Kant 6

Kant talks about form of sensibility, that space and time does not things in themselves but can be found in the world. They are considered innate and shape our preceptions. He then goes on to talk about how math is apriori. as I talked about before, i'm not sure I can agree. space and time, the concepts can exist seperately by themselves.

Kant

He also says that since we are capable of synthetic a priori it suggests that pure reason is able to find the important truths. He also suggests that a lot of what we think to be reality is formed by the perceiving mind. Kant thinks that the doesnt passively receive information thats given from the senses. He says that it shapes and makes sense of that information in order to understand it.

Kant

Kant talks about how the possibilty of analytic propositions can be concieved easily because it is grounded solely on the principle of contradiction. He explains that propositions that are drawn from experience also are easy and don't need special explanations. This is because experience itself is nothing other than a continual joining together of perceptions. Also he said that you cannot start by looking for how propositions are possibles because there is many of them given with undisputed certainty. He said that you need to start with that synthetic but pure rational cognition is actual. I think i understood this part a little more than his other sections but i still can't completly understand his meanings and explanations.

Kant

After Kant talks about pure mathematics and pure intution he goes into metaphysics and how it relies on the faculty of reason and how is doesn't shape our experience in the way that sensibility and understanding does. However, he says that it does help us reason independent of experience.

Kant

Also, in one of his notes he says that geometry has objective reality as prescribing the form of all sensible intutions. He also says that geometry would be fiction if the senses represented to us things in themselves. And earlier he also says that mathematics must exhibit its concepts in intution. Throughout my reading Kant tried to explain how pure mathematics is possible but i never really seemed to find the answer. I thought Kant was very confusing to me.

Kant

Kant says that time and space are pure intutions. And he also says that the objection that the ideality of space and time turns the world of senses into illusions in vain. He says that not to the appearance of senses but judgement by the understanding. He uses an example but it wasn't clear to me. He also said that whether space is appearance or thing in itself has no bearing on this but the doctrine that space is appearance secures the objective validity of geometry. I did not really understand that section either.

Kant

Kant thinks that the mutual requirement of intution and concept applies not only in the
empirical concepts and empirical intutions but also in the non-impirical/pure intutions and the pure concepts. He also says the space and time aren't even capable of yielding cognition of objects. And then he said that the merging of empirical intutions and concepts brings about the cognition of objects as expressed in empirical judgements. He used the example "This rose is red" He goes on about this and how yes and no this is the result in joining pure concepts and intutions but i don't understand it. I found this part confusing because I couldn't seem to catch what he was talking about.

Hume

Hume also talks about cause and effect. He says that it is sometimes okay to assume effects from a cause that someone has concluded from observing effects. He also says that reasoned assumptions are made from observing species of causes and species of effect. I think this is accurate and agree with it because you can definitely assume an effect from the cause. Even though our assumptions aren't always right I still think you can make the assumption from the cause.

Hume

Also Hume mentions how he thinks that all complex ideas are formed from simple ideas. Then the simple ideas result to simple impressions. He also says that our imagination can only come from impressions we have had or experienced, so therefore our imagination is limited and we cannot imagine things that we never seen or heard, ect. However, he says that he can imagine a something he hasn't seen before but only because of previous impressions. For example, you can imagine a color you have never seen before but you have seen other shades of the color so you can form an idea and imagine what that certain color might be.

Hume

Hume kind of gives you the impression that nature guided us to believe the things we do and that it didnt have to do with reason. And instead of giving us reasons why this is so he kind of just explains what we believe in and why we should believe this. He doesn't really prove his points he just explains what he thinks.