Kant: The Critique of Pure Reason
a. Preface to the second edition 1787;
b. the whole Introduction:
namely from “I. Of the difference between Pure and Empirical Knowledge” to “VII. Idea and Division of a Particular Science, under the Name of a Critique of Pure Reason”)
text available at http://www.gutenberg.org/dirs/etext03/cprrn10.txt
Journals due on April 15.
Guidance questions:
1. Which problem does Kant see in Mathematics, Natural Science (Physics) and Metaphysics (philosophy)? What does he aim to achieve?
2. How is judgment important for science? What means a priori synthetic judgment?
3. What means Copernican Turn in Kant's view of knowledge?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Samantha Jones
ReplyDeleteBoth fields both achieve the idea of synthetic that is a prior propitiation possible within traditional aesthetics and a doctrine of a transcendental analytic when Kant demonstrated an essential or a role-play by category within experience and knowledge. Space and time is one of them when it comes up to Aesthetic or Transcendental ideality within that category.To judge is to science in terms of you need to think or the possibilities if it’s even going to work. A mind must learn in order to gain this knowledge. To hear ones knowledge is not as relevant as to make and create your own pool of values. You need to see and to have experience in order to make a table of solutions or answers. To make an experiment yourself you would need to tinker your own thoughts to have experience even if irrelevant you would need to still do so for everyone has there own experience and try to push what they know or think upon another in order for there buffet of understanding knowledge itself. To buffer your knowledge you need to prove yourself of your experiments. As an example one can see another and continue to see them as they grow fond of your voice and your presents, then remove yourself from there area. That being will move itself to another area which you are at just to see if you are there and bunk at your new area. Knowledge can be an experience that can also change in time. Different events can change ones mind to think one way to another depending on the event or the gained knowledge the individual may be abandons and replaced by the new one. Ones brain is the body’s computer and always change due to the time and new enlighten of experiences gained by the doings of the mind , body and soul to the mathematical equations that are used in order to gain this prior knowledge or the area and world around you. The brain believed that this knowledge that you have experience in is correct till you have scientific evidence that that knowledge you have gained is relevant. Metaphysics, that is in terms of influence for all subsequent philosophy. A Copernican turn to be in the reality within self in favor into world of experience and knowledge. The nature can determine the nature of experience; through the bundle of principal in the mind can knowledge by being objective to come to the metaphysics as science. And body of knowledge made by mathematics and astronomy.
Courtney Brown
ReplyDeleteWhen reading kants complez and somewhat confusinf text about understanding reason its important to note a few basic ideas. kants views in this text had alot to do with rejecting the ideas of empiricism and supporting the concept of rationality, even though he states that both idead have some flaws. he states that alothough expiernce is sometimes needed to deduct a proper logical idead about a certain matter, expiernce is still a concept that stems from our minds. At one point Kant begins to speak about synthetic judgments. which can be known as judgment or ideas that are based on some prior knowledge to that idea. he startes to talk about the idea of universal mathmatics and points out a few flaws in that idead. he uses the example of 7+5=12. altough we have all been taught that this nukber combination is true. Kant states that it cant be universal because the number twelve cant be derived out of five or seven. i believe he is trying to state that pure mathmatics is immpossible because it is a syntheric idead that has been passed down. Kant then begins to talk about to idea of true knowledge. he states that there are two types of knowlege. Sensible knowledge, which deald with our sensations and the things we desire, and Logical knowledge wich deals with reason and rationality.
Kant starts by talking about a common feature in all humans which we try to understand ourselves by asking question but can't find an answer.he says that reason is our main tool of examining things and in his critique wants to know the our capacity of pure reason . he starts of with metaphysics which claims to know about reality, but but often have contradictions.he also talks about Hume's skepticism. Kant talks about a kind of knowledge which we all posses , a universal knowledge which is not based on experience. Kant also finds some problem in maths, metaphysics and science. in maths ha finds that was not based on experience which makes it a synthetic a priori knowledge ,he finds the same in science also. he says that as we are able to apply synthetic a priori knowledge,shows that pure knowledge can reveal important truths. although Kant does not use rationalist metaphysics in proving that pure reason has the capacity to prove the mysteries of the universe instead he suggest that most of what we consider real is based on our perceiving mind. kant states that the mind does not receive passive information from the senses but it processes the information it receives.
ReplyDeleteKant sees that the sciences as he observes, are based on phenomenon. These sciences are objective, they begin with intuition and then it can be turned into subjective knowledge. While metaphysics relay on a big abstract thinking, yet aren’t ran out by intuition, so it makes them empty of experimental truth. They aren’t experienced, but we can wonder only about its infinite nature.
ReplyDeleteHe divides them both, so while achieving knowledge from this two views regarding knowledge, we cannot fall into confusion, and the approach to a better conclusion can be reasonable and reliable.
Sciences relay on the ability of the mind to think rationally and apply these ideas, into a experimental ways. Realities aren’t independent of us. The perception of and object isn’t a normal reception on our mind. The perception of an object it’s rather an activity of the mind. Subject and object are constructed the one and the other by both of them. They make themselves possible. This synthetic union makes truth closer to our mind.
Kant doesn’t consider knowledge from a certain object, that which can possible gives us some truth. He says it’s otherwise, the other way around. All the respective objects from their own conditions and nature, makes possible our knowledge about something. That’s the Copernican turn. The sun doesn’t revolve around the earth. The earth revolves around the sun.
In the preface to The Critique of Pure Reason, about the densest thing I have ever attempted to read, Kant makes a very important point about mathematics; that all mathematical judgements are "synthetic" and rational, as opposed to empirical/analytic. He says this is because they carry with them necessity, which cannot be derived from experience, sort of making the point that 3 + 3 = a sum is different from the statement 3 + 3 = 6. He then implies that the method for natural science is synthetic as opposed to analytic because one is ultimately not actually testing an infinite number of situations to verify. Henceforth, he concludes with the statement that all metaphysics, at least in intention, is entirely synthetic in its propositions; a sentence that I am having trouble grasping, along with most everything else in this unbelievably dense text.
ReplyDeleteWhat is the theory of induction that he continues to reference? Is he trying to do away with the distinction between rationalism and empiricism, or trying to strengthen it? Why does he use 8 words for every 1? I am lost.
Kant’s aim is to determine the limits and scope of pure reason. That is, he wants to know what reason alone can determine without the help of the senses or any other faculties. Metaphysicians make grand claims about the nature of reality based on pure reason alone, but these claims often conflict with one another. Furthermore, Kant is prompted by Hume’s skepticism to doubt the very possibility of metaphysics. Kant draws two important points between a priori and a posteriori knowledge and between analytic and synthetic judgments. A posteriori knowledge is the particular knowledge we gain from experience, and a priori knowledge is the necessary and universal knowledge we have independent of experience, such as our knowledge of mathematics. In an analytic judgment, the concept in the predicate is contained in the concept in the subject. In a synthetic judgment, the predicate concept contains information not contained in the subject concept, and so a synthetic judgment is informative rather than just definitional. Typically, we associate a posteriori knowledge with synthetic judgments and a priori knowledge with analytic judgments. Kant argues that mathematics and the principles of science contain synthetic a priori knowledge. For example, “7 + 5 = 12” is a priori because it is a necessary and universal truth we know independent of experience, and it is synthetic because the concept of “12” is not contained in the concept of “7 + 5.” Kant argues that the same is true for scientific principles such as, “for every action there is an equal an opposite reaction”: because it is universally applicable, it must be a priori knowledge, since a posteriori knowledge only tells us about particular experiences.
ReplyDeleteKant: The Critique of Pure Reasoning was difficult to interpret, according to the passage, Kant stated that knowledge is considered a science. When dealing with science we go through a well thought-out scientific process, to conclude with answers. We go through the same process when dealing with knowledge, various paths of learning to arrive at results. Now when dealing with logical science, we make judgements on the subject due to prior knowledge. I would say this is a form of empiricism. We commonly base our knowledge on experiences in order to advance what we already know. Kant uses mathematics as a key example. The hint is not to study the subject, but by understand the concepts you begin to realize that it already exist in the mind. With natural science or physics, reason only determines what is produced, leading more knowledge that follows. We being to understand this science by expanding what we learn. Metaphysics (philosophy) is applied to the concept of intuition. Kant says that reason comes to a stand when dealing with priori perceptions, people do more of experimenting to confirm intuition or pure reasoning.
ReplyDeleteKant sees in Mathematics, Natural Science(Physics) and Metaphysics(Philosophy)analytical propositions tied to the principle of contrdiction. For Kant we must go behind these conceptions by having recourse to an intuition. It is impossible to turn and twist our conceptions without using our intuition. For him the transcental philosophy is the idea of a science for which the Critique of Pure reason must sketch the whole plan architectonically for the validity and stability of all parts which enter into the building.Is Kant's idea good enough?
ReplyDelete