Monday, March 16, 2015
Second Part of Intro to the Critique of Pure Reason
1. What is Kant's perspective on "dogmatist promises"? What is a dogmatist? Why do you think Kant may have an issue with their perspective?
2. What are the two indispensable conditions? Do you agree that these two things are indispensable?
3. At the bottom of p. 8, Kant talks about prior investigations and that they had "two sides". Explain his prior investigations into pure reason. What were the issues? Were there any conclusions?
4. Explain/describe the moment when Kant became "aware of the magnitude of my task". What did he realize?
5. How does Kant define and describe Metaphysics in this second reading? How are Reason and Metaphysics related to one another?
6 Write a 6-7 sentence summary of this quote- it is one of the most important ones from the CPR.
"Up to now it has been assumed that all our cognition must conform to the objects; but all attempts to find out something about them a priori through concepts that would extend our cognition have, on this presupposition, come to nothing. Hence let us once try whether we do not get farther with the problems of metaphysics by assuming that the objects must conform to our cognition, which would agree better with the requested possibility of an a priori cognition of them, which is to establish something about objects before they are given to us. This would be just like the first thoughts of Copernicus, who, when he did not make good progress in the explanation of the celestial motions if he assumed that the entire celestial host revolves around the observer, tried to see if he might not have greater success if he made the observer revolve and left the stars at rest. Now in metaphysics we can try in a similar way regarding the intuition of objects. If intuition has to conform to the constitution of the objects, then I do not see how we can know anything of them a priori; but if the object (as an object of the senses) conforms to the constitution of our faculty of intuition, then I can very well represent this possibility to myself. Yet because I cannot stop with these intuitions, if they are to become cognitions, but must refer them as representations to something as their object and determine this object through them, I can assume either that the concepts through which I bring about this determination also conform to the objects, and then I am once again in the same difficulty about how I could know anything about them a priori, or else I assume that the objects, or what is the same thing, the experience in which alone they can be cognized (as given objects) conforms to those concepts, in which case I immediately see an easier way out of the difficulty, since experience itself is a kind of cognition requiring the understanding, whose rule I have to presuppose in myself before any object is given to me, hence a priori, which rule is expressed in concepts a priori, to which all objects of experience must therefore necessarily conform, and with which they must agree. "
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1. Kant says "Such a dogmatist promises to extend human knowledge beyond the limits of possible experience; while I humbly confess that this is completely beyond my power." He says that he has no power over the dogmatic promises. A dogmatist is a person who asserts his or her opinions in an unduly positive or arrogant manner. Kant may have an issue with this because he thinks that his perspective is the only right answer.
ReplyDelete2. The two indispensable conditions are certitude and clearness. I agree because these two things are necessary because they allow us to have reason.
3. Kant says that the two sides have to do with pure understanding along with demonstrating a priori conceptions. The issues were that reason is an essential part of the Critique. Kant's conclusion was "if my subjective deduction does not produce in his mind the conviction of its certitude at which I aimed, the objective deduction, with which alone the present work is properly concerned, is in every respect satisfactory.
1) Kant's perspective on "dogmatist promises" are that it is to extend human knowledge beyond the limits of possible experience, which Kant believes that that it completely beyond his power. A dogmatist is someone that asserts opinions in an arrogant manner. Kant has an issue with their perspective because Kant would rather examine reason alone and its pure thought, and does not need to go past experience because all Kant needs is his mind.
ReplyDelete2) The two indispensable conditions are certitude and clearness. I believe that these two things are necessary because without certitude and clearness, then everything is solely opinionated and confusing which is not beneficial to other people.
3) Kant's prior investigations into pure reason was that there were two sides, one that relates to the objects of the pure understanding, and is intended to demonstrate the objective validity of its a priori conceptions. The other considers the pure understanding itself, its possibility and its powers of cognition. The issues were that it does not belong essentially to the main purpose of the work because the grand question is what and how much can reason and understanding, apart from experience, cognize. The conclusions were that a reader has a right to demand discursive or logical clearness on the basis of conceptions and secondly, intuitive or aesthetic clearness, by means of intuitions, that is, by examples or other modes of illustration in concreto.
4) Kant became aware of the magnitude of his task and the numerous problems which would be presented in front of him. He realized that the critical investigation would be far from brief, but found it unwise to enlarge it with more examples and explanations which were necessary from a popular point of view.
5) Metaphysics is described as being a science which admits completion. This science is nothing more than the inventory of all that is given us by pure reason. What reason produces from itself cannot lie concealed, but must be brought to the light by reason itself, so soon as we have discovered the common principle of the ideas we seek.
Delete6) Our cognition must apply to the objects, but attempting to know something about them before the fact would go beyond our cognition, and then be nothing. Let us suppose metaphysics by assuming these object must apply with our cognition. This would be similar with the possibility of an a priori cognition. A priori is to establish something before given to you or known to you. Copernicus did a priori assumptions. He did so when he made no progress in the explanation of celestial motions, so he assumed that the entire celestial host revolved around him, the observer. He then tried to see if this assumption would provide himself with greater success. If intuition must apply to the object, then a priori will not work. But, if the object of the senses must conform to the humans intuition, then a priori would work. ( I did not understand the part from "Yet because I cannot stop with these intuitions.... and with which they must agree."
Also, the quote on page 10 translates to "Live with yourself, get to know how poorly furnished you are."
1) The perspective Kant portrays on "dogmatist promises" is that they are to extend human knowledge beyond the limits of possible experience, which Kant believes that is completely beyond his power. A dogmatist is someone that asserts opinions in an arrogant manner. The issue Kant has with their perspective is because Kant would rather examine reason alone and its pure thought, and does not need to go past experience because all Kant needs is his mind.
ReplyDelete2. The two indispensable conditions are certitude and clearness. I agree because without these two things, we wouldnt be able to reason.
3. Kant says that the two sides have to do with one that relates to the objects of the pure understanding, and is intended to demonstrate the objective validity of its a priori conceptions. The other considers the pure understanding itself, its possibility and its powers of cognition.Reason is an essential part of Critique and this brought about an issue. For the conclusions it stated that is was that a reader has a right to demand discursive or logical clearness on the basis of conceptions and secondly, intuitive or aesthetic clearness, by means of intuitions.
4) He became aware of the magnitude of his task and the numerous problems that would be presented in front of him when he realized that the critical investigation would be far from brief however found it unwise to enlarge it with more examples and explanations which were necessary from a popular point of view.
5) Kant describes Metaphysics in his second reading as being a science which admits completion. That this science is nothing more than the inventory of all that is given us by pure reason. What reason produces from itself cannot lie concealed, but must be brought to the light by reason itself.
6)Let our cognition conform around objects but knowing the fact before them the fact would go beyond our cognition and then be nothing. A priori is to estsblish something before given to you or known to you. Its knowing something before which is what Copernicus did. He made a priori assumptions. He assumed that the entire celestial host revovled around him when he made no progress in the explanation of celestial motions. He tried to see if the assumption would bring him with greater success. However a priori will not work if intuitition applied to the object. However a priori would work if the object of the senses conform to the humans intuition.
1. Dogmatist are those who state their ideals and endorses wholeheartedly without questions. Kant might find this line of thought a problem since there is little to no reason put forth from these people’s ideas. Overall it’s probably just his ideals he got from Hume.
ReplyDelete2. The two are clearness and certitude. Although I think clearness is indispensable certitude should only be present when you can state a fact with defined proof.
3. One side deals with the understanding of Kant’s priori conceptions while the other is the power of cognition or understanding itself. Issues Kant points out is that all of these definite things he is stating as his opinion and that in the end the reader can think differently or even against what he wishes to bring to light.
4. While working on the Critique what Kant thought were viable examples of the power of understanding he soon found himself stuffing his text with numerous examples that ultimately would drown out the point he wants to make.
5. Kant describes metaphysics as “the only science which admits of completion”.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete1. Kant says "Such a dogmatist promises to extend human knowledge beyond the limits of possible experience; while I humbly confess that this is completely beyond my power." Kant makes assumptions that he has no power over the dogmatic promises. A dogmatist is a person who asserts his or her opinions in an unduly positive or arrogant manner. Kant may have an issue with this because he thinks that his perspective is the only right answer.
ReplyDelete2. The two indispensable conditions are certitude and clearness. I agree because these two things are necessary because they allow us to have reason.
3. Kant says that the multiple sides have to do with pure understanding along with demonstrating a priori conceptions. The issues were that reason is an essential part of the Critique. Kant's conclusion was "if my subjective deduction does not produce in his mind the conviction of its certitude at which I aimed, the objective deduction, with which alone the present work is properly concerned, is in every respect satisfactory.
4) Kant was aware of the importance of his task and the numerous problems that would be presented in front of him when he realized that the critical investigation would be far from brief however found it unwise to enlarge it with more examples and explanations which were necessary from a popular point of view.
5) Metaphysics is described as being a science which admits completion. This science is nothing more than the inventory of all that is given us by pure reason. What reason produces from itself cannot lie concealed, but must be brought to the light by reason itself.
6)Our cognitions were based around knowing the fact before them the fact would go beyond our cognition and then be nothing. A priori is to estsblish something before given to you or known to you. Its knowing something before which is what Copernicus did. He made a priori assumptions. He did so when he made no progress in the explanation of celestial motions, so he assumed that the entire celestial host revolved around him, the observer. He then tried to see if this assumption would provide himself with greater success. If intuition must apply to the object, then a priori will not work. But, if the object of the senses must conform to the humans intuition, then a priori would work.
1) Kant's perception on "dogmatist promises" is that they expand human knowledge beyond the limits of experience. A dogmatist is someone who arrogantly states opinions. The main problem Kant has with the dogmatist promise is his desire to examine reason and pure thought rather then previous experience.
ReplyDelete2. The two indispensable conditions are certitude and clearness. Both of theses are important parts of humans understanding.
3. Kant says that the two sides relate to the objects of the pure understanding, and is intended on showing the objective legality in its a priori conceptions. The other considers the pure understanding itself, its possibility and the cognition.Reason has an important part to play in Critique. As for conclusions it stated that a reader has a right to logical clearness when it comes to basis of conceptions and aesthetic clearness by means of intuitions.
4) Kant became aware of the magnitude of his task, he realized that a critical investigation would be a long precess however decided that adding examples would only cause confusion.
5) Kant describes Metaphysics as a science which admits completion. This science is just an inventory of all that provides pure reason. By this reason itself cannot be blocked, rather must be present.
6)Let our thoughts understand objects but knowing about them before the fact would go beyond our thought.. A priori is to think of something before you understand it. Copernicus did this. He made a priori assumptions. He assumed that celestial motion revolved around him however he made no progress in explaining celestial motions. He wished to see if assumption would help bring him success. However a priori only works if the object of senses conforms to humans intuition.
Kant's perspective on "dogmatist promises" is that he has no affiliation with them because they go beyond the limits of possible experience. A dogmatist is someone who lays down principles and, when doing so, disregards evidence from others which may disprove their principles. Kant may not agree with dogmatists because they go past reason and experience and choose to delve into an area where there can be no experience.
ReplyDelete2. The two indispensable conditions when critiquing pure reason are certitude and clearness. Certitude prevents opinions or hypotheses to be allowed in the discussion. There must be absolute certainty and factual evidence to argue against pure reason. Clearness must be involved so that the argument is made known and understandable to all who are involved and impacted. I agree with these conditions because they prevent illogical assumptions and jumps in thought to be present when discussing such a difficult topic as pure reason.
3. Kant's prior investigations into pure reason was that there were two sides. One of the sides related to the objects of the pure understanding and was intended to showcase the objective validity of its a priori conceptions. The other considers the pure understanding itself, its possibility and its powers of cognition. The issues were that it does not belong essentially to the main purpose of the work "because the grand question is what and how much can reason and understanding, apart from experience, cognize, and not, how is the faculty of thought itself possible?" The conclusions were that a reader has a right to demand discursive or logical clearness on the basis of conceptions as well as intuitive or aesthetic clearness, by means of intuitions, that is, by examples or other modes of illustration in concreto.
4. When first starting the critique, Kant realized the magnitude of his task. Kant realized that although it would be popular, enlarging his work with more explaining and examples would only make his work more confusing and unnecessarily large.
5. Metaphysics is nothing more than the inventory of all that is given to us by pure reason. That which comes to us from reason must be brought up by reason itself to be incorporated into metaphysics if it is applicable.
6. It has been assumed that all that we come to know through thought, experience, and our senses must be bound to the laws of objects. A priori is when something is established about objects before they are given to us. In metaphysics we can try a priori and establish a premise about something which we do not have. If we do not need reasoning or understanding to know something then a priori is not necessary. Copernicus used a priori to make changes in the way he went about his work by saying that the observer revolved and the stars rest. When thinking of the reality of an object, that which is known without reason makes the whole object conform to this understanding. Experience is subject to understanding which means the full thought must conform.
1. Kant claims that the Dogmatist is one who promises to extend human knowledge, through there "law." Kant's view on this "Dogmatist Promises" are that they are not valid, he says this because they are not based off of facts. Kant, one who believes in experience, knowledge, and reason, does not believe in this type of presumed law, and truly he thinks his way is the best.
ReplyDelete2. The two indispensable conditions are certitude, and clearness. These two conditions are useful, and viable because they help us come to a logical conclusion. Without these two things, assumptions are made, and there is no certainty when it comes to philosophy.
3. The two sides are the "objects of the pure understanding", and and the "validity of a priori conceptions." Kant goes on to speak on how without reason, and understanding we would not be able to produce our own thought,which makes sense. There is no real conclusion other than the statement before, Kant only talks about how he feels responsibility in his role/task to take on sacving philosophy.
4. Continuing off my answer for #3, Kant realized (more like felt) that when creating his philosophy he left a lot of room for himself to be called a hypocrite. I say this because he now realized that his philosophy must be perfect, and he has something to prove. He feels the responsibility to explain his point of view.
5. His idea on metaphysics is that it relies on reason. Without reason, know thought or opinion would have been created in the first place. So in this sense, Kant wants to refresh the idea of metaphsyics, as a necessary use for using pure reason.
6. It has been put forth that all cognition, and knowledge has been known through other objects, such as experience. However can we come to known things without this sense of beforehand experience? So it is my goal to put into place a true feeling that shows that we can know things a priori. Do we need reason to get to know something or not? The object that conforms to the cognition can be a real thing, if we think about such thing prior. If we think ahead we should be able to come to this full cognition.
1. Kant's perspective of "dogmatist promises" is that they are to extend human knowledge beyond certain limits. Kant believes that is completely beyond his control. A dogmatist is someone that asserts opinions in an arrogant manner. The issue Kant has with their perspective is because Kant would rather examine reason alone and its pure thought. Kant does not need to go past experience because all he needs is his mind and his knowledge.
ReplyDelete2. The two indispensable conditions are clearness and certitude. I agree because without these two things, there would be no way to reason.
3. Kant says that the two sides have to do with one that relates to the objects of the pure understanding, and is intended to demonstrate the objective validity of its a priori conceptions. The other considers the pure understanding itself, its possibility and its powers of cognition. Reason is a key part of Critique and this brought about an issue. For the conclusions it said that it was that a reader has a right to demand logical clearness on the basis of conceptions and, intuitive or aesthetic clearness, by means of intuitions.
4. He became aware of the importance of his task and the numerous problems that would have been shown in front of him when he realized that the critical investigation would be far from brief. However, he found it unwise to enlarge it with more examples which were necessary from a popular point of view.
5. Kant describes Metaphysics in his second reading as being a science which admits completion. This science is nothing more than the inventory of all that is given to us by pure reason. What reason produces from itself cannot lie concealed, but must be brought to the light by reason itself.
6. Let our cognition conform around objects but knowing the fact before them the fact would go beyond our cognition and then be nothing. A priori is to create something before it is given to you or known to you. It is knowing something before which is what Copernicus did. He made a priori assumptions. He assumed that the entire celestial host revovled around him when he made no progress in the explanation of celestial motions. He tried to see if the assumption would bring him with greater success. However, a priori will not work if intuition is applied to the object. However a priori would work if the object of the senses conform to the humans intuition.
1. Kant's perspective on "dogmatist promises" is that they are nothing because they transcend limits of experience. A dogmatist is someone who creates rules by forgoing experience. Kant would not agree with them because they go beyond the clarity of reason.
ReplyDelete2. The two indispensable conditions are certitude and clearness. I agree with their importance because without them, ideas would be solely opinionated.
3. The two sides are:showing the validity of a priori conceptions and the possibilities and powers of pure understanding. The issues were over the importance of these two sides in the main purpose of the work. The conclusion is that a reader should be given clear understandable work to read.
4. When Kant first began his critique, he realized the magnitude of his task. He realized that to be successful, he must be able to clearly explain his solution to saving metaphysics.
5. Kant defines Metaphysics as an inventory of all that is given by pure reason. This shows how pure reason fuels and supplies Metaphysics.
6. Our cognition must conform around objects, but knowing the fact before means nothing. A priori establishes something before we know it. This is exactly like Copernicus's situation. He made a priori assumptions as well. This is seen in his theory of the universe's center of gravity For it to work, it must conform to the senses.
1.Kant thinks Dogmastic Theories are ways of filling in the blanks of what people can't know in a prideful manner. He takes issue with dogmas because they "cannot" be questioned and can prevent progress.
ReplyDelete2. The two types of Indespensable Conditions are clearness and certitude. I agree with this because all facts must stem from these categories as they are definite ways of differentiating what is and is not reality.
3. Kant delves into the sides of objects of pure reason and the validity of a priori thought. Kant analyzes these two sides and concludes that we have a right logical clarity.
4. Kant realized the magnitude of his work when he saw how his data and examples were piling up. He was beginning to sound repetitive and would lose his message in itself. Kant realized he would have to scale back his work to just essentials.
5. To Kant, metaphysics is reason and what we can uncover through it. Kant wishes to reinvigorate this science.
6. Even though it hasn't been practiced, we can know aclmoelegde something as itself. Even if we have no prior on it we must shift our perspective. So maybe if we follow Copernicus' lead we will uncover a new truth. Much like he did. We must follow our senses.
ReplyDelete1)" Such a dogmatist promises to extend human knowledge beyond the limits of possible experience; while I humbly confess that this is completely beyond my power", says Kant. A dogmatist is a person who asserts his or her opinions in an unduly positive or arrogant manner. Kant believes his perspective is right , this may be the reason he doesn't like their perspective.
ReplyDelete2)The two indispensable conditions are certitude and clearness. I agree Bc without these two , we wouldn't be able to reason.
3) Kant says that the two sides have to do with pure understanding along with demonstrating a priori conceptions. Issues is that reason is an essential part of the Critique. Kant's conclusion is, "If my subjective deduction does not produce in his mind the conviction of its certitude at which I aimed, the objective deduction, with which alone the present work is properly concerned, is in every respect satisfactory."
4) Kant became aware of the magnitude of his task and the numerous problems which would be presented in front of him. Kant realized that the critical investigation would be far from brief. However, he found it unwise to enlarge it with more examples and explanations which were necessary from a popular point of view.
5) Kant describes Metaphysics as being a science which admits completion. Science is nothing more than the inventory of all that is given to us by pure reason. What reason produces from itself cannot lie concealed, but must be brought to the light by reason itself.
6) Our cognitions were based around knowing the truth before the truth would go beyond our cognition and then be nothing. A priori is to estsblish something before given to you or known to you. Its knowing something before which is what Copernicus did. Kant made a priori assumptions. He did so when he made no progress in the explanation of celestial motions, so he assumed that the entire celestial host revolved around him, the observer. Afterwards, he tried to see if this assumption would provide himself with greater success. The intuition must apply to the object, then a priori will not work. If the object of the senses must conform to the humans intuition, then a priori would work.
1. Kant’s view on dogmatist promises that the knowledge of human reason always has limits. Dogmatist is when one says common opinions. I think Kant might have an issue with the look on reason instead of experience.
ReplyDelete2. Two conditions were clear of mind and certainty. They are indispensable because you will need them to understand human reason.
3. His prior investigations into pure reason were supposed to show the basic conceptions of the priori. The issues were hat people didn’t understand its importance. The conclusions were that logic became clear so others began to understand the main concept of the mind.
4. Kant became aware of the magnitude of his task when he saw that certain things can make other decisions harder even when they aren’t hard.
5. He defines and describes his metaphysics as a science that is fully complete. Reason and metaphysics are related to one another because they both are needed to finish off the knowledge of the mind.
6. Everything needs an explanation and once you have that you can explain on the assumptions. The perspective that we can get from others helps us resolve problems that appear. Objects of experience are necessary for things to agree with one another.
1. A dogmatist is one that promises human knowledge past possible experience. Kant's perspective on a dogmatist is he sees it as invalid, because he believes on the basis of using reason alone. Kant probably feels this way is too systematic and disregards the facts.
ReplyDelete2. The two indispensable conditions are certitude and clearness, I agree with this because clear certainty cannot occur without reason.
3. Kant's prior investigation has two sides, the validity of a priori and the potential of pure understanding. There are objective conclusions that come from a priori, and it is considered to be valid from both sides. Reason is essential for a priori.
4. Kant realized that "the magnitude of his task" is going to be much more complex. From using reason and logic to come to conclusions based on fact he realized that it will take much more depth and time to explain; examples would occupy much of the time worked on it.
5. Kant describes Metaphysics in his second reading as a science. This is a science like any other with definitive conclusions. Coming from reason and logic are facts. This is a science with the space open for pure reasoning, and that must be accepted by humans.
6. All our cognition must adapt to objects. Knowing before hand means nothing if it is not applied with reason. A priori exists to help one understand and know. The truth is based around objects and their validity. If the intuition of objects comes before the regards to a priori, it does not represent anything. These objects must be determined through concepts of common knowledge and human reason. The simpler way is for objects to conform to concepts after the fact, and that gives it truth. Objects are expressed by humans in a necessary way.
1. Kants view on dogmatist promises is that human reason has its limits. Dogmatists disregard human reason and make absurd opinions.
ReplyDelete2.Two conditions are certitude and clarity. These are the foundations of reason.
3.His investigations show the basic concepts of a priori assumptions .These things relate to human understanding.
4.Kant became aware of the magnitude of his task, he saw his problems somewhat pile up. He then realized his work would be far from brief, ,Also that his work would have an effect on people.
5.Metaphysics is a science that is complete. Kant describes metaphysics as being fueled by reason ad logic.Kant wants to reinvigorate metaphysics. He believe that is knowledge is reason can be extracted.
6.The assumptions that we made requires explanation.We must base our cognition around truth and when that happens we can make better assumptions. Kant was known for making a priori assumptions. These are assumptions made before the fact that require a sense of direction and reason. Copernicus is an example of this, because he believed in the notion the celestial motion revolved around him.
1)Kant’s perspective on dogmatist promises are that they seek to widen the depth of human knowledge past the borders of “human experience.” Which he admits is not of reach but beyond him. A dogmatist “is someone who expresses strongly held opinions and accepts them to be accepted without question. “ Kant may have an issue because from his perspective all their opinions and solutions are the only right answer. Kant admits that their promises are beyond him which means he doesn’t seek past human experience.
ReplyDelete2)The two indispensable conditions are certitude and clearness. Yes I believe that these two conditions because they help distinguish options from fact. Certitude “certain” clearness “clear” the solution is now comprehendible without you are confused it is shrouded with doubt.
3. Kant says that the two sides include the objects of pure reasoning and the demonstration of understanding with priori conceptions. The issues were they didn’t connect to the original frame of work. Kant's conclusion was that the reader needs to establish his own conceptions
4) Kant was aware of the growing problems that arose in front of him. He realized that the investigation wouldn’t be brief but he decided that it was unwise to provide more examples.
5) Kant describes metaphysics as a science which “admits completion.” This science is only a storage room for the information that has been provided by pure reason.
6) Usually we would assume that we acquire all our knowledge from the objects. All of our attempts to find out about them have led to dead ends. Let’s suggest for once that metaphysical objects doesn’t coincide with our cognition which would go better with establishing information about objects before they are given to us. If our instinct has to obey the foundation of objects I don’t see how we gain a concept of a prior. I can’t stop with these intuitions, if they eventually become cognitions, you must refer them as figures, and decide what they mean and what they are. I can assume either the concepts I have made obey the objects, or the objects obey the concepts. In this way I have an easy solution, if experience is a form of perception that requires understanding, I have to apply it to myself before anything is given to me. This is a priori, all objects of experience must conform and agree with a priori concepts
1. Kant's opinion of "dogmatist promises" is that their job is to extend human knowledge beyond certain limits. Kant believes this is beyond his control. A dogmatist is someone whom asserts their opinions in an arrogant way. Kant has an issue with their perspective because he would rather examine reason alone and its pure thought. Kant does not need to go beyond the realm of experience because all he needs is his mind and his knowledge, which have experienced all he needs them to.
ReplyDelete2. The two indispensable conditions are certitude and clearness. I agree because without these two, there would be no way to reason.
3. Kant says that the two sides have to do with one that relates to the objects of the pure understanding. This is intended to demonstrate the objective validity of the a priori conceptions. The other considers the pure understanding itself, its possibility and its powers of cognition. Reason is a key part of Critique and this brought about an issue. Because in the conclusions it says that a reader has the right to demand logical clearness on the basis of conceptions and, intuitive or aesthetic clearness, by means of intuitions.
4. Kant became aware of how important his task was and the numerous problems that would appear when he realized that the critical investigation would be nowhere near brief. However, he figured it wouldn't be wise to enlarge it with more examples which were necessary from a popular point of view.
5. Kant describes Metaphysics as a science that admits to completion. This science is nothing more than an inventory of all the things given to us via pure reason. What reason produces from itself cannot lie concealed, but must be brought to the light by reason itself.
6. Let our cognition conform around objects but knowing the fact before them, the fact would go beyond our cognition and then be nothing. A priori is to have prior knowledge of something before your current encounter or experience with it. It is knowing something before which is what Copernicus did; he made a priori assumptions. He assumed that the entire celestial host revolved around him when he made no progress in the explanation of celestial motions. He tried to see if this assumption would bring him greater success. However, a priori will not work if intuition is applied to the object. However a priori would work if the object of the senses conforms to the human's intuition.
1. Kants dogmatic view is all about how limited the human mind is in its regard to imagination and reason. Kant believes he is an expert in the field of dogmatic view because he believes he has fond his limit to his mind
ReplyDelete2. certitude and clearness are the two indispensable conditions discussed.
3.his investigations have brought forth his findings on human understanding and attempting to understand a priori.
4.Kant eventually became aware of the growing problem of problems only becoming bigger problems when the decisions made turned bad and just dug the hole deeper.
5.what Kant is trying to get at is in order to reinvent science we must better understand his metaphysics of reason.
6.as we have learned through studying Kant A priori is to think of something before you understand it. through cognition we find a better way of understanding the fact of an object before hand.if a sort of intuition is given to any object a priori becomes completely null to it. Copernicus is one of the best examples for Kants theory given how he theorized the earths revolment around the sun as using a priori on most objects.
1. His dogmatic view was that the human mind sometimes refuses to use itself for reason and imagination. A dogmatist is a person who believes that their views are superior to others and they attempt to put their views ahead of everyone else's.
ReplyDelete2. The two indispensable conditions are certitude and clearness. yes i agree with these because they help us as humans use and practice reason.
3. The two sides include the object of pure reasoning and the demonstration of understanding using a priori thoughts and concepts.
4. Kant realized that a big issue was upcoming, and problems were becoming a major epidemic and were just getting worse and worse.
5. Metaphysics is a necessity to the remodeling of science and without it we cannot understand and rebuild science.
6. We as humans understand all that we do through, knowledge and the objects surrounding us. Through these objects, we can gain the knowledge necessary to fully understand, or somewhat understand, the things we know as they are. If our intuition must be the reason for our understanding of things, there is no way we can truly understand them, however. We must experience and realize objects that we do not all ready understand and focus on more closely. All objects, in theory, must know each other to truly allow knowledge to be gained and understood.