, altering the physical state of the brain would automatically alter what that brain comprehends. — RussellA
Sounds like a nice place. Never been there, so afraid it is a place of imagination for me.Balboa Park, San Diego, 1971, windowpane. — Mww
If you are an idealist, then none of your claims can be refuted suppose. :DYou know, laying in the grass, you can’t tell the difference between imagining the grass is growing or your head is shrinking? — Mww
Space and time are the Categories are both a priori, however, space and time is the necessary foundation for the categories. For example, we have the concept of space and we have the concept of a number such as two, though it is a fact that although we can imagine empty space empty of numbers, we cannot imagine numbers outside of space. Consequently, first is the pure intuition of space and time within which are the pure concepts of the understanding (the categories).
We can use our cognitive facilities on our sensibilities about external objects affecting our sensibilities, but what we are able to cognize is limited by our a priori pure intuition of space and time and the a priori pure concepts of the understanding (the Categories). — RussellA
I am not sure if anyone claims that space is internal intuition or categories, then whether he could be qualified as a realist. Shouldn't he be an idealist?Kant is a Realist because, for him, the cause of our seeing the colour red originated outside our mind rather than within our mind. — RussellA
I am not sure if anyone claims that space is internal intuition — Corvus
I try not to 100% rely on or accept the internet sites information even SEP (because even SEP they don't have various different commentaries on the same topic - they tend to have 1 commentary or article on 1 topic - entails possible biased view). I try to read the original works and various printed commentaries.From SEP article on Kant's Views on Time and Space — RussellA
This idea comprises a central piece of Kant’s views on space and time, for he famously contends that space and time are nothing but forms of intuition, a view connected to the claim in the Transcendental Aesthetic that we have pure intuitions of space and of time. — RussellA
I try not to 100% rely on or accept the internet sites information — Corvus
If you claim that Space and Time was solely pure intuitions and concepts in Kant, and has nothing to do with the physical entity in the external world, then should you not brand Kant as an idealist, rather than Representative Realist? — Corvus
It is vital to bear in mind that I am not denying Kant said that space and time was a priori pure intuition in CPR. He did. But he also had in mind that space and time is empirical reality out there too, although he doesn't make big song and dance about it. — Corvus
:up:I agree. — RussellA
So your view is also for Kant's space and time as both empirical reality and pure intuitions too. :up:IE "space" and "time" as pure intuition refer to known perceptions in the mind, whilst "space" and "time" as empirical reality refer to unknown things existing in a mind-independent world causing our known perceptions. — RussellA
So your view is also for Kant's space and time as both empirical reality and pure intuitions too — Corvus
If Kant were to think space and time inhere or subsist in themselves, and thereby they represent empirical reality, hence can be properties of things, he contradicts the tenets of his own epistemological metaphysics, not to mention it beggars the imagination as to why he would, on the one hand contradict itself, and on the other spent ten years constructing a philosophy in which it is proved they don’t. — Mww
Any idea why he had to go that way in CPR? — Corvus
In order to establish what is named today, as I understand it, as Indirect Realism, still not accepted by the Direct Realists after 200 years of debate, including people such as Hilary Putnam and John Searle. — RussellA
Did he not oppose to both rationalism and empiricism? He wanted to combine the two schools, saying that both rationalism and empiricism lack in coherence in their perspective. He then set up his own system amalgamating the two, and proved Metaphysics has more legitimacy than Natural Science, because metaphysical knowledge is based a priori categories and pure intuitions.Kant was trying to save rationalism from Hume's sceptical challenges particularly wrt causation. — unenlightened
….space and time and the matter within it are empirically real. — RussellA
….(not) denying space and time for empirical reality at all, but…presupposed it. — Corvus
But he had to make space and time as pure intuition in order to give ground for necessity of a priori knowledge — Corvus
If Kant's view on space and time was only pure intuitions, and there is no physical space and time as such, then he wouldn't have been taken seriously by the current philosophy or science. :)Despite the direct textual references refuting that opinion, you both continue the misunderstanding. Or I do. One or the other. — Mww
Kant was a dualist. Space and time was physical existence in empirical reality as well as pure intuitions for metaphysical knowledge. He had been only focusing on the latter in CPR.If space and time are empirical realities they absolutely cannot be pure a priori conditions residing in the constitution of the subject, and if such were the case, that they are empirical realities, Kant could not justify them as antecedent conditions for anything of pure a priori content. — Mww
Despite the direct textual references refuting that opinion, you both continue the misunderstanding — Mww
If Kant's view on space and time was only pure intuitions, and there is no physical space and time as such, then he wouldn't have been taken seriously by recent science — Corvus
Kant was a dualist. Space and time was physical existence in empirical reality as well as pure intuitions for metaphysical knowledge. — Corvus
a dualist, i.e., he can concede the existence of matter — RussellA
I would say that the above is some evidence that for Kant, as an Empirical Realist, space and time are empirically real. — RussellA
Exactly. Existence of matter. Things. Objects. That which appears to human sensibility. That of which sensation is possible. That for which phenomena are given. In Kant, space and time are none of those. — Mww
In the Introduction to CPR by Paul Guyer and Allen W. Wood is the statement that, for Kant, space and time are empirically real. — RussellA
I don't think he was denying space and time for empirical reality at all. He presupposed it. But he had to postulate space and time as pure intuition in CPR in order to give ground for necessity of a priori knowledge such as Geometry and all the Metaphysical judgments, which are supposed to be superior to the natural science based on the space and time of the empirical reality. Inevitably Kant was a dualist. — Corvus
If we all accept that for Kant matter is empirically real, then how could it be the case that matter is empirically real yet the space and time that this matter is existing within is not empirically real? — RussellA
Imagine how practically impossible it would be to talk about things, if it were denied from the outset such things were not, and could not, be thought as extended in space. From the perspective of the thesis itself, it was never meant to imply there actually is such a thing as space into which things extend, but only that the constitution of the human intellect can’t function without the transcendentally given objective validity granting it. — Mww
:up:As you say, Kant wanted to combine the two schools of rationalism and empiricism. — RussellA
In the preface CPR, Kant sounds like he is on duty to reinstate Metaphysics as the queen of all Science.However, not to show that Metaphysics is superior to the Natural sciences, but rather better explain both Metaphysics and the Natural Sciences. Neither Metaphysics nor the Natural Sciences could be properly understand without first amalgamating both rationalism and empiricism. — RussellA
Kant's Space in TI of CPR is intuited pure concepts, and he is talking about how Metaphysics works. He is not talking about the space in empirical reality in CPR (it is presupposed existence). They are totally different things all together. If Kant denied the existence of the physical space in empirical reality, he would commit himself to an immaterial idealist like Berkeley. I don't see Kant would have done that at all. As you indicated, I agree, Kant was a dualist.Kant's synthetic a priori amalgamating transcendental idealism and empirical realism is necessary to better understand both Metaphysics and the Natural Sciences. He was a dualist. — RussellA
come up with a whole bunch of ideas demonstrating how space isn’t real..........From which follows necessarily, that the knowledge of things is the determinant factor for their reality, the space of them utterly irrelevant, insofar as the knowledge is remains regardless of the space of it.................If you say, space is that which is contained in an empty bucket, what have you actually said? — Mww
In the preface CPR, Kant sounds like he is on duty to reinstate Metaphysics as the queen of all Science. — Corvus
He is not talking about the space in empirical reality in CPR (it is presupposed existence). — Corvus
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.