective role, focusing on both Kantian and Fichtean perspectives.
Scientific realism as idealism sui generis: Argues that scientific realism is inherently a "hidden" form of idealism, as unobservable entities are essentially theoretical constructs of the mind.
Scientific discoveries made from the idealist approach: Provides historical evidence showing how scientific breakthroughs often originate from an a priori idea rather than pure empirical observation.
Human mind as “inner space” of science and religion: Concludes that the human mind is the shared space where both scientific knowledge and religious experience originate, suggesting no significant epistemic difference between them.
Keywords
epistemology, realism, German idealists, scientific realism as idealism, religious experience, Kant, Fichte, Schelling, I, non-I, Wissenschaftslehre, scientific discovery, phenomenal world, idealism, subject.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the fundamental thesis of this work?
The paper argues that there is no significant difference between knowledge and understanding in science and religion because both are rooted in an idealistic epistemological approach.
What are the central thematic fields covered?
The work covers epistemology, the history of philosophy (German idealism), philosophy of science, and the intersections between theological and scientific cognitive processes.
What is the primary goal of the author?
The goal is to demonstrate that scientific realism is a form of "hidden idealism" and to establish that the human mind (or the "I") is the common space for both religious and scientific experiences.
Which scientific method is primarily discussed?
The author discusses an idealistic epistemological method, emphasizing that scientific categories are derived from human mental structures rather than being purely passive reflections of external reality.
What topics are addressed in the main body?
The main body treats the transition from pre-Kantian epistemology to German idealism, the significance of these theories for modern science (such as astronomy and quantum mechanics), and the role of the individual scientist.
Which keywords best characterize this research?
Core keywords include epistemology, realism, German idealists, idealism, scientific realism, and the subjective "I" as a space for experience.
How does the author define the "Absolute I" in the context of Fichte's philosophy?
Fichte's Absolute I represents the ontological foundation beyond individual subjectivities, serving as the source of universal and certain knowledge that ensures science is a consistent, shared enterprise.
What does the author mean by "scientific realism as idealism sui generis"?
The author argues that since we cannot directly observe many entities postulated by science (such as quarks), our "realism" regarding them is a mental construct, which aligns with the principles of idealism.
How does the author interpret the significance of "instrument epistemology" in science?
It refers to the idea that scientific tools and experimental conditions act as mediators that define what can be observed, implying that experimental data are interpreted through pre-existing theoretical frameworks.
- Citar trabajo
- Dr. Thomas Klibengajtis (Autor), 2008, Knowing God, the world and ourselves. What can the science-theology dialog learn from the German idealism today?, Múnich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/190863
