PHILOSOPHY OF KANT (Core – 2) PHL1C02
STUDY MATERIAL FIRST SEMESTER CORE COURSE
MA PHILOSOPHY CBCSS (2019 ADMISSION)
UNIVERSITY OF CALICUT SCHOOL OF DISTANCE EDUCATION Calicut University P.O, Malappuram, Kerala, India 673 635.
190402 School of Distance Education
UNIVERSITY OF CALICUT SCHOOL OF DISTANCE EDUCATION
STUDY MATERIAL FIRST SEMESTER
MA PHILOSOPHY (2019 ADMISSION)
CORE COURSE : PHLIC02 : PHILOSOPHY OF KANT
Prepared by : Sri. Manoj K.R, Assistant Professor on contract SDE, University of Calicut.
Scrutinized by : Dr. Sheeja O.K, Assistant Professor of Philosophy, Sree Kerala Varma College, Thrissur.
PHLIC02 - Philosophy of Kant Page 2 School of Distance Education
PHLIC02 - Philosophy of Kant Page 3 School of Distance Education
Unit 1
1) Introduction 2) The distinction between Pure and Empirical Knowledge 3) Need of a science of Apriori 4) Distinction between Analytic and Synthetic judgements 5) Synthetic Apriori judgements 6) The General problem of pure reason 7) The Idea and Division of the Critique of pure reason
Unit – II 1) Transcendental Aesthetic – Introduction 2) Definition a) Sensibility b) Intuition c) Sensation d) Representation e) Appearance f) Phenomena g) Noumena h) Matter of Appearance i) Form of Appearance j)Pure or Apriori Intuition k) Empirical Intuition
3) Space - Metaphysical Exposition and Transcendental Exposition 4) Time - Metaphysical Exposition and Transcendental Exposition 5) General observation on Transcendental Aesthetic
Unit – III Transcendental Logic – Introduction 1) Logic – Division of Logic in to Analytic and Dialectic 2) Transcendental Logic, Division in to Transcendental Analytic and Transcendental Dialectic
Unit – IV
1) Transcendental Analytic – Introduction 2) Analytic of Concepts 3) A clue to the discovery of all pure concepts of understanding 4) Logical Employment of Understanding 5) Pure concepts of Understanding or Categories 6) Table of Categories 7) Transcendental deduction of the Categories.
PHLIC02 - Philosophy of Kant Page 4 School of Distance Education
UNIT - I
1.1 Introduction
Immanuel Kant was born in the Prussian town of Konigsberg on 22 April 1724.Konisberg is situated on the Baltic sea at the North Eastern edge of German speaking lands. In Kant’s time Konisberg was a prosperous city. Kant grew up in modest circumstances. His father was a Harness maker, whose ancestors came from wider Konigsberg region. He dedicated his life entirely to his philosophical work. The Critique of pure reason was published in 1781.One of Kant’s central problem was regarding the status of metaphysics, if it is to be raised to the status of knowledge, the uncertainties and contradictions in the thoughts of earlier thinkers is to be resolved.
There was dispute regarding the origin of ideas since the time Greeks. Plato considered knowledge is derived from innate ideas, these unconscious ideas was imprinted in the soul from the time of birth. Through reasoning these ideas are brought to consciousness, hence yielding knowledge of necessary eternal forms. Innate knowledge is independent of sense experience though recollection could be aided by sense experience. Rationalist thinkers of the modern period like Descartes, Spinoza and Leibniz held versions of this theory.
The empiricist philosophers held a different view, they did not regard any knowledge to be derivable other than from sense experience. John Locke, Berkeley, David Hume adhered to such a view. David Hume considered all simple ideas are faint copies of impressions and complex ideas was constructed out of imagination. Some empiricists even rejected general ideas. Empiricists analysed thinking in terms of associative functions of memory and imagination also they failed to recognize between general concepts and sense impressions. For rationalists it was impossible to account for innate knowledge being applicable to the world without invoking divine benevolence. Understanding for rationalists is like a mystical instantaneous intuition. For Kant neither rationalism nor empiricism provides satisfactory account of the relation of the intellect and the senses. According to Kant intellect has no ideas that are independent of its operation in experience. Kant ushers a new analysis of understanding to remedy the defects of both empiricists and rationalists.
Kant's philosophy may be termed a synthesis between rationalism and empiricism. Kant
PHLIC02 - Philosophy of Kant Page 5 School of Distance Education
accepts the rationalist claim that pure reason is capable of genuine knowledge but denies that knowledge of things in themselves is possible through pure reason. He takes the empiricist claim that knowledge is based in experience but through sense experience we cannot infer universal and necessary knowledge. His epistemological theory of knowledge is called transcendental idealism, according to Kant mind of the knower makes active contribution to the objects before us, the knowledge we already have through experience makes us easier to acquire newer knowledge. The two sources of our knowledge are minds receptive capacity(sensibility) and mind’s conceptual capacity(understanding).No experience of objects are possible which are not placed in space and time.
The mistake metaphysician do is they reason beyond things that are beyond the metaphysician’s grasp. This results in contradiction. The role of reason is to understand and to limit itself. The role of the perceiving mind is brought to the centre. Mind actively shapes and makes sense of the information it gets through the senses. It is because mind arranges this information in temporal progression that all experience happen in time. It is because mind thinks in terms of cause and effect that we could say that one event follows another event. According to Kant space and time are pure intuitions of faculty of sensibility, the pure intuition of faculty of understanding are the concepts of physics such as causation and inertia. It is through intuitions of space and time we can have knowledge of mathematics. Our intuition of successive moments of in time account for number sense and intuition of space accounts for geometrical knowledge. It is the faculty of understanding which organizes experiences into concepts such as causation which forms the principle of natural science.
From metaphysical speculation of nature of reality to critical examination of nature of thinking and perceiving mind, this shift is termed the Copernican revolution in philosophy. Time, space and causation are the forms which mind gives to experience and not the content of external reality. Kant found the doctrines of traditional metaphysics was insufficiently grounded speculation on matters which lay beyond the reach of the senses and therefore eluded confirmation as well as disconfirmation through experience. Rational methods are applied in the investigation in to the nature and attributes of God, the existence and presuppositions of human freedom and immortality of the human soul. There was proofs and demonstration even from the time of Plato regarding the existence of God. The conflicting positions regarding the composition of the world, one view that world is composed of discrete elementary particles and the other that it is composed of infinitely
PHLIC02 - Philosophy of Kant Page 6 School of Distance Education
divisible parts. It is equally possible to demonstrate both finite and infinite extension of the world in space and time. Kant found that both this positions with seemingly valid proof pointed to deficiency at the heart of metaphysics. Kant sought to uncover the illusion underlying the use of the intellect in matters of metaphysics, he thought it might be due to a erroneous basic assumption or fallacious general procedure.
Hence, he sought that there was strict limitation to space and time, restricted itself to the world of senses. He found that it was due to erroneous application of space and time which is only applicable to the senses, to the world of understanding on which they do not have bearing. The distinction between the world of sense and the world of understanding was regarded as two different cognitive abilities of the human mind. The two forms of cognition were different in kind and that no amount of working over sensible cognition could yield non- sensible cognition. Metaphysics should be based on the use of intellect totally independent from sensible cognition (world of sense), for metaphysics to fit the rank of other subjects like Mathematics or Physics.
According to Kant metaphysics has fallen in to principal errors. Firstly, the attempt to discover the nature of the soul by philosophical reflection which is called rational psychology. Secondly, Rational theology is an attempt to discover the proofs of the existence of God and truths about his nature by philosophical reasoning. Thirdly, In Rational cosmology conflicting views appear within metaphysics and conflicting arguments appear to be equally valid. Kant states that these conflicting arguments are part of reasoning process. Kant found that the whole of metaphysics rests on shaky foundation and it will continue until a full enquiry in to the working of reason can be undertaken. Previous philosophers have undertaken dogmatic assumptions regarding metaphysics, he states that through our intellectual powers are capable of making discoveries which is the object of metaphysics. Further he insists till an inquiry in to the nature of our reasoning powers is done our investigation in to metaphysics must be withheld.
According to Kant it was David Hume who woke him from his dogmatic slumbers. Kant states it was Hume who first pointed in a philosophical way the difficulty in achieving a result on metaphysics. David Hume stated that it was not by reason alone instead through experience that we have knowledge of cause and effect. According to Kant David Hume’s thought dealt with cause and effect only, it took no account of other pure concepts of understanding. In Kant’s
PHLIC02 - Philosophy of Kant Page 7 School of Distance Education
view, to know what caused any change to take place needs experience, but we know apriori that something must have caused it.
So I first tried whether Hume’s objection could be represented universally, and I soon found that the concept of the connection of cause and effect is by no means the only one by which connections between things are thought apriori by the understanding; indeed that metaphysics consists of nothing else whatever I tried to make certain of the number of these concepts, and when I had succeeded in doing this in the way I wished namely from a single principle, I proceeded the deduction of them. I now assure that they are not, as Hume had feared, deduced from experience, but have their origin in pure understanding. This deduction, which seemed impossible to my sagacious predecessor, and had never even occurred to anyone except him, although everyone confidently us ed these concepts without asking on what their objective validity is grounded- this deduction has first to establish the possibility of metaphysics. Having succeeded in solving Hume’s problem not merely in a special case, but with regard to the whole faculty of pure reason, I could take sure although still only slow steps towards determining at last the whole extent of pure reason completely and according to universal principles, in its boundaries as well as in content. This is what metaphysics needs in order to construct its system according to a sure plan(Kant,Prol.IV 260)
Kant found that the concepts are not derived from experience but from pure understanding, this deduction according to Kant is the most important thing undertaken in metaphysics, because this deduction has to first establish the possibility of metaphysics. Metaphysics is not like empirical knowledge, if it exists is apriori knowledge
Logic, mathematics and physics have acquired the name of sciences, he says what makes it capable to call it science. He further states that these disciplines use apriori judgements in a philosophically justified way. Mathematics and Physics yield synthetic apriori knowledge, and so yielding synthetic apriori knowledge is a necessary condition for the possibility of science. Similarly, this is what metaphysics has to do if it were to yield any knowledge at all.
Some of the important works of Immanuel Kant are given below – Critique of pure reason (1781) Prolegomena to Any Future Metaphysics (1783)
PHLIC02 - Philosophy of Kant Page 8 School of Distance Education
Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals (1785)
Metaphysical Foundations of Natural Science (1786)
Critique of pure reason (1787)
The Critique of Practical Reason
(1788) Critique of Judgment (1790)
1.2 The distinction between Pure and Empirical Knowledge The knowledge, content of which includes nothing empirical is pure apriori knowledge. Empirical knowledge is that obtained from experience, apriori knowledge that which is obtained independently of experience. A person can observe and find that water turns to ice at low temperatures, here he empirically gets knowledge of it. But a person has apriori knowledge that water turning to ice has a cause, we can know apriori that every alteration has a cause, but for Kant this is not pure apriori knowledge. Because concept of alteration in derived from experience. Alteration is also derived from experience, but anything that falls under this concept has a cause which is independent of experience. If k = l and l = m then k= m is pure apriori knowledge.
According to Kant, even if cognition starts with experience but it does not mean it arises from it. There is a question which remains that whether there is a cognition which is independent of all impressions of the senses. One calls such a cognition apriori. While the empirical ones is called aposteriori, which have their sources in experience. Those cognitions are called pure which have nothing empirical intermixed with it.
1.3 Need of a Science of Apriori
Kant found that the whole of metaphysics rests on shaky foundation and it will continue until full a full enquiry in to the working of reason can be undertaken. The previous thinkers had uncertainties and contradictions regarding the status of metaphysics and Kant found that these issues must be resolved for metaphysics to become a genuine science. What Kant had proposed is that instead of dogmatically assuming what previous thinkers had did that through our intellectual powers we can get to know the objects of metaphysics, he has a critical approach saying that firstly a full enquiry regarding our reasoning powers is to be found.
PHLIC02 - Philosophy of Kant Page 9 School of Distance Education
Further he insists till an inquiry in to the nature of our reasoning powers is done our investigation in to metaphysics must be withheld.
Metaphysics, even if we look upon it as having hitherto failed in all its endeavour, is yet, owing to the nature of human reason, a quite indispensable science, and ought to contain apriori synthetic knowledge. (from the text Critique of pure reason, trans. Norman Kemp Smith)
Kant views that metaphysics rests on shaky foundation, to overcome this problem a full inquiry into the working of reason has to be undertaken. So what is needed is a critical approach rather than a dogmatic one. Suitability of our reasoning powers for metaphysical task should be enquired. Mathematics and Physics yield synthetic apriori knowledge, and so yielding synthetic apriori knowledge is a necessary condition for the possibility of science. Similarly this is what metaphysics has to do if it were to yield any knowledge at all.
The knowledge, content of which includes nothing empirical is pure apriori knowledge. Empirical knowledge is that obtained from experience, apriori knowledge that which is obtained independently of experience. Logic, mathematics and physics have acquired the name of sciences, he says what makes it capable to call it science. He further states that these disciplines use apriori judgements in a philosophically justified way. Mathematics and Physics yield synthetic apriori knowledge.
Kants intention of showing human freedom is compatible with truth of modern science. Foundations for certainity of modern science and the possibility of human freedom is being laid in the critique of pure reason. Kant’s position laid claim to undermine the agreements of traditional metaphysics, also establish a scientific metaphysics of his own. This scientific metaphysics establishes apriori , but limits it to experience of ordinary and extends it to natural science.
1.4 Distinction between Analytic and Synthetic judgement
Kant defines analytic and synthetic in terms of what is thought or judged in the act of thinking a certain concept rather than in terms of what is asserted. In a simple subject predicate judgement, there are two ways in which subject predicate relation may be thought. Either the predicate in contained in the concept, or the predicate stands outside the subject- concept, even though it is
PHLIC02 - Philosophy of Kant Page 10 School of Distance Education
of course connected with it. The former is called analytic judgement, the latter is synthetic. It can add to our knowledge, for the connection between subject and the predicate cannot be known by analysis of subject concept alone.
All bachelors are unmarried
Here the subject and predicate are Identical, hence tautologous, is an analytic statement.
All bodies are heavy
Here heaviness is connected with the concept of body, though it is connected with it, it is not contained in it and hence it is called a synthetic statement. Here two different two different concepts are combined in thought. In the case of analytic judgement, left and right side of the copula contains either the same concept or left side may be a part of right side. So Kant classified judgements as analytic and synthetic, which are the characteristics of various sciences. According to Kant knowledge is attained when there is joint functioning of sensibility and intellect. It is the union of intuition and concepts. Intuition is the product of sensibility and Concept is the product of understanding
One of the important phrases of Kant –
Thoughts without content are empty; and intuitions without concepts are blind Kant considered the function separately in the text critique of pure reason entitled, ‘Transcendental Aesthetic’(from the Greek aesthesis = sensation) And ‘Transcendental logic’ In the Aesthetic, Kant does not give a psychological account of how our senses work; instead regarding the principles according to which material provided to the sensibility is necessarily ordered in the structure of sensation, not its content.
1.5 Synthetic Apriori judgements
If we think about what could possibly be the objects of non- empirical, pure cognition or of non empirical judgements. Why should we assume that there are judgements of this type?
PHLIC02 - Philosophy of Kant Page 11 School of Distance Education
According to Kant there are judgements that tell us way things are, such that these judgements are necessary and absolutely certain and hence valid totally independent of experience. Kant calls such judgements ‘synthetic’ and ‘apriori’. In Kant’s view there are propositions in mathematics, in the concept of the triangle the sum of internal angles equals 180, also when sum of 5 and 7 equals 12.In both cases(geometry and arithmetic) it is pure intuition of spatial and temporal relations that guide joining of one concept with another.
Natural science contain apriori synthetic judgements as principles. (from the text, Kant,Critique of pure reason,trans. Norman Kemp Smith)
Natural science(Physics) contains within itself synthetic apriori judgements as principles, if we examine certain propositions, eg:-In all alterations of the corporeal world the quantity of matter remains unaltered also In all communications of motion effect and counter effect should always be equal.
So Kant sees the possibility of metaphysics to investigate in to a wider framework the reach of our cognitive powers independent of experience. He states that the judgements independent of experience can be judgements about objects of experience. The non- empirical mode of cognition does not imply commitment to non-empirical objects of such cognition. This highlights one of the important crucial aspects of the possibility of synthetic apriori knowledge.
Metaphysics, even if we look upon it as having hitherto failed in all its endeavour, is yet, owing to the nature of human reason, a quite indispensable science and ought to contain apriori synthetic knowledge.(from the text,Kant,Critique of pure reason, trans. Norman Kemp Smith)
The judgements of experience based upon experience is called synthetic judgements aposteriori. Instead Synthetic apriori judgements could be judgements about what makes possible experience and its objects- judgements regarding the necessary conditions of all experience and its objects. One should not confuse the meaning of the word transcendental with the word transcendent, transcendent usually means going beyond experience. The word transcendental has different meaning based on the context, according to Kant the word transcendental is characterised as the
PHLIC02 - Philosophy of Kant Page 12 School of Distance Education
necessary conditions of cognitions. Kant says, “I call all cognition transcendental that is
occupied not so much with objects but rather with our mode of cognition of objects in so far as this is to be possible a priori” (A11/B25) According to Kant ‘Transcendental’ means the Non- empirical conditions of the empirical and set of terminologically that which lies at the root of all experience from that which it is
transcendent and lies beyond all experience1.
Transcendental idealism refers to the limitation of possible cognition to possible objects of experience, or the view that in the final analysis, every object of our cognition is only
appearance or a representation in our mind that has no existence independent of us2. We are unable to have cognition of ‘things in themselves’.
Logic, mathematics and physics have acquired the name of sciences, he says what makes it capable to call it science. He further states that these disciplines uses apriori judgements in a philosophically justified way. Mathematics and Physics yield synthetic apriori knowledge, and so yielding synthetic apriori knowledge is a necessary condition for the possibility of science. Similarly this is what metaphysics has to do if it were to yield any knowledge at all.
1.6 General problem of pure reason
The previous thinkers had uncertainties and contradictions regarding the status of metaphysics and Kant found that these issues must be resolved for metaphysics to become a genuine science. What Kant had proposed is that instead of dogmatically assuming what previous thinkers had did that through our intellectual powers we can get to know the objects of metaphysics, he has a critical approach saying that firstly a full enquiry regarding our reasoning powers is to be found. Kant acknowledged that it was David Hume who aroused him from his Dogmatic Slumber. According to Hume, reason alone cannot demonstrate that a particular effect is the result of a given cause. It is through experience that cause effect relation is discovered. So according to him reason cannot establish the apriori connections. Apriori knowledge is that which is obtained independently of experience.
PHLIC02 - Philosophy of Kant Page 13 School of Distance Education
Just like the knowledge provided by Mathematics and Physics are Synthetic apriori, so the necessary condition of possibility of any science depends on possibility of knowledge being synthetic apriori. So this also is what metaphysics yield to. So in the text Critique of pure reason, the section Transcendental Aesthetic and Transcendental Analytic , a firm foundation is provided for Mathematics and Physics based upon possibility of synthetic apriori judgements. In Transcendental Dialectic, the objects outside the reach of the senses we cannot make synthetic apriori judgements, therefore explanation by traditional philosophers on the problems God, Freedom and immortality should fail.
1.7 Idea of the Division of Critique of pure reason
Pure reason is that which contains the principles for cognising something apriori, hence an organon of pure reason would be sum total of all those principles in accordance which all pure cognitions can be acquired and brought about. A system of pure reason could be created by exhausitive application of such an organon.
Such a science would have to contain both analytic as well as synthetic apriori cognitions, what is required is to take analysis only as far as necessary for providing insight into the principles of apriori synthesis in their entire scope. It is better to call it a transcendental critique since it is correction of cognitions than their amplification themselves and it means to supply worth or worthlessness of all cognitions apriori which is the concern.
Our object here is not of things which is inexhaustible but understanding which judges about the nature of things.'Transcendental philosophy is here the idea of a science,for which the critique of pure reason is to outline the entire plan architectonically, i.e., from principles," with a full guarantee for the completeness and certainty of all the components that comprise this edifice. It is the system of all principles of pure reason’.
Chief concern of division of such a science is that apriori cognitions be entirely pure or no concepts is entered in to it which is empirical. The division of this science from general viewpoint, then it must contain first a Doctrine of Elements and second Doctrine of methods. Each of these parts have sub divisions, grounds of which cannot yet be expounded.
PHLIC02 - Philosophy of Kant Page 14 School of Distance Education
The division of “Doctrine of the elements” is in to two main parts, the transcendental Aesthetic and Transcendental Logic, The transcendental Aesthetic concerns the apriori contributions of our forms of sensibility, namely space and time, to our knowledge the second of which considers the apriori contribution of the intellect both genuine and spurious to our knowledge. General science is basic science of forms of thought and transcendental logic, being the basic science of basic forms for the thought of objects(A50-51/B74-82) The transcendental logic is sub divided into ‘transcendental analytic’ and ‘transcendental Dialectic ’ The transcendental Analytic is divided in to two
i) Analytic of Concepts
ii) Analytic of Principles
The first of which argues for universal and necessary validity of pure concepts of understanding of the categories such as substance and causation. The analytic of Principles argues for the validity of fundamental principles of empirical judgement employing those categories. Transcendental dialectic is the spurious attempt of reason working independently of sensibility to provide metaphysical insight in to things as they are in themselves.
Transcendental dialectic is also divided into two bodies,
i) On concepts of pure reason
ii) Dialectical inferences of pure reason
Here there is explanation of how ideas of metaphysical entities such as soul, world, God can be generated from pure reason, also the pattern of inferences which are valid within the limits of human sensibility is extended beyond the limit to prove the ideas of soul, world, God. In the dialectical inferences of pure reason, the divisions of transcendental analytic- Analytic of concepts and Analytic of principles is combined with the main part of the dialectic. Now there will be replication in traditional ie., concepts, judgements and inferences. It is this structure which Kant which provides sound principles which (concepts of pure understanding applied to forms of sensibility) is the heart of Kantian critical metaphysics. But here the inferences of pure reason must respect the limits of sensibility, otherwise it will lead to metaphysical illusion.
PHLIC02 - Philosophy of Kant Page 15 School of Distance Education
The three sections into which inferences are divided are – i) Paralogisms of Pure reason ii) Antinomy of Pure reason iii) Ideal of Pure reason which expose metaphysically fallacious arguments about the nature of the soul, about the size and origin of the world as a whole, and about the existence of God, respectively.
It is through demolition of the special metaphysics of rational psychology, cosmology and theology that Kant criticizes dogmatic metaphysics based on pure reason. He replaces it with constructive doctrine of his own transcendental analytic. And finally in the “Doctrine of the method” there are four divisions, they are - Discipline, Canon, Architectonic and History of Pure Reason Here the consequences of demolition of traditional metaphysics along with reconstruction of some of its parts is given.
PHLIC02 - Philosophy of Kant Page 16 School of Distance Education
Unit – II
2.1 Transcendental Aesthetic
In the transcendental aesthetic Kant states the importance of the two pure forms of intuition space and time which are part of subjects sensibility which are source of synthetic apriori knowledge of mathematics and mechanics. Kant also states the importance of Things in themselves which cannot be known by the human subject.
Here the sensibility is examined to understand whether it contributes to apriori knowledge to experience. So inorder to determine it, sensibility is to be seperated from intellect. According to Kant Transcendental Aesthetic is foremost the science of all principles of apriori sensibility. A distinction is made between lower order capacity of sensibility and higher order of intellect and imagination. The lower order is of the capacity to receive impression while the higher order process this data. The data is given through the senses and sensibility is considered a passive receptivity rather than an active faculty. While the process of intellect is spontaneous. The term intuition for Kant designates both a kind of representation and the process by which subjects acquire them. As a representation, an intuition is a cognition through which the subject is immediately related to an object (A19/B33)As far as subject senses objects present to it intuition takes place as a cognitive process.
Intuition yields information of some existing state of affairs while thought is not so. The basic representation required for thinking is a concept (Begriff ), which, as Kant tells us, is produced by the understanding A19/B33) The detailed analysis of concepts is given in the transcendental analytic. According to Kant, for a concept to function as a cognition of an object, it must ultimately relate to sensible intuition. So the original content of all cognitive thought is supplied by sensible intuition.
“That representation, however, which can only be given through a single object, is an intuition.”(A32/B47–8)Intuitions differ from concepts as representations of particulars, or singular representations, differ from general representations. General representations only represent the properties of the individual hence the representation is only partial. Data about
PHLIC02 - Philosophy of Kant Page 17 School of Distance Education
particulars is provided by sensibility, general features are thought through. Instead of the suggestion in the Aesthetic that humans can conciously represent objects by intuition alone. It might be better to say sensibility supplies the intuitive idea for representing objects. But this data prior to all intellectual processing is not yet a representation of which we are concious.
According to Kant, it is the apriori elements of sensibility which is the concern of the Aesthetic A question that remains is whether sensation is a mental state or state of perceiver's body At B44(KRV) he refers to “the sensations of colors,sounds, and warmth, which, however, since they are merely sensations and not intuitions, do not in themselves allow any object to be cognized. ”Kant has used sensation here as concious experience. Falkenstein points to kants view of sensation as ordered and placed in space and time(A20/B34) as a claim for sensation being states of body. Since they are ordered spatially they must have physical states. There is good reason to think that secondary qualities are physical states of the perceiver than the qualities we conciously experience. It means according to Kant every sense has a determinate degree of receptivity for sensations.
Kant defines experience as whatever is given in sensible intuition. Kant's critical philosophy emphasise that knowledge is only of appearances and not of things in themselves. The empirical object that we experience through sensible data of intuition is termed appearance. According to Kant,the apriori which lies in the mind are forms of space and time,systems of relations in which we receive sensations through the data given in contact with objects. There are certain conceptual schemes for ordering and relating the appearances given in sensibility. Whether it is sensibility or the intellect which provides the form of experience is a system for ordering and relating some content, which functions as matter relative to that form. From the critical philosophy one could find that knowledge is about appearances rather than things in themselves and here importance of the mind in appearances is brought to the forefront. Kant also states that these appearances have objective features too. The empirical object that we experience through sensible object of intuition is called sensation.
Transcendental Aesthetics foremost is a science of apriori sensibility, firstly sensibility is isolated from what understanding thinks through concepts and what remains is only empirical intuition. In the second stage there is detachment from sensation and what remains is only pure intuition and the mere form of appearances. This is what sensibility can make available apriori.
PHLIC02 - Philosophy of Kant Page 18 School of Distance Education
There are two pure forms of sensible intuitions, space and time as principles of apriori cognition. Objects are given to us through intuitions and thought through understanding, from this arise concepts. All thoughts whether directly or indirectly must be related to intuition thus in our case to sensibility.
‘Both may be pure or empirical , when there is no mingling of sensation with representation, they are pure. Sensation may be entitled the material of sensible knowledge. Pure intuition therefore contains only the form under which something is intuited; the pure concept only the form of the thought of an object in general. Pure intuition or pure concepts alone are possible apriori, empirical intuitions and empirical concepts only aposteriori.’(from the text,Critique of pure reason, trans.Norman Kemp Smith)
The effect of an object upon capacity for representation in so far we are affected with it is called sensation. The intuition which the object is related to the sensation is called empirical. Undetermined object of empirical intuition is called appearance. All thoughts must be related to intuitions in one way or another, since there is no other way in which objects can be given to us. The effect of an object on the capacity of representation, in so far we are affected by it is called sensation. The intuition which is related to the object through sensation is called empirical. The appearance which corresponds to sensation is its matter, the manifold of appearances is intuited as ordered in certain relations is called form of appearance. Matter of appearance is only aposteriori, but the form of its appearance is apriori. All representations which are free of sensations is termed pure representations. When manifold of appearances is intuited in certain relations, there are apriori sensibility of pure form of relations of these appearances.
2.2 Definitions
a) Sensibility -
It is the human capacity to intuit objects. Human sensibility having two modes one outer and other inner. Outer comprises the sense organs which intuits things distinct from the mind and reflective inner sense which intuits our own mental state.In both forms sensibility is passive. The capacity for receiving representation through the mode in which we are affected by objects, is entitled sensibility. Objects are given to us by means of sensibility, and it alone yields as
PHLIC02 - Philosophy of Kant Page 19 School of Distance Education
intuitions. Without sensibility no object would be given to us, without understanding no object would be thought
b)Intuition –
An intuition is the kind of representation in which the knower immediately apprehends a “given” or existing state of affairs. More precisely, through intuition we are given a manifold of sensible data for representing whatever exists. Kant designates intuition as both the kind of representation and the process by which subjects acquire them. Intuition is a representation in which existing state of affairs is given to the subject, here it is a cognition through which subject is immediately related to the object. As a cognitive process intuition takes place when the subject senses the object present to it. In whatever way and through whatever means a cognition may relate to objects, that through which it relates immediately to them, and at all thought as a means is directed as an end, is intuition. Intuition and concepts constitute therefore, the elements of all our knowledge, so that element of all our knowledge, so that neither concepts without an intuition in some way representing to them, nor intuition without concepts can yield knowledge.’
c) Sensation –
Sensation may be entitled the material of sensible knowledge. According to Kant sensation may be defined as the effect of an object on the capacity for representation in so far as we are affected by it.
d) Representation – The representation of a body in intuition contains merely the appearance of something in the way we are affected with it. This receptivity of our cognitive faculty is called sensibility. And this is world apart from the cognition of object in itself. The apprehension of the manifold in appearance of a house which stands before me is successive. The house is a representation the transcendental object of which is unknown.
e) Appearance –
All intuitive representations in which we are conscious are appearances. The undetermined object of an empirical intuition is called appearance. Appearances contain
PHLIC02 - Philosophy of Kant Page 20 School of Distance Education
in addition to intuition the matter for some object in general; they contain that is to say, the real of sensation as merely subjective representation, which gives us only the conciousness that the subject is affected, and which we relate to an object in general.
f) Phenomena –
Certain objects are called appearances, beings of sense, they are intuited from their constitution itself. Appearances, to the extent that as objects they are thought in accordance with the unity of the categories, are called phenomena.
g) Noumena –
A thing that is not to be thought as object of the senses, but rather as a thing in itself. It can be called a concept that limits sensibility. It is not a special intelligible object of understanding; the understanding to which it will remain will be a problem; namely cognizing its object not discursively through categories instead through non sensible intuition which we cannot least represent. Intellectual intuition lies outside our faculty of cognition, no use of categories can reach beyond the boundaries of object of experience, beings of sense correspond to beings of understanding , but there could be beings of understanding to which our sensible faculty have no relation at all, concepts of understanding being forms of thought for sensible intuition cannot reach there.
h) Matter of Appearance –
According to Kant “That in the appearances which corresponds to sensation, I call its matter." The undetermined object of an empirical intuition is called appearance. The matter of all appearance is only given to us a posteriori, but its form must all lie ready for it in the mind apriori, and can therefore be considered separately from all sensation.
i) Form of Appearance –
According to Kant “That in the appearances which corresponds to sensation, I call its matter." That which allows the manifold of appearance to be ordered in certain relations is called the form of appearance. The matter of all appearance is only given to us aposteriori, but its form must all lie ready for it in the mind apriori, and can therefore be considered separately from all sensation.
PHLIC02 - Philosophy of Kant Page 21 School of Distance Education
j) Pure or Apriori Intuition –
Pure intuition therefore contains only the form under which something is intuited; the pure concept only the form of the thought of an object in general. Pure intuition or pure concepts alone are possible apriori, empirical intuitions and empirical concepts only aposteriori.
k) Empirical intuition – If sensation is mixed to representation it is empirical. May be called data of possible experience. The objects are given to us by means of sensibility, the effect of an object on the capacity for representation, insofar as we are affected by it, is sensation. That intuition which is related to the object through sensation is called empirical.
2.3 On Space and Time
According to Kant Human sensibility contain two pure forms of intuition, space and time which form the basis of synthetic apriori cognitions of Mathematics and Physics. The necessity and universality of these sciences are accountable to the subject since it is the subject which contribute to these forms.Kant before presenting his own theory of space and time, presents absolute and relational theory space and time.In the absolute theory of space and time, space and time are considered as real containers of spatial and temporal objects. Here space and time are real and objective. They exist independently of things occupying them. It is from the spatial and temporal position the objects occupy, that the spatial and temporal relations among objects are derived. It means even if perceivers or objects do not exist, absolute space and time could exist.
The next theory is the relational theory, here space and time are merely systems of relation whose existence depends upon the prior existence of both perceivers and the objects or elements so related. Leibniz and Berkeley who adhered to this view criticized absolute theory as incoherent, since it entertains the existence of real entities that are not themselves substances. For Relationists, it is from properties and relations of metaphysical substances that spatial and temporal relation among things are constructed. Hence space and time are constructed through the mental processes involved in representing existing things. Here space and time are ideal and subjective also empty space and time do not exist. And the next theory is Kant's own which states space and time are pure forms of human
PHLIC02 - Philosophy of Kant Page 22 School of Distance Education
intuition. This theory denies that space and time are absolute or real as things in themselves and also denies they are derived from prior experience of non spatiotemporal things. Even though there is rejection of both absolute and relational theories by Kant, still his theory incorporate some elements of both. On the one side Kant accepts the position that space and time are logically independent of the objects they contain on the other side he does not admit that space and time are independent of human perceiver. Kant does not admit the idea that space and time are constructed from relations of experienced substances.
There are two frameworks, or two pure sensible intuition in which our actual sensations occur, namely space and time, one is outer sense and the other inner. Space is not an empirical concept derived from our experience of things, outside us. There can be no particular space falling under the general concept of space- there can only be one, all embracing space. It is not only empirical; it is not discursive nor conceptual either.
When we say W is to the left of V, we have already presuppose some idea of space. We cannot imagine the non existence of space although we can think it as non existence of objects. Our apprehension of space is in fact based on pure and apriori intuition not empirical intuition. Our capacity for receiving sensations from objects outside us is so ordered that these objects are always perceived by as extended in space. Space being a necessary condition for all outer objects as they appear to us, it does not mean that they underlie things as they are in themselves. Idea of space cannot be derived from sense experience. Space, then, is nothing but the form of all appearances of outer sense’; and it is then, is nothing but the form of all appearances of outer sense’; and it is therefore solely from the human stand point that we can speak of space, of extended things, etc’(KRV A26 B42) Next, the notion of succession and simultaneity presuppose time, they are concepts, we must therefore already have the concept of time before we can talk about it. Time again is not a general concept though we can speak of different times, they are not different instances of one concept, but different parts of one and the same time. Like space, it is an apriori form of intuition. Time is a necessary condition of all formal experience. We have representations of inner states and outer objects, we tend to observe these as succeeding or simultaneous with one another, this happens in time. All objects of the senses are in time and necessarily stand in time relations. The sensations which we receive through the
PHLIC02 - Philosophy of Kant Page 23 School of Distance Education
senses has its arrangement a temporal order. Similarly spatially ordered for the external objects. Our apriori knowledge has its contribution from nature and structure of human sensibility, Transcendental aesthetic examines it.
2.3.1 On Space a) Metaphysical Exposition of Space
If we enquire what is space and time, are they determination of relation of thing or are they relations that attach to form of intuition alone. Exposition is the distinct representation of that which belong to the concept; the exposition is metaphysical when it contains that which exhibits the concept as given apriori.
1. Space is not an empirical concept that is derived from experiences
2. For certain sensations to be related to something outside me, thus in order to represent it outside and not merely as distinct in different places, the representation of space must be already their ground. Outer experience is first possible only through this representation.
3. One can never represent that there is no space. Space is the ground of all outer intuitions. Though we can think of space without objects. It is regarded as the condition of the possibility of appearances.
4. Space is not a discursive or general concept of the relations of the things in general, but a pure intuition. One can only represent single space and not many spaces. If any one speaks of many spaces it is actually part of one whole.
5. Space is represented as infinite given magnitude, concept can be thought of infinite representation containing within itself, but space is thought of as that which contains infinite set representations within itself. The original representation of space is apriori intuition not a concept.
b) Transcendental Exposition of Space
Transcendental exposition is the explanation of concept as principle, from which, insight in to the possibility of synthetic apriori cognitions could be achieved.
There are certain conditions which follow –
1) Cognitions actually follow from the given concept
PHLIC02 - Philosophy of Kant Page 24 School of Distance Education
2) These cognitions are possible only under the presupposition of a given way of explaining the concept.
What must be a representation of space possible for geometrical intuitions, Geometry is a science which determines properties of space both synthetic as well as apriori, hence it must be intuition, from the mere concept we could not draw other propositions which can go beyond the concept. This intuition can never be empirical. It should be pure.
How can concept of object of experience preceed the cognition of the object and concept of this can be determined apriori. The seat of this is the subject itself as its formal constitution being affected by objects, thereby acquiring immediate representation. If one were to abstract from subjective conditions of intuitions then no determination to the objects remain. Neither absolute nor relative determinations can be applied to the objects prior to the existence of things they pertain.
Space is nothing other than merely the form of appearance of outer sense, it is the subjective conditions of sensibility under which outer intuition is possible for us. Pure intuitions in which all objects can contain the principles of their relations prior to experience. What we call outer objects are mere representation of our sensibility. Space represents no property of things in themselves nor any relation of them to each other, If we abstract from the subjective intuitions no determination of them that attaches to objects remain. Form of appearance of outer sense can be termed space, or in away subjective condition of sensibility through which only cognition of outer intuition is possible.
Form of appearance is apriori, it can be given in the mind prior to the actual perceptions. This apriori form as pure intuitions determine the objects, there are certain principles which determine the relation of the objects. Space comprehends all things that appear to us externally but not things in themselves, whether they are intuited or not or by whatever subject they may be intuited. There is possibility that intuition of other thinking beings may not be bound to follow the same conditions that is universally valid for us. As soon as there is possibility of experience there is reality of space, everything that comes before us as object. And ideal of space when thought in regard to things when they are considered in themselves through reason. By transcendental ideality, Space is something that grounds things in themselves when the subject is taken out of the condition of the possibility of all experiences.
PHLIC02 - Philosophy of Kant Page 25 School of Distance Education
The qualities of objects like color,sound,warmth are sensations, which can be different for different subjects, the rose counts in an empirical sense a thing in itself, but in the transcendental sense nothing that is intuited in space is a thing in itself, space is not a form for anything in itself, outer objects are mere representations of our sensibility, whose form is space ,while the thing in itself cannot be cognised
2.3.2 On Time
a) Metaphysical Exposition of Time
It is because of representation of time as a ground we have perception of succession and simultaneity. It states that it is only due to presupposition of time that we could perceive several things exist at different times and existing at the same time.
Time is apriori in which the actuality of appearances is possible, even if appearances are removed still time remains. It is a necessary representation in which all appearances are grounded.
Time as apriori necessity brings in to picture the axioms of time apodictic principles of relations of time. There is no different times simultaneously, instead different time in succession. These are the principles which are valid as rules under which perception of objects is possible. The rules cannot be derived from experience, it instructs prior to the experience and not through it.
Different times are part of one and the same time, time is a pure form of sensible intuition. Different times are not simultaneous cannot be derived from a single concept. Also the proposition is synthetic. When a magnitude of an object is determinately represented then the entire representation cannot be given through concepts instead it should be through immediate intuition. b) Transcendental Exposition of time
According to Kant, space and time are pure intuitions based upon synthetic apriori cognitions. The transcendental exposition should show that the fact that space and time are pure intuitions is both necessary and sufficient to account for synthetic a priori judgments concerning space and time
PHLIC02 - Philosophy of Kant Page 26 School of Distance Education
The concept of motion is possible only through representation of time as apriori intuition. No concept can make the principle of alteration comprehensible; it is only through this apriori (inner) intuition that it is made possible. Also, the case of contradictory opposed predicates of one and the same thing, like an object being in a place and not being in a place of the very same thing at the same place.
Time does not attach to things as objective determination, and if abstracted from subjective conditions of intuitions of them then it will be actual without an actual object. If time is the subjective conditions under which intuitions take place then it is represented prior to the cognition of objects.
Time is nothing other than form of inner self. It represents the relation of representations in inner state. Representation of time itself is an intuition since all its relations can be expressed in outer intuition.
Determination of the mind belong to the inner state and inner state depends upon formal conditions inner intuition thus time, so time is the formal condition of all appearance in general, also the immediate condition of inner intuition, also the mediate condition of outer appearances.
Hence we can also say that all objects of the senses are time and necessarily stand in relations to time. Time is real since alterations are possible only in time. Time is the real form of inner intuition. Synthetic cognitions of apriori are drawn from space and time as two cognitions of which pure mathematics in regard to its cognitions in space and its relations. It is through this pure sensible intuition that synthetic apriori propositions are made possible.
PHLIC02 - Philosophy of Kant Page 27 School of Distance Education
2.4 General Observation on Transcendental Aesthetic
So we can say that all our intuitions are representation of appearances. It is through our subjective constitution of our senses that we perceive them. What we intuit are not in themselves, regarding what we intuit them to be, also the relations that constitutes them as appearing to us. Once we remove this subjective constitution then all the relations of objects in space and time, particularly the forms of pure intuition space and time also would disappear since it is in us that all these exist. What we have in ourselves is the way to perceive them. In does not say that all beings are the same.
Space and time are called pure intuition, which is prior to all perception, sensation is that which is reason for being called aposteriori cognition or empirical intuition. Even with the highest degree of distinctness in our sensibility we could not come close to the constitution of objects in themselves. What we cognize is only through one’s own way of intuiting. What we represent of a body is only the appearance of it, it contains nothing that pertains to an object in itself, appearance of something the way in which we are affected by it, this receptivity of our cognitive capacity is termed sensibility. The propositions of Geometry are universal and necessary while empirical experience is not of this sort.
PHLIC02 - Philosophy of Kant Page 28 School of Distance Education
UNIT – III
3.1 Transcendental logic - Introduction
Kant is concerned with the distinction between general logic and transcendental logic and this is of fundamental importance in the Critique of pure reason. General logic abstracts from all differences in objects known while Transcendental logic abstracts only from empirical content.According to Kant, General logic is “the absolutely necessary rules of thinking, without which no use of the understanding takes place” (A52/B76).It is the syntactic rules for forming judgements rules specifying valid inferences. When logic is restricted to certain kinds of objects it is special logic. The concern of Critique is pure logic rather than applied logic.
Transcendental logic deals with originative activities through which it produces apriori concepts from within itself and through which it attains, independently of experience, to an a priori
determination of objects.3
Kant’s classification of logic is given below General Pure
LOGIC Applied Special
Transcendental
According to Kant, it is only through a concept that apprehension of an object is possible, only in and through apprehension that object come to conciousness. According to Kant, aesthetic is the science of rules of sensibility in general, Logic is the science of understanding in general. General logic is a canon of understanding in its general discursive or analytic employment, it is a logic of elements, ie absolutely necessary laws of thought in abstraction from all differences
in the object dealt with,i.e. from all content whether empirical or transcendental.4 When no account of the empirical psychological conditions under which understanding can act is taken then it is pure logic. In its development as an applied logic, there is formulation of rules for the employment of understanding under these subjective conditions. Rules governing
PHLIC02 - Philosophy of Kant Page 29 School of Distance Education
certain class of objects is special logic, it is an organon of this or that science. Pure logic is independent of everything empirical, being completely apriori it is a body of demonstrative teaching.
In logic the question is how we ought to think, therefore the rules of logic is derived from necessary use of understanding. According to Kant, a system of apriori principles for correct employment of certain faculty of knowledge is called canon, while organon is instructions on as to how knowledge may be extended, regarding how new knowledge may be acquired. A discipline is distinguished from a canon by taking in to account other than purely apriori conditions. Canon directs faculty by supplying principle, it’s distinction from organon cannot be hard and fast.
Kant describes, Special logic being organon of this or that science.The pure intuition contains only the form under which something is intuited and pure concept only the form of thinking of an object in general. Only pure intuition or concepts alone are possible apriori, empirical ones
only aposteriori.5 The receptivity of the mind to receive representation as it is affected in some way is called sensibility.The faculty for bringing forth representation or spontaneity of cognition is understanding.
The faculty for thinking of objects of sensible intuition on the contrary is understanding.6 Both sensibility and understanding are equally necessary for attaining knowledge. Thoughts without content are empty and intuitions without concepts are blind. Understanding is not
capable to intuit anything and senses cannot think anything.7 Only through their unification knowledge can arise. We need to distinguish these two aspects and should not mix these up. Rules of sensibility, from the science of rules of understanding in general, ie logic Transcendental logic thus has a more restricted field than general logic, whose laws relate to empirical judgements and the relations between them as well as to apriori judgements; transcendental logic is concerned only with the sub class of the apriori,’with the laws of understanding and reason solely in so far as they relate apriori to objects’(KRVA57B82)
PHLIC02 - Philosophy of Kant Page 30 School of Distance Education
3.2 Logic – Division of Logic into Analytic and Dialectic
According to Kant, truth is said to consist of agreement of knowledge with the object. Here one's knowledge is verified with itself. Since the object is external, one can only judge whether one's knowledge of the object agrees with one's knowledge of the object. So what is a universally acceptable condition of truth?
The following passage is by Kant " A universal material criterion of truth is not possible; the phrase is indeed self-contradictory. For being universal it would necessarily abstract from all distinction of objects, and yet being a material criterion, it must be concerned with just this distinction in order to be able to determine whether a cognition agrees with the very object to which it refers, and not merely with some object or other, by which nothing would be said. But material truth must consist in this agreement of a cognition with the definite object to which it refers. For a cognition which is true in reference to one object may be false in reference to other objects. It is therefore absurd to demand a universal material criterion of truth, which is at once to abstract and not to abstract from all distinction of objects"
There is absurdity in universal material condition of truth. The universal formal criteria of truth are universal logical marks of agreement of cognitions with themselves with the general laws of understanding and reason. But this criteria is not sufficient for objective truths, but yet they are to be viewed as its conditio sine qua no(essential action).According to Kant all activities of reason which we exercise in thought is discovered by means of analysis. The analytic of form and understanding contains the necessary rules of all truth without which truth of our knowledge is untrue in itself even apart from its objects and is called the logic of truth. It becomes a canon for the formal correctness of our knowledge. When used as an organon it becomes dialectic.
So Kant says there must be two parts of logic, one to treat the formal criteria of truth, being the analytic, the other one which does not agree with the formal criteria of truth although it seems to agree with it, it is known by the marks and rules it contains. And Kant refers to it as cathartic of understanding. A general logic has to with strictly apriori principles, and is a canon of the understanding and reason, but only in regard to what is formed in their use, be the content what
PHLIC02 - Philosophy of Kant Page 31 School of Distance Education
it may(empirical or transcendental).It may be termed cathartic of the common understanding, since there is pure as well as empirical intuitions, then there can be also pure and empirical thinking of objects. General logic has nothing to do with origin of cognition, it deals only with the form of the understanding, which can be given to the representation wherever they may have originated concepts may be related to the objects apriori as acts of pure thinking which can be termed science of pure understanding by means of which we think objects completely apriori. The fundamental sources from which cognition arises are in the first part the object is given to us and later the object is thought in relation to this representation. Elements of our cognitions can be classified as intuitions and concepts. Without the combination of intuition and concepts no cognition can take place. Intuitions without concepts are blind and thoughts without content are empty.
If sensation is mixed to representation it is empirical or if sensation is not mixed to representation it is pure. Both can be pure or empirical. If only the form under which something is intuited is given it is pure intuition, and pure concept, only form of the thinking of object in general. Receptivity of our mind to receive representations in so far we are affected in some way is called sensibility , similarly the faculty for bringing forth representations itself, or the
spontaneity of cognition is the understanding.8 Understanding is the faculty for thinking of objects of sensible intuition. Understanding is not capable of intuiting anything nor the senses are capable of thinking anything. It is through the unification that thought arises. Aesthetics is the science of rules of sensibility in general while logic is the science of rules of understanding in general.
With regard to its aim logic can be classified as general and particular use of understanding. General logic contains absolute and necessary rules of thinking without which no use of understanding takes place. It is concerned with these rules, and it may be directed to objects irrespective of their differences. It can be called elementary logic. The rules for correctly thinking about certain kind of objects is called logic of particular use of understanding. This may be organon of a science. General logic is otherwise called pure logic, it deals with apriori principles is canon of understanding and reason only in regard to what is formal in their use, be the content of what it may. If general logic is directed to the rules of understanding under subjective empirical conditions that psychology teaches us then it is called applied logic.
PHLIC02 - Philosophy of Kant Page 32 School of Distance Education
Difference of objects is not a matter of concern here. Hence, it can be called a cathartic of common understanding. The part of general logic which is concerned with pure doctrines of logic which is separated from applied part is science which is scholastically correct representation of doctrine of elements which understanding requires.
The rules is defined as below9 –
1. As general logic it abstracts from all contents of the cognition of understanding and of the difference of its objects, and has to do with nothing but the mere form of thinking.
2. As pure logic it has no empirical principles, thus it draws nothing from psychology, which therefore has no influence at all on the canon of the understanding.It is a proven doctrine that everything in it must be apriori.
Applied logic is thus representation of the understanding and the rules necessary use in concreto, namely under the contingent conditions of the subject, which can hinder or promote this use, and which can all be given only empirically
3.3 Transcendental Logic
According to Kant, Transcendental logic is the science of rules of pure understanding required for cognition. First of all we are reminded of the distinction between sensibility and understanding. Sensibility being a receptivity for sense experience while understanding has the role to think of objects through concepts. Both have their own functions has a characteristic type of representations. When there is sensation given in intuition there will be concepts associated with it which are empirical representations, the nature of which is aposteriori. Apriori representations are when there is pure intuitions and pure concepts arise from the activity of understanding. This also reminds us that just like pure intuitions represent only formal features of sensible objects, only the general features of thought in any idea of an object is represented by pure concepts.
Transcendental representation is neither space nor any geometrical determination of it, but only the cognition that these representations are not of empirical origin at all and the possibility that they can be nevertheless be related apriori to objects of experience can be called transcendental.
The cognition of all objects with apriori space would be transcendental, but if the cognition is restricted to certain sense objects, then it is called empirical. There should be a general and
PHLIC02 - Philosophy of Kant Page 33 School of Distance Education
necessary rule for the forms of cognition and understanding and there must be a criteria of truth in these very rules. It is the analysis of apriori cognition in to elements of pure cognition of understanding, Along with the conditions that –
1)That the concepts be pure and not empirical concepts
2)It belongs to thinking and understanding and not to intuition and sensibility.
3)They are elementary concepts and clearly distinguished from those which are derived from them 4)It should be a complete table that entirely exhaust the entire field of pure understanding. There is an idea of a whole unity where sum total of cognitions are grasped under it. The completeness of this system can in a way yield correctness and genuineness of all pieces of cognition fitting in to it.
3.4 Division of Transcendental logic into the Transcendental Analytic and Dialectic
As far as transcendental logic is concerned the understanding is isolated and the part of the thought which has its origin in understanding is elevated from our cognition. It is based upon these conditions the use of pure cognition depends upon. It means the application for the objects given in intuition. As we know cognition would remain empty without intuition, since it lacks objects.
Transcendental Analytic is part of transcendental logic. In Transcendental analytic, a logic of truth, the elements of pure cognition of understanding and principles is given without which no object can be thought at all. It is a canon for assessment of empirical use. It should not be used as an organon of general and unrestricted use. When objects in general is decided or synthetically judged, asserted by pure understanding alone, this is termed dialectical. So the second part of transcendental logic is called transcendental dialectic, it is a critique of dialectical illusion. It is a critique on hyperphysical use of understanding and reason.
PHLIC02 - Philosophy of Kant Page 34 School of Distance Education
UNIT – IV
4.1 Transcendental Analytic
In the Transcendental analytic Kant states that understanding provides pure concepts and principles to our knowledge of objects. These pure concepts are called categories, and these concepts are applied to objects given in intuition. First he tries to prove that understanding does provides pure concepts. Here there is derivation of categories from logical forms of judgement. This stage is called metaphysical deduction The next stage is transcendental deduction Schematism being the third stage which addresses the sensible condition to which pure concepts are applied.
And finally there is a detailed demonstration of pure principles of understanding, synthetic apriori judgements based on categories. Aristotles theory of categories is based on semantics. Any descriptive term denotes things that could be put under at least one of these 10 classes. Only substances could be put to essential predications since they can retain identity while undergoing change in time. In 20th century there was gradual revision of Aristotelian conceptual scheme, questioned whether there was a necessary conceptual scheme. Kant also claimed that ontological concepts could be derived from logical concepts.
Transcendental logic is considered science of pure understanding, Kant states it rules of pure understanding required for cognition. The spontaneous power to think of objects through concepts is understanding . Sensations given in intuition and concepts that depend on them are empirical representations known as aposteriori. The pure forms of intuition and the pure concepts arising solely from the activity of the understanding are a priori representations. In pure intuition there is representation of only formal features of sensible objects, in the representation of pure concepts, it is the most general features thought in any idea of an object. The role of understanding consists in classifying and organising the data in to a conceptual scheme that one can represent the objects. This is the role of understanding. Organising data both pure and empirical, making it intelligible based upon a conceptual scheme is the function of understanding.
PHLIC02 - Philosophy of Kant Page 35 School of Distance Education
The part of transcendental logic, therefore, that expounds the elements of the pure cognition of the understanding and the principles without no object can be thought at all, is the transcendental analytic, and at the same time a logic of truth. Pure understanding separates itself from everything empirical and even from all sensibilities, there is a unity which is sufficient and subsists in itself in which no further external additions is required. Hence sum total cognitions constitute a system. This is grasped under one idea. The completeness of the system keeps all pieces of cognitions fitting in to one system. It is not like putting rough aggregates from estimates, instead it is possible only by idea of the whole of apriori concepts of understanding. It is through connection in the system the division of concepts that the idea determines and constitutes.
The analysis of the whole apriori cognitions in to elements of pure cognitions of understanding is termed the analytic. Under the condition that-
1. They belong to understanding and not to intuitions.
2. The concepts be pure
3. They be elementary concepts
4. The table should be complete such that it exhausts entire field of understanding.
4.2 Analytic of Concepts
Concept is a predicate for possible judgement are related to some representation of still undetermined object. In transcendental Philosophy the concepts are sought based upon a principle, which are pure from the understanding and connected among themselves in accordance with a concept as idea. This connection provides a rule by means of which the place of each pure concept of the understanding and completeness of all of them together can be determined apriori. In every human cognition understanding is a cognition through concepts, not intuitive but discursive. Concepts rest on functions by functions is the unity of the action of ordering difficult representations under a common one. A concept is thus never immediately related to the object but always related to some other representations
In every judgement there is a concept that holds of many and that among this many also
PHLIC02 - Philosophy of Kant Page 36 School of Distance Education comprehends a given representation, which is then related immediately to the object. In the example, all bodies are divisible the concept of divisible is related to various other concepts, here it is related to the body and which in turn is related to certain appearances that come before us.
All judgements are function of unity among representations
4.3 On the Clue to the Discovery of all Pure Concepts of the Understanding
Concepts orginate in understanding and is pure rather than empirical. Pure concepts express functions of understanding, in which there is unity which subsists on its own. So a complete list of pure concepts is possible since here understanding has only one function. Understanding must produce concepts, Kant considers it discursive. The unity of the action of ordering different representation under a common one is function of understanding. Understanding functions by bringing together many representations under a concept. And classifies the representations depending upon the concept.
If we abstract from all content of a judgement in general, and attend only to the mere form of understanding in it, we find that the function of thinking in that can be brought under titles each of which contains under itself three moments. They can be suitably be represented in the following table
Quantity of judgement Universal Particular Singular
Quality Relation Affirmative Categorical Negative Hypothetical Infinite Disjunctive
Modality Problematic Assertoric Apodictic
PHLIC02 - Philosophy of Kant Page 37 School of Distance Education
If we put a statement that ‘ Soul is not mortal’ ,then soul comes in a domain separated from mortality, the space that remains is still infinite, though content wise it is being limited, it should not be kept apart from the transcendental table of judgements, function of understanding being required in the field of its pure apriori cognition. Problematic judgements are those which considers assertion or denial as possible. Assertoric judgements are those which are actual
Problematic proposition is which expresses only logical possibility, there is a free choice to count as valid that it makes an arbitrary assumption in understanding. Only through manifold of pure apriori intuitions of space and time, transcendental subject receives representations of objects and these affect concept of objects. Through the spontaneous action of the mind within the manifold space time apriori intuitions these combine in different way to form a cognition. This is called action synthesis. Such a synthesis is pure if the manifold is apriori(space and time),and first of all this must be first given, no concepts can arise analytically as far as content is concerned. Synthesis is the first thing to attend to if we wish to judge about first origin of our cognition. To bring the synthesis to concepts is the function of understanding.
4.4 Logical employment of Understanding
Understanding being a non-sensible faculty of cognition is not a faculty of intuition. Therefore, cognition of human understanding is through concepts. Concepts rests itself on functions, function means the unity of action of ordering different representation under a common one. A concept is not immediately related to an object, instead it is related to some other representation. While intuition is immediately related to object. Concept is grounded in spontaneity of thinking. An intuition is grounded in receptivity of impressions. Understanding makes use of concepts by judging by means of them. Every time we judge based upon a concept, the concept can hold for different things. When we hold to a particular concept then there are many things associated with it, which will be mediately represented through it.
All judgements are functions of unity among representations, where many possible cognitions are drawn in to one. Like the concept of a body is a predicate of possible judgement, they are still related to some representation of an undetermined object. Other representations can be
PHLIC02 - Philosophy of Kant Page 38 School of Distance Education
contained under a concept, so that it can be related to other objects. Judgement, according to Kant, is “the mediate cognition of an object, hence the representation of a representation of it” (A68/B93). Considered most abstractly, a judgment is a way of representing an object or objective state of affairs.
In the judgement, all bodies are divisible, the concept divisible is related to many other concepts, however in this context it is related to body and this in turn to certain appearances that come before us. It is by analysing concepts as predicates of possible judgement that Kant states and function of understanding as judgement, the priority of judgements over concepts. The syntactic structures which unify subject predicate concepts are considered as judgements.
The primary activity of understanding being making determinative judgements regarding objective state of affairs. Concepts are objective representations while sensation being subjective. Also concepts are related to the representation of still undetermined object (which may not be classified as a kind)
Kant’s main premises are these10:
1. All acts of the understanding are judgments. 2. Judgments are acts in which the understanding unifies diverse representations into a single, more complex, representation of an object.
3.The function of a concept is to unify other representations in making judgments.
From premises 1–3 Kant can draw the conclusion:
4. All judgments presuppose second-order, syntactical concepts expressing the forms for combining first-order concepts (or other representations) in judgment.
From 4 and the following definition of a pure concept in 5:
5. Pure concepts express the logical operations of the understanding,
Kant is then entitled to conclude:
6. Therefore, a complete list of forms for unifying representations in judgment will produce a complete list of pure concepts of the understanding.
PHLIC02 - Philosophy of Kant Page 39 School of Distance Education 4.5 Pure concepts of Understanding
In the previous step the complete list pure concepts understanding is provided by logical forms of judgement. Now here one has to prove that it has real use. According to Kant the syntactic concepts have semantic use. It forms the transcendental content for knowing objects.
The same function which unifies different representations in a judgement also gives unity to the mere synthesis of different representation in an intuition, which expressed generally is pure concept of understanding. While general logic has no restriction on the content of judgement. Content in terms of pure forms of space and time is attributed to transcendental logic. It is reference into existing domain. It is intuition which makes the access to existing things. There is restriction on the domain of judgement. The existing things are judged their interpretation must be spatial and temporal. This spatial and temporal interpretation takes place through the process of transcendental synthesis. Judging data in terms of those concepts. In synthesis different representations are unified into one complex cognition.
The manifold of intuited data is represented as an object it requires apprehending the data and connecting it with one complex cognition. Here there are both pure and empirical aspects involved. Synthesis of pure manifold in the forms of intuition is the pure aspect. While connecting it with aposteriori data is empirical aspect. It is imagination which connects the representations. Kant states imagination as a blind though indispensible function of the soul, without which we could not have any cognition at all. We may not be concious of it. Humans have the ability to think according to rules we can conciously recognise. It is concepts provided by understanding which makes possible rules of objective representations. Though we are not aware of the process of synthesis, we can become conscious by the reflecting on our representations.
In order to have experience of individuating experience the prerequisite is identifying their spatio-temporal locations. Hence pure concepts function both syntactically – to combine first- order concepts (or other representations) in judgment – and semantically – to synthesize the pure manifold of spatial-temporal data given in the forms of intuition11
PHLIC02 - Philosophy of Kant Page 40 School of Distance Education
At this point Kant has achieved his first goal in the Metaphysical Deduction, namely to demonstrate that there is a determinate set of pure concepts of the understanding, and that an exhaustive list is provided in the table of the forms of judgment.
Transcendental logic teaches us how to bring pure synthesis of representation under concepts. The first thing to be given is manifold of pure intuition, synthesis of this manifold by imagination is the second thing. The concepts that give rise to pure synthetic unity, that consist of necessary representation of synthetic unity are necessary when an object comes before us and they depend on understanding. The same function which provides unity to different representation in a judgement provides unity to different representations in an intuition, which is called pure concept of understanding. Similarly, the same understanding or the same actions through which it brings the logical form of judgement in to concepts by analytic unity and transcendental content in to the representation by synthetic unity of manifold in intuition in general. There can arise as many pure concepts of understanding that can be applied to objects of intuition in general apriori,
4.6 Table of Categories
The following statement highlights the role of Categories -
‘All synthesis, therefore, even that which render perception possible, is subject to the categories and since experience is knowledge by means of connected perception, the categories are condition of the possibility of experience and are therefore valid apriori for all objects of experience’(from the text, Critique of pure reason ,Immanuel Kant, , trans. Norman Kemp Smith)
PHLIC02 - Philosophy of Kant Page 41 School of Distance Education
1. Categories of Quantity Unity Plurality Totality
2. 3. Categories of Quality Categories of Relation Reality Of Inherence and subsistence Negation Of Causality and dependence Limitation Of Community
4. Categories of Modality Possibility - Impossibility Existence - Non- Existence Necessity – Contingency
Above is the pure concepts of synthesis, It is only through these concepts that understanding is made possible in the manifold of intuition. Understanding contains within itself apriori and on account of which it is only pure understanding.
The four concepts of understanding can be divided in to two groups, one is mathematical and the other dynamical. The first group is concerned with objects of intuition(pure and empirical) and second is concerned with the existence of the object.
Each class has same number of categories, for the first and second concept to bring forth the third requires a special act of understanding. For eg:-
Totality is combination of Plurality and Unity. Limitation is reality combined with negation.
Community is causality of substance in reciprocal determination to others. Existence that is given by possibility is necessity.
One thing to remember is that one should not consider the third category as merely derivative of first and second. Instead there is a special act of understanding involved in comparison to the act involved in first and the second. They are coordinated with each other and not subordinated, it means the relation is not like a series(unilateral) instead it is like reciprocal(relation between
PHLIC02 - Philosophy of Kant Page 42 School of Distance Education
aggregate and parts), if one is posited then rest excluded. It is not like the cause effect relation, instead it is coordinated with other simultaneously and reciprocally as cause with regard to determination. In the cause effect scenario, the consequence does not determine the ground reciprocally. Just like in a parts of a sphere which is divided, though each part is separate still there is a thought of whole sphere.
Explanation of the way in which concepts can relate to objects apriori is called transcendental deduction and this could be differentiated from empirical deduction. The empirical deduction shows how concepts is acquired through experience and reflection. Space and time are pure apriori intuitions or forms of sensibility and categories or concepts of understanding cannot be empirically deduced, only transcendental deduction is possible. Objects appear to us only through the forms of sensibility, apriori cognition must provide the condition of the possibility for synthetic cognition of objects as appearances irrespective of experience and synthesis in them has objective validity. While objects can be given without having related to the functions of understanding. The categories of understanding do not represent the conditions under which object is given to us.
The question arises as to how the subjective conditions of thinking can have objective validity. If we take the example of cause and effect, say A and B, regarding how to different entities, one follow other, When the intuition is given as appearances, is it possible from the given cognition that there is a necessary connection between A and B.
The sensible intuitions other than providing condition for the appearance to be an object of experience, must accord with the conditions understanding requires for synthetic unity. The concept of cause must be grounded in understanding completely apriori, from which follows that B follows from A both necessarily in accordance with universal rule. Effect does not come along with the cause instead it is posited through it and follows from it. The synthetic representation and the object can relate to each other in two possible ways, If the object alone makes the representation or if only the representation makes the object possible.
Through intuition the object is given as appearance, and concept through which an object is thought related to this intuition. The ground for experiential cognition as apriori conditions is because of concept of the object in general and objective validity of categories as apriori concepts is affirmed, through categories only experience is made possible. Also only through them only any object of experience can be thought at all.
PHLIC02 - Philosophy of Kant Page 43 School of Distance Education
The three sources which give rise to the possibility of experience and which cannot be derived from any other faculty of human mind are – Sense, Imagination and apperception
On these are grounded
(i) the synopsis of manifold apriori through sense
(ii) Synthesis of the manifold through imagination
(iii) Unity of this synthesis through original apperception
In addition to their empirical use, they have their transcendental one which is concerned with form and which is possible apriori. In transcendental philosophy the concepts are sought based upon a principle, which are pure from the understanding and connected among themselves in accordance with the concept or idea. This connection provides a rule by means of which the place of each pure concept of the understanding and completeness of all of them together can be determined apriori
4.7 Transcendental deduction of Categories
Transcendental deduction is a normative argument justifying the use of a concept than a factual argument concerning its actual use. In the case of empirical concepts such a deduction is not required since experience can prove their objective validity. There is requirement of a special proof to justify pure concepts of understanding which are not derived from experience. The empirical deduction cannot justify apriori concepts. The two forms of apriori concepts are those orginating in the forms of sensibility and those originating in the understanding.
A mathematical concept such as a triangle can be displayed in intuition, but concepts such as substance-accident, cause- effect may not be. Kant states the forms of intuition space and time establish validity of spatiotemporal and mathematical concepts for objects given in senses while in the case of pure concepts of understanding having no original connection to sensibility requires additional argument for their application to appearances. According to Kant, for any intuition to represent an object it must be subject to categories. No causal connections can be
PHLIC02 - Philosophy of Kant Page 44 School of Distance Education
discerned if the pure concepts do not apply to the sensory data. So it can be said that either the representation makes the object possible or object makes the representation possible. It is only by making the object possible that necessarily representation be applied to it.
The question arises as to if pure concepts are the necessary conditions which makes possible to think of an object in general. So it can be said that concept is presupposed in all objects of experience. The Transcendental Deduction must show that pure concepts of the understanding relate “a priori to objects of experience, since only by means of them can any object of experience be thought at all”.(A93/B126)Combination of the manifold cannot happen through pure form of sensible intuitions; instead it is spontaneous act of power of representation, which can be termed understanding. If the combination is of manifold of intuitions or several concepts, whether of sensible or non-sensible intuition, it can be given the title synthesis. It is through the activity of the mind that we combine the representations and it is not given in the objects. Combination is the representation of the synthetic unity of manifold. Representation of which is added to the manifold.
All categories are grounded in logical function of judgement. The category already presupposes unity. In these combinations unity of given concept is already thought. In the transcendental aesthetic the supreme principle regarding the possibility of all intuitions in relation to sensibility was that the manifold of sensibility fall under the conditions of apriori space and time. In relation to understanding, all manifold of Intuitions stand under synthetic unity of apperception.
Only if intuitions are combined in one consciousness then only it can be thought. The representations cannot have in common the act of apperception. Self-consciousness grasps” I think” only because of this combination in one consciousness. Understanding consists in the determinate relation of the given representation to the object. Unity of consciousness is what constitutes the only relation of representation to an object. It is their objective validity which makes cognitions on which understanding is made possible.
In the example of drawing a line, there is synthetic unity of determinate manifold, unity of this act is the unity of thought hence it is the object first thought. Synthetic unity of consciousness is therefore objective unity, something under every intuition should stand to become an object ,without these synthesis no other way the manifold would be united in one consciousness
PHLIC02 - Philosophy of Kant Page 45 School of Distance Education
The unity through which the manifold given in an intuition is united in a concept of the object is called Transcendental unity of apperception. If we closely examine the relations of cognitions in a judgement and if we distinguish it as belonging to understanding according to laws of reproductive imagination(subjective), then judgement is way to bring given cognitions to objective unity of apperception.
A statement like “bodies are heavy”
They belong to one another by virtue of necessary unity of apperception in the synthesis of intuition. According to principles of objective determination of all representation in so far as cognitions can from them, the principles of which are all derived from transcendental unity of apperception. In this way there arise a judgement which is objectively valid.
All sensible intuitions stand under the categories as conditions under which their manifold can come together in one consciousness. The manifold of representation is brought under apperception in general through the action of understanding is the logical function of judgements. All manifold is given in one empirical intuition. One of the logical functions of judgement determine how all manifolds are given in one empirical intuition by which it is brought in to consciousness in general. The manifold of intuitions is judged with regard to categories, categories acting as function of judgement.
Through the synthesis of understanding, the manifold contained in intuitions are represented necessarily as belonging to unity of self consciousness, this takes place by means of category. Just as pure apriori consciousness stands above empirical consciousness of one intuition similarly pure sensible intuition(apriori) stands above empirical intuition. The above propositions is in a way is a beginning of deduction of pure concepts of understanding, categories arise independently of sensibility, merely in the understanding. By abstracting from manifold of intuition to attend to the unity of the intuition through the understanding by means of the category. The unity of empirical intuition is based upon the prescriptions to manifold of given intuitions by the categories. Thus, by the apriori validity in regard to all objects of our senses aim of deduction will be attained.
Thinking of an object in general through pure concept of understanding can become cognition
only if the concept is related to the senses, it means all intuition that is possible is sensible. Through pure intuitions we can acquire apriori cognitions of objects, it is related to the form as
PHLIC02 - Philosophy of Kant Page 46 School of Distance Education
appearances, but whether there are objects that fill this form makes situation incomplete. So all mathematical concepts are not cognitions until there is a presupposition that there are things that are presented to us in accordance with form of that sensible intuition.
So Categories provide us with cognition of things only through their possible application to empirical intuition. Space and time are valid as conditions of possibility of knowledge only for sense objects, beyond these boundaries they do not represent anything.
There is in us a certain form of sensible intuition apriori which rests on the receptivity of the capacity for representation, the understanding can determine the manifold of given representation in accord with synthetic unity of apperception (of the manifold of sensible intuition) through which the categories which are mere forms of thought acquire objective reality. The synthesis of manifold of intuition which possible and necessary apriori are called figurative.
Imagination is the faculty for representing an object even without its presence in intuition. In the imaginative process, it is the subjective condition on which the it can give corresponding intuition to concepts of understanding, its synthesis depends upon the acts of spontaneity which can determine the form of the sense apriori in accordance with unity of apperception. Apriori sensibility depends upon faculty of imagination and the synthesis of intuition in accordance with categories, which must be transcendental synthesis of imagination, the effect of understanding on sensibility. Objects of intuition being applied first.
It is understanding and its original faculty of combining the manifold of intuition that determines the inner sense and brings it under apperception. Inner sense only contains merely the form of intuition. We cannot think about a circle without describing it. We cannot think of a line without drawing it. A straight line is a figurative description of time, we successively determine inner sense by attending merely to the action of the synthesis of the manifold and thereby attending to this succession in inner sense. There is no combination of manifold already in the inner sense, instead it is produced by affecting the inner sense.
Just like we order the outer sense in space, we order the determination of inner sense in appearance of time. We cognize our own subject only as appearance in the inner intuition. But not in accordance of what it is in itself. Just like the cognition of an object is distinct from what it is, there is a need for an intuition in addition for thinking of an object in general. In the
PHLIC02 - Philosophy of Kant Page 47 School of Distance Education
transcendental synthesis of manifold of representation, the subject is conscious of himself not as it appears to himself but that he is as he is. This representation is thinking and not intuiting. Usually manifold of every possible intuition is brought in to the unity of apperception by action of our thought, in addition to it, a determinate sort of intuition is required for the cognition of ourselves.
In order to cognise oneself one needs in addition to thought of oneself, an intuition of the manifold in him, through which he determines this thought. Existing as an intelligence which is conscious of the faculty of combination, but regarding the manifold it has to combine is subject to limiting condition that it call inner sense, which can make those combination intuitable only in temporal relations that lie outside the concepts of intuition proper, that can cognise itself merely as it appears to itself with regard to an intuition. Whatever objects may come in front of our senses if categories does not provide laws as far as their combination in concerned it will not be clear as to how it stands under laws that arise apriori from understanding alone. The composition of the manifold of empirical intuition through which perception becomes possible is synthesis of apprehension. All synthesis through which even perception becomes possible come under the categories, experience being cognition through connected perceptions, categories are conditions for possibility of experience are also valid apriori for all objects of experience.
Suppose if we take the example of perception of a house, apprehension of the manifold of a house, there is a necessary unity of space and outer sensible intuition in general. The shape of the house should be in agreement with the synthetic unity of manifold in space. It is the category of quantity that the perception (synthesis of apprehension) should be in agreement. Therefore, the synthetic unity abstracted from the form of space has its seat in understanding. The concepts that prescribe law apriori to appearances are called categories. This law is hence applicable to nature, to the sum total of all appearances. There is a question which remains regarding how since the laws of nature are not derived from nature how it should be conceived that nature follow it. It means how there can be apriori determination of the combination of nature without deriving from nature.
Laws exist relative to the being in which appearances inhere. Even without an understanding cognising thing in themselves, lawfulness remains. Appearances are only representations of
PHLIC02 - Philosophy of Kant Page 48 School of Distance Education
things that exist, without cognition of what they might be in themselves. No law of connection is applicable except that which the connecting faculty provides for this representation. It is through imagination that manifold of sensible intuitions gets connected, and imagination is in turn depended on unity of understanding for its intellectual synthesis on sensibility for the manifoldness of apprehension. All possible perception depends on synthesis of apprehension, this empirical synthesis depend on transcendental one, thus on the categories. All perceptions that reach empirical consciousness stand under categories, on which nature depends as the grounds of necessary lawfulness
We can cognise objects only through the intuition that corresponds to those concepts, it is through categories that thought is made possible. It can be stated that no apriori cognition is possible without objects of possible experience. Though cognition is limited to objects of experience, it is not borrowed from it. There are element of cognition that can be encountered apriori with regard to pure concepts of understanding and pure intuitions. We cannot say that experience makes the concepts, instead categories are apriori concepts independent of experience, categories contain the ground of possibility of all experience in general from the side of understanding.
PHLIC02 - Philosophy of Kant Page 49 School of Distance Education
References :-
Kant Immanuel, Critique of Pure Reason, translated by Norman Kemp Smith,Macmillan,London,1929 John Kemp, Philosophy of Kant,Oxford University Press,1968 Kant Immanuel,Critique of Pure Reason,translated and edited by Paul Guyer and Allen W Wood,Cambridge University Press, 1998 Kant Immanuel,Prolegomena to Any Future Metaphysics That will be Able to Present itself as Science, edited by Gunter Zoller,translated by Peter G. Lucas and Gunter Zoller,Oxford University Press,2004 Jill Vance Buroker,Kant’s critique of pure reason,An Introduction,California State University, San Bernardino,Cambridge University Press,2006 A commentary to Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, Norman Kemp Smith,new introduction by Sebastian Gardner,Palgrave Macmillan,2003
www.sparknotes.com/philosophy/kant/section1/page/2/ www.sparknotes.com/philosophy/kant/section1/ www.qcc.cuny.edu/socialsciences/ppecorino/intro_text/chapter%205%20epistemology/Trans c endental_Idealism.htm
Abbreviation:- KRV - Kritik der Reinen Vernunft(Critique of Pure Reason)
PHLIC02 - Philosophy of Kant Page 50 School of Distance Education
Note :- 1. Kant Immanuel,Prolegomena to Any Future Metaphysics That will be Able to Present itself as Science, edited by Gunter Zoller,translated by Peter G. Lucas and Gunter Zoller, pp 16
2. Ibid. pp 17,
3.A commentary to Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, Norman Kemp Smith,new introduction by Sebastian Gardner, pp 172
4. Ibid. pp 169
5.Kant Immanuel,Critique of Pure Reason, translated and edited by Paul Guyer and Allen W Wood, pp 193
6. Ibid.
7. Ibid. pp 194
8. Ibid. pp 193
9. Ibid. pp 195
10. Jill Vance Buroker, Kant’s critique of pure reason, An Introduction,California State University, San Bernardino,pp 83-84
11. Ibid. 107
$$$$$
PHLIC02 - Philosophy of Kant Page 51