CHID495, Spr-2010 reading guide
Reading Guide: CPR, Introduction
Introduction <B> (1787)
I. Pure and Empirical Cognition
Locke was Right….But Leibniz was Too
-all cognition BEGINS with empirical experience by the senses (Locke), but not all cognition comes FROM such
experience (Leibniz: ~ “there is nothing in the intellect which was not in the senses, except the intellect itself”)
-in terms of before and after (time), no cognition comes “before” experience
A Priori (Pure), A Posteriori (Empirical)
-question: Is there cognition independent of all experience? (a priori cognition)
-a priori cognitions are independent of our experience, and pertain to our own constitution
-a posteriori cognitions issue from our empirical experience
-a priori does not have to do with memory and learning from experience, so that knowing that building a house on
sand is unsound from past experience constitutes “a priori” knowledge in later cases: a priori means “absolutely
independent of all experience”; nothing empirical is intermixed
II. We Have Some A Priori Cognitions
Criteria for Pure A Priori
-issue: how do we distinguish between pure and empirical cognitions? (a start: look to special types of
propositions and judgments we appear to be able to make)
-CRITERIA: necessary & universal
-judgments thought to be necessary are a priori, and absolutely a priori if the follow only from other necessary
judgments (and not hypotheses, assumptions, etc.)
-judgments thought to be strictly (not empirically) universal are a priori
-judgments about empirical universality only assert increases in validity (from most to all cases); strict
universality is essential to the judgment
The Possibility of Experience in General
-we know we are capable of making JUDGMENTS that are necessary and universal (e.g. math)
-we also know that experiential CONCEPTS (e.g. body) cannot be thought without reliance on concepts which
cannot be experiential
-hence, we must have a priori concepts that have their “seat” in our own faculty of cognition
III. We Need a Science of A Priori Cognitions
Beyond “Possible Experience”
-beyond a priori cognitions corresponding to POSSIBLE EXPERIENCE, there are certain cognitions which can
have no corresponding object given in experience via the senses
-these cognitions lead to “unavoidable problems of pure reason,” which Kant identify as 3: God, freedom, and
immortality (of the soul)
-metaphysics tried to satisfy reason on these problems; but we have neglected to investigate their “domain,
validity, and value”
Captivation by Pure Reason
-we are captivated by the seeming progress of reason by removing contradictions in thinking
-insight: the “greatest part” of the business of our reason consists in analyses of concepts we already have of
objects (this will be characterized by Analytic judgments)
-but also: reason always, without us knowing, make assertions of another kind, in which it adds something to
given concepts (this will be characterized as Synthetic judgments)
http://staff.washington.edu/schenold/chid495a/
CHID495, Spr-2010 reading guide
IV. Difference Between Analytic and Synthetic Judgments
Analytic and Synthetic
[note: “judgment” just means predication about identified object: e.g. “this pencil is sharpened”]
-analytic judgments like “all bodies are extended in space” identify the predicate (extension in space) in the
subject (the concept of a body); we just analyze the concept of body to see that it contains the concept of extension
in its definition
-synthetic judgments like “all bodies have weight” do not identify the predicate (weightiness) in the subject (the
concept of a body); our experience is added in this kind of judgment
Judgments of Experience are all Synthetic
-p.142: “I can first cognize … synthetic combination of intuitions”
-but there are also “synthetic a priori judgments” – the most difficult to handle – in which experience is of no aid
-synthetic a priori judgments like “everything that happens has its cause[s],” which contains a concept of cause
that does not pertain to an identified concept of the object (grounded in a concept), nor something experienceable in general (grounded in the empirical experience about which the predication is made)
V. Synthetic A Priori Judgments Are Principles of Theoretical Sciences of Reason
Judgments, Propositions in Math, Natural Science
-Kant basically uses confusing examples to exemplify his point about synthetic a priori judgments; he simply
wants to state that common judgments in those two fields rely on synthetic a priori judgments
VI. The Problem of Pure Reason
The Main Inquiry of the CPR: HOW ARE A PRIORI SYNTHETIC JUDGMENTS POSSIBLE?
-Sub-questions:
--How is Pure Math possible?
--How is Pure Natural Science possible?
--How is Metaphysics as a Predisposition of Reason possible?
----How is metaphysics possible as a science?
-Math and N.S. prove the possibility of knowledge in their actuality – that is, they show that they work
-Metaphysics, however, is eminently doubtable; yet metaphysics is a NATURAL PREDISPOSITION (Reason, as a
faculty of the power of Desire, tends toward metaphysical speculation)
The Critique is Needed to Save Human Reason From Itself
-Critique has to do with Reason itself, its “capacity” in regards to objects that come before it (and not objects OF
Reason (ideas), which are imagined to be infinity)
-direct, dogmatic analysis of a priori cognition of reason can only show what is contained in our concepts, but it
cannot hope to show HOW we attain them or use the validly
-Critique is for developing the “productive and fruitful growth of a science that is indispensible for human reason”
VII. Critique of Pure Reason as a Special Science
Transcendental Philosophy
-Reason is the faculty that provides the principles of a priori cognition
-hence, PURE reason is that which contains the principles for cognizing something a priori
-transcendental philosophy is NOT a doctrine, it is a transcendental critique
-transcendental pertains not to objects, but to “our mode of cognition of objects insofar as is possible a priori
-the object of CPR is ultimately the Understanding (see p.150, “…our object…appraisal”)
The Architectonic
-transcendental philosophy proceeds architectonically, from principles and builds a complete system
-CPR is the foundation, not the science itself
http://staff.washington.edu/schenold/chid495a/