Question

Both the proofs [for the cosmological and ontological arguments] previously cited were attempted transcendentally, i.e., independently of empirical principles. For although the cosmological proof is grounded on an experience in general, it is not carried out on the basis of any particular constitution of experience, but of pure principles of reason in relation to an existence given through empirical consciousness in general; and even this introduction is an occasion for basing itself on entirely pure concepts. Why, exactly, does Kant say that the cosmological proof is independent of empirical principles? What does he mean by empirical principles? That things exist would seem to be an empirical fact, or at least an empirical judgment. Isn't the cosmological proof an inference that includes both empirical and rational premises and so it is abductive?

Answer 1

Immanuel Kant argues that the cosmological argument for the existence of God starts with empirical data but primarily uses pure reason, rooted in innate categories of understanding, to argue for a necessary being, thus making it independent of empirical principles. Empirical principles pertain to knowledge gained from sensory experience, while the cosmological proof reaches its conclusion through an a priori process of reasoning.

Step-by-step explanation:

Kant asserts that the cosmological proof is independent of empirical principles because it does not rely on the specific constitution of experience, but on pure principles of reason. By empirical principles, Kant refers to knowledge that is derived from sensory experience. The cosmological proof does indeed start with the empirical fact that things exist but quickly moves into the realm of pure reason to argue for the existence of a necessary being.

The cosmological argument discusses the existence of the universe and its order, starting with the experience and moving towards the cause, which in this argument, is God. Kant is emphasizing the distinction between the cosmological argument's basis in experience and the ontological argument's reliance on pure reason. The latter, like Anselm's Proof, begins with the concept of God and relies solely on a priori reasoning without turning to empirical evidence. Kant's critique highlights that while the cosmological argument involves an empirical starting point, its conclusion is reached through non-empirical means, drawing on the concepts such as necessity and contingency rather than on sensory data or specific observations to arrive at the existence of a necessary being, i.e., God.

Kant suggests that although we can know of objects empirically, the categories necessary for understanding these empirical concepts—like causation and necessity—are innate and shape our experience.