An interesting facet of Platonism is that the only knowable objects are the eide, the forms. In the material universe, we are confined to "likely accounts", because they are subject to time and chance, the taint of non- being involved in becoming.
That's what E. Kant's phenomenon/noumenon divide is all about! Yet, I've personally noticed a logical paradox in Kant's vision: what's a pure phenomenon in Kant's philosophy? That is a phenomenon that doesn't refer to some underlying, transcendental reality/noumenon? Well, according to Kant himself, such a pure mirage that doesn't represent some other genuine object/reality, is a noumenon!! Paradoxical, isn't it?
Gustave, PhD at large. |
