Kant

Discuss any topics related to metaphysics (the philosophical study of the principles of reality) or epistemology (the philosophical study of knowledge) in this forum.
User avatar
Ephrium
New Trial Member
Posts: 10
Joined: February 21st, 2017, 1:20 pm

Kant

Post by Ephrium »

I have heard a lot about Kant and am a philosophy undergraduate. However, even after researching many areas, these scholastic papers do not seem to tell me whether Kant is correct or wholesale wrong. For instance even Stanford encyclopedia of Philosophy just state what Kant’s viewpoint is

https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/kant ... -idealism/

https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/kant-spacetime/

They do not state whether it is rubbish or what

In contrast, other topics such as Causation in philosophy or Justified True Belief have more definite answers whether they are “right or wrong”

Now how shall I take Kant’s theory
Fooloso4
Posts: 3601
Joined: February 28th, 2014, 4:50 pm

Re: Kant

Post by Fooloso4 »

Ephrium:
For instance even Stanford encyclopedia of Philosophy just state what Kant’s viewpoint is
They do not state whether it is rubbish or what
You should dismiss anything that says that Kant is rubbish as rubbish. It should be realized what an enormous and difficult task it is to say what Kant’s viewpoint is, so difficult in fact, that you will not find general agreement. If you are to either accept or reject something Kant says you must first have a plausible explanation of what it is he is and is not saying. In my opinion, his most important contribution is in showing that perception is not passive, that how we see things is not determined simply by how they are but by how we are. Where I disagree with this is that I do not think there is a universal, unchanging structure of the mind.

There are, of course, so many other topics he addresses that making a general judgment by which the whole of what he says is dismissed as wrong is wrong.
Namelesss
Posts: 499
Joined: November 15th, 2017, 1:59 am

Re: Kant

Post by Namelesss »

Ephrium wrote: March 30th, 2018, 11:14 am I have heard a lot about Kant and am a philosophy undergraduate. However, even after researching many areas, these scholastic papers do not seem to tell me whether Kant is correct or wholesale wrong.
If you are studying to be a philosopher, you are going to have to learn how to think for yourself!
One cannot say whether anyone is/was ever "wholesale" right or wrong.
Much of Kant's opinions have been refuted.
'Ancient' thinkers did not have the advantage of modern science (QM) to guide their 'philosophical' ramblings.
Science, all sciences, are feeder branches on the tree of philosophy!
A philosopher is conversant with cutting edge science, and even beyond!

If you are studying Kant, I suggest that you learn how to think critically and learn science (QM) and evaluate his opinions for yourself.
In contrast, other topics such as Causation in philosophy or Justified True Belief have more definite answers whether they are “right or wrong”
Well, if you understand how 'causation/creation' is impossible, and "justified true belief" is nonsense, then you are 'right'! *__-
Now how shall I take Kant’s theory
Kant, like everyone else, has a multitude of hypotheses and opinions and thoughts, there is no 'unified whole' to accept or reject.
It sounds like you have nor studied/read/understood his ideas yet, that you ask this question.
I can refute some of his opinions, but that is because I can evaluate them for myself, and support my analysis/refutation with logic, science.... and my .45! *__-
User avatar
Burning ghost
Posts: 3065
Joined: February 27th, 2016, 3:10 am

Re: Kant

Post by Burning ghost »

Read his work and try and understand it as best you can. I wouldn't rely on what others have written about Kant if you've not read him yourself.

Once you've read Critique of Pure Reason cover to cover, and tried your damn hardest to absorb it, then you should look to the thoughts of others. Often you'll find people have many opinions about Kant when they are doing no more than recycling the ideas of others who've read Kant rather than actually reading it themselves.

It's the most worn book on my shelf. It is neither easy nor enjoyable to read. IMO it is a must read if you're serious about improving your reading ability if nothing else.

If you take it on in a respectful manner you'll be referring to it for years to come I assure you. As a piece of analytic philosophy many regard it as the best. It is amazing to think that he could hold such things together in his head.
AKA badgerjelly
User avatar
Ephrium
New Trial Member
Posts: 10
Joined: February 21st, 2017, 1:20 pm

Re: Kant

Post by Ephrium »

I have read through My University Guide, A companion to it, a thorough intro it it, The two Stanford articles and searched the web for other opinions.

The Critique itself more than halfway through

And very specifically the first half Most of it is about Space and time And how the things that are seen are first through us.

He gives a number of so called proofs which I do not know how to evaluate them. For instance, he claims The reason we can anticipate appearances is because these appearances are in us, something which I find fishy. Why could not the reason We can anticipate be because we are intelligent and the objects are outside us?

Of course there is his theses that space and time is only a human’s Ground of representation of the outside and inner world where these are nothing outside of us. Now what does physics tells us?

Which is the reason why I am here, to find if there is any consensus on his theories
Fooloso4
Posts: 3601
Joined: February 28th, 2014, 4:50 pm

Re: Kant

Post by Fooloso4 »

Ephrium:
For instance, he claims The reason we can anticipate appearances is because these appearances are in us, something which I find fishy. Why could not the reason We can anticipate be because we are intelligent and the objects are outside us?
The appearance or representation in us are not the objects outside us. We can only know these objects in the way we represent them to ourself, that is, as ideas.
Of course there is his theses that space and time is only a human’s Ground of representation of the outside and inner world where these are nothing outside of us. Now what does physics tells us?
Physicists have not arrived at an agreed upon notion of space and time. Most are realists in the sense that they do not think they are merely ideas in the mind, but we should not simply dismiss Kant because of this. We are still dealing with how we make sense of things, with mathematical models rather than direct observations of space and time.
Which is the reason why I am here, to find if there is any consensus on his theories
Doesn’t one of the articles point out that there is not even consensus on what his theories entail?
User avatar
Ephrium
New Trial Member
Posts: 10
Joined: February 21st, 2017, 1:20 pm

Re: Kant

Post by Ephrium »

Okay since there appears from feedback here and my research that there is no unanimous take on his theory, I will list one criticism one of his reasoning.

He claims we have Apodictic certainty that there cannot be no space BECAUSE space is the ground of our representation. Now I question, why can’t our so called apodictic certainty be due to that space itself cannot be absent and we judge it correctly rather than it due to being our so called ground? For instance two parallel lines shall not meet is not because the lines are part of the ground of the basis of our red presentation but rather they cannot meet because in reality they cannot meet!?
User avatar
Burning ghost
Posts: 3065
Joined: February 27th, 2016, 3:10 am

Re: Kant

Post by Burning ghost »

Page reference?

What you've written above seems to be the contrary nature of understanding that Kant does his hardest to cut up into manageable pieces.

I seem to remember him saying something along the lines of the impossibility of imagining anything without "space." He was essentially continuing the dualistic problem exposed by Descartes and feeling out its contrary nature.

Also, two parallel lines exist, abstractly or otherwise, only within space (abstractly or otherwise.)
AKA badgerjelly
User avatar
Ephrium
New Trial Member
Posts: 10
Joined: February 21st, 2017, 1:20 pm

Re: Kant

Post by Ephrium »

When I read I kept encountering references to A or B something. Why does it not show up in my Kindle? And if I quote it here by referencing % is it okay
User avatar
Ephrium
New Trial Member
Posts: 10
Joined: February 21st, 2017, 1:20 pm

Re: Kant

Post by Ephrium »

The transcendental Aesthetic First section on Space (B37) Points one and two
User avatar
The Beast
Posts: 1403
Joined: July 7th, 2013, 10:32 pm

Re: Kant

Post by The Beast »

From the Noema there is a downward or upward emergence. With the emergence of the observer a duality occurs and the negative existencials originate the paradoxes. As such, the Apeiron is not the Noema but it could have a negative existencial if ( like some) have predicate Noematas. Therefore infinity existence and infinity non existence are the same. The Noema and the Apeiron are the same as the One. Change, Time and Space and the Noema as the fourth dimension. This which is changing (emergence) may be the next irreducible reality. The materialistic view or the dualistic nature of our reality. The operational mode of predication sets upon the confines of what is… and what was: an original high energy… the more energy the more freedom. This is true to noein. Infinite freedom.
Fooloso4
Posts: 3601
Joined: February 28th, 2014, 4:50 pm

Re: Kant

Post by Fooloso4 »

Ephrium:
For instance two parallel lines shall not meet is not because the lines are part of the ground of the basis of our red presentation but rather they cannot meet because in reality they cannot meet!?:
But they can meet depending on the topology. On a two dimensional plane they do not meet, but twist the paper and they do. Our representations of space have their topologies when we factor in such things as gravity.
Now I question, why can’t our so called apodictic certainty be due to that space itself cannot be absent and we judge it correctly rather than it due to being our so called ground?
If we had no idea of space, that is, if we could not represent it, we could not represent the relation between things or their location. An animal with two dimensional rather than three dimensional sight does not represent space in the same way as we do. What would our concept of space be like if we only saw in two dimensions? would we have to figure out depth via experience? Could we do so if the mind was not able to do so a priori?
User avatar
Ephrium
New Trial Member
Posts: 10
Joined: February 21st, 2017, 1:20 pm

Re: Kant

Post by Ephrium »

Fooloso4 wrote: March 31st, 2018, 4:51 pm
Now I question, why can’t our so called apodictic certainty be due to that space itself cannot be absent and we judge it correctly rather than it due to being our so called ground?
If we had no idea of space, that is, if we could not represent it, we could not represent the relation between things or their location. An animal with two dimensional rather than three dimensional sight does not represent space in the same way as we do. What would our concept of space be like if we only saw in two dimensions? would we have to figure out depth via experience? Could we do so if the mind was not able to do so a priori?
Did I say we have no representation of space? The relevant section is Transcendental Aesthetic B37 points one and two. Someone quote it here

Kant claims we are not able to represent no space while we are able to represent no object. Somehow this leads to the conclusion space is an intuition in us.

I am merely counter claiming why could it not be the case we are not able to represent “no space” because of some logical reason that there cannot be no space rather it being due to an intuition in us? Just like Decartes mentioned he cannot imagine a four sided triangle
Fooloso4
Posts: 3601
Joined: February 28th, 2014, 4:50 pm

Re: Kant

Post by Fooloso4 »

Ephrium:

The relevant section is Transcendental Aesthetic B37 points one and two. Someone quote it here

How’s this?
Now what are space and time? Are they actual entities [wirkliche Wesen]? Are they only determinations or also relations of things, but still such as would belong to them even if they were not intuited? Or are they such that they belong only to the form of intuition, and therefore to the subjective constitution of our mind, without which these predicates could not be ascribed to any things at all? (A23/B37-8).
I am merely counter claiming why could it not be the case we are not able to represent “no space” because of some logical reason that there cannot be no space rather it being due to an intuition in us? Just like Decartes mentioned he cannot imagine a four sided triangle
Sorry I misunderstood you. Let me make sure I have it right by putting it in the form of a proposition: Perhaps there is a logical reason why there must be space, and it is for this reason that we cannot represent the absence of space.

Do you mean logical a priori? Or do you mean something about time as an actual entity that would logically prevent it from not existing? If the former, are you suggesting that such a reason would mean that space is a concept rather than an intuition? If it is a concept it is not just like the case of a four sided triangle. We know by definition that a triangle has three sides. Space has no definition by which we can determine that “no space” is logically impossible.

Kant’s concern is transcendental: the condition of the possibility of appearances. (A24/B38-9) If space were a concept but not a universally agreed upon concept how could it stand as the transcendental condition of the possibility of appearances? If it is a physical entity there is still the question of how it is represented.
User avatar
The Beast
Posts: 1403
Joined: July 7th, 2013, 10:32 pm

Re: Kant

Post by The Beast »

The narrative of negative existencial is an intuition. This “intuition” is within the realm of the human brain. It is required to be human. No doubt, humans live in a three dimensional Cartesian environment so contemplating this intuition requires a fourth dimension. Quaternions are needed for a proof. The rotation sequences in a three dimensional space will be much like a bird flying or for some a mosquito buzzing in a room. What is: A built in system of high energy particles and also an innate noema. The idea of intuition moves the designs of reality. So, the question: Is fiction a negative existencial?
Nothing compares with the mechanisms packed in the brain of a mosquito buzzing around doing effortless calculations to points in the fourth dimension. To me, existencial negatives require a bigger brain. Enter Kant -ϴ
Post Reply

Return to “Epistemology and Metaphysics”

2023/2024 Philosophy Books of the Month

Entanglement - Quantum and Otherwise

Entanglement - Quantum and Otherwise
by John K Danenbarger
January 2023

Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul

Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul
by Mitzi Perdue
February 2023

Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness

Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness
by Chet Shupe
March 2023

The Unfakeable Code®

The Unfakeable Code®
by Tony Jeton Selimi
April 2023

The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are

The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are
by Alan Watts
May 2023

Killing Abel

Killing Abel
by Michael Tieman
June 2023

Reconfigurement: Reconfiguring Your Life at Any Stage and Planning Ahead

Reconfigurement: Reconfiguring Your Life at Any Stage and Planning Ahead
by E. Alan Fleischauer
July 2023

First Survivor: The Impossible Childhood Cancer Breakthrough

First Survivor: The Impossible Childhood Cancer Breakthrough
by Mark Unger
August 2023

Predictably Irrational

Predictably Irrational
by Dan Ariely
September 2023

Artwords

Artwords
by Beatriz M. Robles
November 2023

Fireproof Happiness: Extinguishing Anxiety & Igniting Hope

Fireproof Happiness: Extinguishing Anxiety & Igniting Hope
by Dr. Randy Ross
December 2023

Beyond the Golden Door: Seeing the American Dream Through an Immigrant's Eyes

Beyond the Golden Door: Seeing the American Dream Through an Immigrant's Eyes
by Ali Master
February 2024

2022 Philosophy Books of the Month

Emotional Intelligence At Work

Emotional Intelligence At Work
by Richard M Contino & Penelope J Holt
January 2022

Free Will, Do You Have It?

Free Will, Do You Have It?
by Albertus Kral
February 2022

My Enemy in Vietnam

My Enemy in Vietnam
by Billy Springer
March 2022

2X2 on the Ark

2X2 on the Ark
by Mary J Giuffra, PhD
April 2022

The Maestro Monologue

The Maestro Monologue
by Rob White
May 2022

What Makes America Great

What Makes America Great
by Bob Dowell
June 2022

The Truth Is Beyond Belief!

The Truth Is Beyond Belief!
by Jerry Durr
July 2022

Living in Color

Living in Color
by Mike Murphy
August 2022 (tentative)

The Not So Great American Novel

The Not So Great American Novel
by James E Doucette
September 2022

Mary Jane Whiteley Coggeshall, Hicksite Quaker, Iowa/National Suffragette And Her Speeches

Mary Jane Whiteley Coggeshall, Hicksite Quaker, Iowa/National Suffragette And Her Speeches
by John N. (Jake) Ferris
October 2022

In It Together: The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All

In It Together: The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All
by Eckhart Aurelius Hughes
November 2022

The Smartest Person in the Room: The Root Cause and New Solution for Cybersecurity

The Smartest Person in the Room
by Christian Espinosa
December 2022

2021 Philosophy Books of the Month

The Biblical Clock: The Untold Secrets Linking the Universe and Humanity with God's Plan

The Biblical Clock
by Daniel Friedmann
March 2021

Wilderness Cry: A Scientific and Philosophical Approach to Understanding God and the Universe

Wilderness Cry
by Dr. Hilary L Hunt M.D.
April 2021

Fear Not, Dream Big, & Execute: Tools To Spark Your Dream And Ignite Your Follow-Through

Fear Not, Dream Big, & Execute
by Jeff Meyer
May 2021

Surviving the Business of Healthcare: Knowledge is Power

Surviving the Business of Healthcare
by Barbara Galutia Regis M.S. PA-C
June 2021

Winning the War on Cancer: The Epic Journey Towards a Natural Cure

Winning the War on Cancer
by Sylvie Beljanski
July 2021

Defining Moments of a Free Man from a Black Stream

Defining Moments of a Free Man from a Black Stream
by Dr Frank L Douglas
August 2021

If Life Stinks, Get Your Head Outta Your Buts

If Life Stinks, Get Your Head Outta Your Buts
by Mark L. Wdowiak
September 2021

The Preppers Medical Handbook

The Preppers Medical Handbook
by Dr. William W Forgey M.D.
October 2021

Natural Relief for Anxiety and Stress: A Practical Guide

Natural Relief for Anxiety and Stress
by Dr. Gustavo Kinrys, MD
November 2021

Dream For Peace: An Ambassador Memoir

Dream For Peace
by Dr. Ghoulem Berrah
December 2021