Kant- Appearance and Judgements

"When an appearance is given us, we are still quite free as to how we should judge the matter.  The appearance depends upon the senses, but the judgement upon the understanding; and the only question is whether in the determination of the object is there is truth or not."

When we first see something or even a person, our minds make up a judgement about them or it.  Whether it is true or not we still do it.  Sometimes in the end it can be completely wrong or right.  We can never know about something until we observe them and learn about them.  In the end, we never really can know the full truth about something no matter what.  There is always more to someone or something.

Kant- How is nature possible

On page 56 Kant asks how nature is possible.  Nature is possible because we are able to touch things, see things, hear things, taste things, and smell them.  Everyone else is able to do the same things too.  We are able to share what things look and taste like.  How can nature not be possible?  How could we all be seeing the same things?  I don't understand how you can argue with that.  

Kant- Perception and Judgement

On pages 39 and 40, Kant talks about perception and judgement.  He says that judgements of experience are more valid then perception.  I don't really see the difference between the two.  Perception is your awareness of something by your senses or to understand something.  But isn't a judgement just a guess? So why would that be more valid then perception.

Kant- External Experience and internal experience

On pages 72 and 73 Kant talks about external experiences and internal experiences.  If I'm reading this right when he says external he means our bodies (takes of space) and internal is our soul.  I think this subject goes back to something I learned in Psychology.  Some people believe the mind and brain work together and are aware of each other but others think one works and not the other.  I think they both work together.  Our mind thinks what were gonna do or has thoughts and judgements and the brain is what actually does it.  They both have a connection to each other.

Kant- Nature and Experience

"But experience teaches us what exists and how it exists, but never that it must necessarily exist so and not otherwise...Experience therefore can never teach us the nature of things in themselves."-35

Experience teaches about everything around us.  By seeing and observing things in life, we learn about them and why things are certain ways.  We see other people and we understand why they exist.  By Kant saying experience can never teach us the nature of things in themselves, I believe he is saying just by going about our day to day life seeing different things we won't just learn about everything beyond the picture that is in front of us.  I agree with this; we have to go beyond just the experience to know the truth in things.  

Kant- Math

"I shall confine my assertion to pure mathematics, they very concept of which implies that it contains pure a priori and not empirical cognition." -pg. 11

If I am reading this right, I think Kant is saying that math is a priori and if priori means not learning from experience.  I would have to disagree with Kant on this one.  We learn math from others.  We learn it by someone teaching us how to add and subtract.  By going to school and listening to our teachers we are learning by experience.  I'm not sure if that was what he was getting at but that's what I got out of it.

Please tell me what you think.

Kant- mathematics

Kant talks about the normalness of mathematics and everything about math is the way it is just because it is the way it is. There is defintely talking about skepticism when they realize math is the way it is. It is just a natural way of lie that 2 +2 = 4 and that 90 degrees is straight. It is just the way that it is. Alot of rationalists will always have some kind of doubt but hey, it will always be like this no matter what.

Kant - science of nature

Kant starts to talk about the synthetic a priori which means the science of nature and the science of mathmatics which is the apllication of space and time. Of course, the science of nature is talking about physics. Kant asks how is physics possible? he answeres his own question because it is a synthetic. It argues with Hume when he talks about the science of nature is synthetic and informative and observable.

Kants rebuttle to Hume

Kants rebuttle to Hume is all about distinction. It is all about distinction between judgements of perception. It is all about how we percieve and judge what we see in nature all over. The way you perceive and accept to the science of nature itself. It is also a distinction between judgements of experience.The judgements can be subjectively valid or they can be very objective to experience.

Kant- empiricism

Empiricism is when there is skepticism about the patterns of nature. It is when people wonder why are these things the way they are. Why is there a thunder storm here and not there? or why is there certain kind of areas that have these kind of flowers and trees. Why is climate control so different. It is just the weird patterns nature is all about. I think its a very interesting question but, i dont think there really is such an answer for questions like those. Empiricism is a very moderate way when it comes down to asking questions and truly not being satisfied with the way things are.

Kant- rationalism

Kant also talks about rationalism. Rationalism is when Kant talks about skepticism about the exterior world. Kant thinks to himself that we cannot know about everything we must leave it to nature itself. The fact that we dont always know something is fine according to Kant. I agree with him on that one, anyone who thinks they know everything about everything is just an idiot. Some things are better yet unknown when it comes right down to it.

Kant

Kant talks about Kant skepticism about cause and effect generalize. He also wonders about our judgement and he talks about how nature is truly just us and only us. He speaks about analytic synthetic distinction. When kant talks about a prior he seems to talk about just a natural role of observation that we all seem to go through.

Hume Billiard Ball effect

"If I see a billiard ball moving towards another, on a smooth table, I can easily conceive to stop upon contact." - Hume

This is the perfect example of you never know what could happen. If you are someone who has never played pool in their lives you have no idea that that one white ball could make all of the other balls move the way it is. To someone playing pool for the first time it is a complete mystery. Sometimes it is a complete mystery to figure out where the other balls go in such.