Kant's argument on Metaphysics

He believe that metaphysical cognition must consist obly apriori judgment.

According to the standford encyclopedia of philosophy, "one of Kant's main complaints is that metaphysicians seek to deduce a priori synthetic knowledge simply from the unschematized (pure) concepts of the understanding. The effort to acquire metaphysical knowledge through concepts alone, however, is doomed to fail, according to Kant, because (in its simplest formulation) “concepts without intuitions are empty”"

Kant's judgemnt on experience.

Kant said," ......we can know more of any object than belongs to the possible experience of it or lay claim to the least knowledge of how anything not assumed to be an object of possible experience is determined according to the constitution that it has in itself. For how could we determine anything in this way, simce time, space, and all the concepts formed by empirical intuition in the sensible would have an d could have no other use than to make experience possibly?"
(page 85)
Kant is saying that if something that happened once doesn't mean it's going to happen again the same way because the second time all factor will change that can effect the event.

Kant's concept on how Mathematic is a priori!

According to Kant, "all mathematical cognition has this peculiarity: it must first exhibit its concept in intuition, and do so a priori, in an intuition that is not empirical but pure."

I think i disagree with Kant, I believe that math is not A Pirori which means that knowledge that is independent of observation. If math is A Pirori than that much mean that math is inate!

A critical examination of the nature of the thinking and perceiving mind!

Kant tells us that reality is a joint creation of external reality and the human mind and that it is only regarding the latter that we can acquire any certain knowledge. Kant challenges the assumption that the mind is a blank slate or a neutral receptor of stimuli from the surrounding world. The mind does not simply receive information, according to Kant, it also gives that information shape. Knowledge, is not something that exists in the outside world! knowledge is something created by the mind by filtering sensations through our various mental faculties. These faculties determine the shape that all knowledge takes, we can only grasp what knowledge, and learn truth.

On the Determination of the bounds of pure reason

Kant( The Clearest arguments having been adduced, it would be absurb for us to hope that we can know more of any object than belongs to the possible experience of it or lay claim to the least knowledge of how anything not assumed to be an object of possible experinece is determine according to the consitution that it has in itself) pg 85 I believe that kant means by that everything is base on expereince that with experinece you gain knowledge and more experience. I agree with him, without experincwe we think we have knowledge but its wrong because you need to go through experiences in order to gain knowledge.

What is a Normal good sense?

Kant( It is the faculty of the knowledge and use of rules in concreto, as distinguished from the speculative unsderstanding, which faculty of knowing rules in abstracto. Common sense can hardly unsderstand the rule that every event is determine by means of its cause and can never comprehends it thus generally. It therefore demands an example from experience; and when it hears that this rules means nothing but what it always thought pg 103) What he means is that true knowledge is something sure and distinguishesd. Now common sense you could hardly understand it, and that it comes from a cause that can never be understand it. For example with common sense you could confirm by experience.

Rationalism and Empiricism

Kant and Hume agree on something and that is when kant draws the idea that pure reason is capable of significant knowledge but rejects the idea that pure reason can tell us anything about things in themselves. From empiricism, he draws the idea that knowledge is essentially knowledge from experience but rejects the idea that we can have no necessary and universal truths from experience.

Time And Space

Kant arguesin here, are pure intuitions of our faculty of sensibility, and concepts of physics such as causation and inertia are pure intuitions of our faculty of understanding. Supposely our Sensory experience only makes sense because our faculty of sensibility processes it. How do we do that? is by organizing it according to our intuitions of time and space. These intuitions are the source of mathematics. Our number sense comes from moments in time, and geometry comes from our intuition of space. Events that take place in space and time would still be a meaningless if it were not for our faculty of understanding, which organizes experience according to the concepts, like causation, which form the principles of natural science.

Kant And Math

Kant argues that mathematics and the principles of science contain synthetic a prior knowledge. Math is a priori because it is a necessary and universal truth we know independent of experience, and it is synthetic because the concept of the results of the problem. Is not contained in the concept of the problem itself. Kant argues that the same is true for scientific principles such as, “for every action there is an equal an opposite reaction.

perceiving experience

also when we experience something we do so because we have senses if we didnt have those senses then we would feel at all. we wouldnt be able to experience and in turn perceive or guess what would happen on certain occasions.

perceiving experience

Well kant regarding this topic of perception and experience he basically said that without experience there is no way we can perceive what will happen again when we go through that same experience. for example when we get touch a hot object and get burned we learn not to do it,.we try to teach our kids not to do because we perceive the same will happen.

Kant and conclusion of pure reason

on page 85
KAnt explains in a way how one can not know what will happen unless experienced for themselves.
lets just say if a ball is thrown on the floor and it bounces back up they can say that if they do it again it will occur yet again. however these ideas are only guesses. they cant really prove that the ball will bounce exactly the same way back up.

KAnt and math

KAnt in regards to math basically said that in order for math to make sense and exist is must be in steps otherwise it wont work. the problem will not work or make sense unless there are more then one step it cant be completed in a single step.
however if these steps dont work then the problem cant work also. its like a puzzle if the pieces are alike in color, but are not really the same then those pieces wont fit.

kant 2

Kant and the geometry of the triangle.

Kant is basically tring to say that even though two things may seem similar in ever aspect that there will be a difference and that one thing cannot take the other ones place.

KAnt

Kant and the science of metaphysics

according to kant critique and critique alone, contains in itself the whole well-proved and well-tested plan, and even all the means required to accomplish metaphysics, as a science; by other ways and means it is impossible. so basically by studying it and trying to prove it and explaining and really looking into it can it be made into science.

Kant's view on Judgment being a piori

"Former judgment is merely a judgment of perception and is of subjective validity only: it is merely a connection of perceptions in my mental state, without reference to the object."

Kant said that when you first make a judgment of something or someone, you merely just judgment them, it's a natural response of being human. so he think it is a piori.

Kant's view on Synthetic judgment!

Kant think that denying an analytic truth leads to contradiction, but denying a synthetic truth is strange but not contradicting, He use the judgements of experience as an example of synthetic.

he said," Judgment of experience are always synthetic. For it would be absurd to base an analytic judgment on experience, as our concept suffices for the purpose without requiring any testimony from experience."

he's right though because in class we talked about how an Analytic truth about all bachelors are unmarried, and the sythetic part is that if the bachelor are sport center. All bachelors are unmarried is the truth because being a bachelor means that u have to be unmarried, but being a bachelor don't necessarly means that u have to be sport center, even though most of them are.

Kant's view on Analytic Judgement

Kant believe that analytic judgments depend on priciple of contradiction,

He said, "For the predicate of an affirmative analytic judgment is already thought in the concept of the subjct, of which it cannot be denied without contradiction....such is the case of the judgements: "All bodies are extended," and "No bodies are unextended""

It is true through denying an Analytic truth leads to contradiction, but denying the synthetic truth is strange but not contracdicting.

Pool ball

When Hume talks about the white ball rolling smoothly toward the other ball we can assume that it will stop. but if someone that never played pool can't really tell whats going to happen. another thing that come into play is the way the ball was hit and where the white ball hits the other ball. for example if u scratch the other ball with the white ball then it wont stop but instead keep going in a slower moving in another direction. so then hume is wrong in saying that the ball will stop.

Memory regarding feeling pain.

Hume believes that even though memory of pain is stored in the mind there will never be another one that equal the same pain because the mind stores but is unable to calculate the same amount of pain. so basically you can't feel the same amount of pain again.