Notes on Kant: Introduction to Kantian Metaphysics & the "Critique of Judgment" Diagram showing the Kantian division of mental faculties: ............................................................................... : : : ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ : : ^ aspiration to absolute (GOD) ^ : : ^ ^ : : ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ : : : : +------ REASON -----------+ : : | | : : | (a will to knowledge; | : : | a regulative faculty | : : | with respect to the | : : | understanding; domain: | : : | THE GOOD) | : : +-------------------------+ : : +---- JUDGMENT -------------+ : : | | : : +--- UNDERSTANDING ---------+ | (referable to either | : : | | | reason -- THE GOOD -- | : : | (applies the a priori | | or to the understanding | : : | categories of the | | in concert with the | : : | understanding to sense | | imagination -- THE | : : | impressions: creates | | BEAUTIFUL -- or to | : : | concepts, predicates; | | reason in concert with | : : | domain: THE CONCEPTUAL) | | the imagination -- | : : +-------------------------- + | THE SUBLIME) | : : +-------------------------- + : : : : +--- IMAGINATION -------------+ ************************* : : | | N * Pleasure results from * : : | (integrates and represents | O * the harmonization of * : : | sense impressions for the | T * the faculties of the * : : | reason & understanding; a | E * mind with the mani- * : : | mechanical faculty, but | * fold of sensation, or * : : | sometimes treated by Kant | * with each other. * : : | as a constitutive one) | ************************* : : +-----------------------------+ : : : : : : vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv : : v MANIFOLD OF SENSATION v : : v v : : v (conditioned by the a priori v : : v "spectacles" of TIME and v : : v SPACE) v : : vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv : : : : : : - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - : : ------------ Gap Between Perception and Reality ------------- : : - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - : : : : : : ?????????????????????????? : : ? DAS DING AN SICH ? : : ? (the thing in itself) ? : : ?????????????????????????? : : : :.............................................................................: Notes on Kant's "Critique of Pure Reason" Kant is responding to enpricists like Locke and Hume, who tried to explain the concepts of the understanding in terms of experience. Kant thinks they exist a priori, and cannot be derived from experience. [I. Transcendental Doctrine of Elements First Part. Transcendental Aesthetic] Time and Space are "pure a priori intuitions" underlying all of our sensations of the internal and external worlds. We do not know "things in themselves"; only appearances are "given to us" through our "sensibility." Time and Space are mental phenomena, not objective attributes of thiings in themselves, about which we can know nothing. [Kant is clearing ground for his theor of mind: the mind is not mirroring nature; rather, it is in part constructing it.] [Second Part. Transcendental Logic] "If the receptivity of our mind, its power of receiving representations in so far as it is in any wise affected, is to be entitled sensibility, then the mind's power of producing representations from itself, the spontaneity of knowledge, should be called the understanding. Our nature is so constituted that our intuition can never be other than sensible; that is, it contains only the mode in which we are affected by objects. The faculty, on the other hand, which enables us to think the object of sensible intuition is the understanding." "We therefore distinguish the science of the rules of sensibility in general, that is, aesthetic, from the science of the rules of the understanding in general, that is, logic." The understanding applies its categories by means of logical rules. The logic dealing directly with the sensibility is called analytic, that dealing with general grounds of truth not bound to a particular object is called dialectic. Kant distinguishes his use of dialectic from the Platonic one, which he sees as completely specious due to its lack of empirical basis, "For logic teaches us nothing whatsoever regarding the content of knowledge, but lays down only the formal conditions of agreement with the understanding...." [First Division. Transcendental Analytic Book I. Analytic of Concepts] TABLE of CATEGORIES of the UNDERSTANDING (from Kant): 1 Quantity of judgements Universal Particular Singular 2 3 Quality Relation Affirmative Categorical Negative Hypothetical Infinite Disjunctive 4 Modality Problematical Assertorical Apodeictical TABLE of CATEGORIES of the UNDERSTANDING (after Cassirer) I. QUANTITY (unity, plurality, totality) II. QUALITY (reality, negation, limitation) III. RELATION (substance, causality, community) IV. MODALITY (possibility, existence, necessity) [Transcendental Analytic. BOOK II. The Analytic of Principles] "Understanding" has been a catch-all term, now to be refined: "General logic is constructed upon a ground plan which exactly coincides with the division of the higher faculties of knowledge. These are: understanding, judgment, and reason. In accordance with the functions and order of these mental A131 powers, which in current speech are comprehended under the general title of understanding, logic in its analytic deals with concepts, judgments, and inferences." Explanation of Judgment: "If understanding in general is to be viewed as the faculty of rules, judgment will be the faculty of subsuming under rules; that is, of distinguishing whether something does or does not stand under a given rule (casus datae legis). General logic contains, and can contain, no rules for judgment. For since general logic abstracts from all content of knowledge, the sole task that remains to it is to give an analytical exposition of the form of knowledge [as expressed] in concepts, in judgments, and in inferences, and so to obtain formal rules for all employment of understanding. If it sought to give general instructions how we are to subsume under these rules, that is, to distinguish whether something does or does not come under them, that could only be by means of another rule. This in turn, for the very reason that it is a rule, again demands guidance from judgment. And thus it appears that, though understanding is capable of being instructed, and of being equipped with rules, judgment is a peculiar talent which can be practised only, and cannot be taught. It is the specific quality of so-called mother-wit; and its lack no school can make good." We laugh loud: "Deficiency in judgment is just what is ordinarily called stupidity, and for such a failing there is no remedy. An obtuse or narrowminded person to whom nothing is wanting save a proper degree of understanding and the concepts appropriate thereto, may indeed be trained through study, even to the extent of becoming learned. But as such people are commonly still lacking in judgment (secunda B173 Petri), it is not unusual to meet learned men who in the application of their scientific knowledge betray that original want, which can never be made good." Toward the Critique of Judgment: The Aesthetic (sense-based) Judgments: BEAUTY: sensation of pleasure produced by the free play of the Imagination and the Understanding SUBLIMITY: sensation of pleasure produced by the free play of the Imagination and Reason "free" = not referable to, not allowing, not resting with any concept or contingent purpose