Comparing Kant And Transcendental Aesthetics

1386 Words6 Pages
Kant’s attempt to save the metaphysics was to propose synthetic a priori knowledge that Hume failed to recognize. Hume holds that we have no necessary (or even probable) material synthetic knowledge, but Kant believes that there should be another type of knowledge that is universal, necessary and a priori that tells us about the world (synthetic). We shall start our discussion with the first part of the Transcendental Doctrine of the Elements with the Transcendental Aesthetic. Kant holds that there’s no other way that objects can be given to us through anything other than our sensibility (A20). By sensibility, he refers to the faculty of our receptivity of representations in which we are affected by objects. The Transcendental Aesthetic…show more content…
We can’t have multiple spaces, as they are all included in one space. Space as the whole precedes the space in part. This is the reason why space is an intuition and not a concept. Another argument that supports Kant’s claim of the intuition of space is that space is represented as an infinite given quantity (B40) the infinity is in space itself. We can’t have infinite number of concepts. For example, if we choose the concept of tree, it does not contain an infinite number of representations under itself. I maybe be able to fit many types of trees under this category of tree, but it’s going to be a limited number. Therefore, all parts of space co-exist at infinitum and space could not be a concept. It must be an institution. Arguments for a priori nature of time are similar to space. Kant believes that time is pure intuitions since it is a component that is necessary for all intuitions. Time can be represented as a void of appearances in which different times are all part of one unified time. Like space, time is infinite rather than limited. Kant believes that time is the pure intuition by which the mind governs its inner sense. Time is not co-existent, non-empirical and not in succession. This means that time is an intuition as well. When Kant mentioned in A23, that time cannot be perceived externally, but space can be perceived as something within us, he means that time is intuition of inner-self, but space is an intuition of…show more content…
Kant states that by “arranging different representations together, and comprehending what is manifold in them under one form of knowledge” imputes the synthesis to the transcendental logic (A77). Synthesis is the act of putting together the concepts of “sensibility a priori” (conditions of receptivity of mind) in manifold with Transcendental Aesthetic to reach pure understanding and representation of objects with possibility of affecting those concepts, which without those concepts, it would be without content and therefore, appearing empty (A77). Kant asserts that the manifold is not given empirically, but a priori in time and space (B103). Before we can do an analysis of our representation, their concepts must be given since no concepts can arise analytically (B103). Knowledge must first be produced by the synthesis (whether give empirically or a priori) and that knowledge might need analysis beforehand if its primitive or crude, but its really the synthesis that does to collection of knowledge and unifies them (B103). So, when Kant indicates, “that analysis presupposes synthesis” he means that analysis or dissolution, is the opposite of synthesis and always pre-supposes it since when the understanding had not combined anything, it cant dissolve anything either (B130). Since the analysis presupposes that there is still something left to analyze and
Open Document