Kant: The Critique of Pure Reason
a. Preface to the second edition 1787;
b. the whole Introduction:
namely from “I. Of the difference between Pure and Empirical Knowledge” to “VII. Idea and Division of a Particular Science, under the Name of a Critique of Pure Reason”)
text available at http://www.gutenberg.org/dirs/etext03/cprrn10.txt
Journals due on April 13.
Guidance questions:
1. Which problem does Kant see in Mathematics, Natural Science (Physics) and Metaphysics (philosophy)? What does he aim to achieve?
2. How is judgment important for science? What means a priori synthetic judgment?
3. What means Copernican Turn in Kant's view of knowledge?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Jonathan Hicks
ReplyDeleteJudgement is important in science because through the methods that's used to acquire facts are accurate and can be proved scientifically that's why judgement is important in science as far as determining what's true and false.Priori synthetic judgement means a judgement that's not based on first hand knowledge but on the gathering of evidence.For instance,if a group of people witness a person doing something first hand that's authentic.However,if and individual doesn't have firsthand knowledge of a situation and judge someone with what they think they know that's, priori synthetic judgement.
Analyzing Kant's critique of reason he implies that metaphysics goes beyond perception or experiences effectively making synthetic judgment beyond the definition of existing concepts because metaphysical principles must be synthetic.Judgment is important for science if one aims for priori knowlege. In my opinion it is important to have a synthetic judgment (priori) to explaining how science provides knowledge about the world and enviroment.
ReplyDeletei have to agree with jonathan. science is important to jugement..however i would like to add it there is a limit to that as well. i dont believe that science can influence a jugement on everything. for example knowing whats right from wrong. you cannot use an scientific jugement on that to develop an idea on whats right from wrong because each individual has a diffrent opininon on whats right from wrong. The question that i would like to know does science and jugement play a role on our everyday roles as a human being?
ReplyDelete1.Which problem does Kant see in Mathematics, Natural Science snd Metaphysics? What does he aim to achieve?
ReplyDeleteAccording to my understanding, Kant saw that Mathematics, Natural Science an Metaphysics all have a common problem in that they are mostly based on empirical knowledge. A simple example that I would like to use to support Kant is that; two plus three is equal to five and will never be anything else than five. This is true and real before experience and does not depend on past present and future experience.
Since these great sciences rise above all level of experience, he required that their knowledge should be derived according to a priori synthetis principles. Priori synthesis means that that the properties have strict universality. Kant found that there are too many conflicting ideas in Mathematics, Metaphysics and Physics which originated from the philosophers involved in these sciences. He felt that if you try to obtain knowledge about these subject theories, concepts alone will be impossible. He aims at employing priori synthesis in order to come to common grounds about these sciences. In doing so, this would bring together experience and reason, and form "pure" reason to explain and put forward knowledge of the sciences.
Kunti
want to agree and disagree with Sean’s statement. I believe that science can influence judgment and it can effect decisions like what is right from wrong. With out certain things that where discovered through science we wouldn’t know whether what we are thinking or saying is right; I feel science had to be involved in it some how. I don’t think science can influence judgment all the time. I feel that we have enough knowledge to discern certain things with the help of science.
ReplyDeleteBut Kant had a different idea of how our minds contain knowledge, and how reality conforms to us and the knowledge we know and not the other way around.
What means a priori synthetic judgment?
ReplyDeleteAll mathematical propositions, for example, are a priori. Other examples of fields containing synthetic a priori judgments include pure mathematics and pure science. Similarly, all the important statements of metaphysics are synthetic a priori propositions. When viewed this way, the problem of metaphysics becomes one of determining how to make synthetic a priori judgments in that domain. I believe given the success of mathematics and natural science, which also deal with synthetic a priori judgments, there seems cause to hope for at least some semblance of real progress in the field when the appropriate rules of the game are recognised.
1.Which problem does Kant see in Mathematics, Natural Science snd Metaphysics? What does he aim to achieve?
ReplyDeleteI agree with Kunti statement. Kant said that mathematic, natural science and metaphysics all have the same problem, they are all based on empirical knowledge and synthetic judgement. Synthetic judgement is a proposition whose predicate concept is not contained in its subject concept. They are sythetic through priori. Priori is the knowledge not dependent on or through experience. Mathematic, natural science and metaphysics require knowledge above and beyond experience.
Sheila Lopez
i have to agree that science is important to judgment because we use science everyday to judge what is right and what is wrong. i think judgment is important to science because we use science to make assumptions about the world.we once assume the world was flat but because of science later found that the world is round. well i guess you can say judgment can determine how we live our life's. also it is important that science prove the true knowledge about our environment and the universe.
ReplyDeleteandrew nandalall
A priori synthetic judgment is the necessary and universal knowledge we have independent of experience, like knowledge of math. Pure reason is capable of knowing important truths. What we consider reality is actually shaped by the perceiving mind. With that idea Kant believes humans minds are an active originator of experience instead of a passive recipient of experience. Kant believed that the external world depended upon the position and movement of its observers. Kant did not believe in rationalists or the empiricists, but more about the philosophy that human knowledge is gained by our concepts that shape our experience of objects. Our knowledge comes from the structure of our mind.
ReplyDeleteA priori synthetic judgments means knowledge that are based on evidence that we gather, like reaching out to the real world, and employing concepts to make statement about how things are as a matter of fact. this include pure mathematics and pure science.
ReplyDeletethis judgement is universal and necessary in virtue of the form, and valid for an empirical world is virtue of the matter but we need both. because with out either where will we be.
3. What means Copernican Turn in Kant's view of knowledge?
ReplyDeleteIn Kant's view of knowledge in the Copernican Turn, he reaches the conclusion that certain types of metaphysics are possible, while others are not. Kant felt that we should try to remove ourselves and our influence from the explanation of metaphysics. He questions whether we are innately prone to see things in a certain way. The basic question that Hume brings up and tries to answer is whether metaphysics is possible as a science- or to put it another way. Kant could not explain metaphysics on a transcendent level, so he simply turned to faith to justify the existence of it. Kant stated that no matter who we are and what lives we lead everything must have a spatial and temporal origin.
Kant felt that mathematic, natural science and metaphysics had the same predicament in common which was that they were all built on empirical knowledge and synthetic judgement. I feel judgment is important to science, because it allows for different opinions causing new ideas to flourish; however it’s not dependent on judgment. Judgment can also be the same as an assumption, which isn’t necessarily true. This same assumption can be damaging misinformation that can hold us back either further from possible absolute truth.
ReplyDeleteKant had a different view on what is universal knowledge than most of the philosophers we have studied so far. He believes more in knowledge being also because of human intuition and experience. But it also has to be backed up with science and metaphysics. because you can not prove something is 100 percent truth based on intuition or feelings.
ReplyDeleteisabella Soteldo
I agree with this theory, because just like intuition, science is not always right either. For example, when we thought that Pluto was a planet and now we find out that it is not. Science has to be backed up with intuition to be knowledge. I also think this makes us more human. And makes the concept of knowledge more universal.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteKant argues that mathematics and the principles of science contain synthetic a priori knowledge. For example, 7 + 5 = 12 is a priori because it is a necessary and universal truth we know independent of experience, and it is synthetic because the concept of 12 is not contained in the concept of 7 + 5. Kant argues that the same is true for scientific principles such as for every action there is an equal opposite reaction because it is universally applicable, it must be a priori knowledge, since a posteriori knowledge only tells us about particular experiences.
ReplyDeleteAlso although distinctions similar to Kant’s a priori posteriori distinction and his synthetic analytic distinction have been made by other philosophers like Hume and Leibniz, I think Kant is the first to apply two such distinctions to generate a third category for knowledge. He is an intelligent philosopher.
The only knowledge we can have is that there is Noumenal Reality, Phenomenal Experience, and the Structure of the MIND. Once we understand how our MINDS generate our reality (Kant's Philosophy of Mind) - that is our first Science; our most certain knowledge. The MIND interprets Neumena into Phenomena - and it adds space and time (three dimensional ordinary physical existence) in the process. Space is one of the fulcrums that the MIND uses to interpret the really real - the neumenal reality. Our ordinary phenomenal world is largely illusory. The MIND constructs much of reality. In fact, our ordinary way of conceiving of "physical reality" is incorrect. Besides space, another fulcrum the mind uses to present phenomena to us is time. When you see some phenomena (e.g., a fire hydrant), you have to remember that what you see is not divorsed from your MIND's influence. Most of that fire hydrant is mental (phenomenal). In fact, you can't know what is really real about that fire hydrant - since the MIND doesn't have the capabiliies to give you that information. Neumenal reality - what is really real - is unknowable to us; on the other hand, we do know that neumenal reality exists and is what is really real.
ReplyDelete