Immanuel Kant’s Understanding of Philosophy of Knowledge

Immanuel Kant’s Understanding of Philosophy of Knowledge

June 27, 2021 Off By Felso

Kant realized that there was a problem in the way empiricist thought reached knowledge. If, as the experimenters say, ultimately all you know or all you have accumulated are certain sensations or certain impressions, then how do you arrive at absolute and universal knowledge? In other words, how can you explain the possibility of scientific knowledge, or rather the cause-effect relationships that make it possible for the mind to grasp scientific truths?

Kant found an answer to this question, which bridges the gap between two schools of thought – rationalism and empiricism (See: What is Criticism?).

Kant’s own theory of knowledge reframed the issue of how people “know” things. Rather than saying that people are passive perceivers observing the world, Kant believed that people are active in knowing the world. The experimenter agrees with his predecessors, saying:

“There can be no doubt whatsoever that all our knowledge begins with experience. However, just because all our knowledge begins with experience does not mean that it all comes from experience.”

Contrary to the outside-in approach of empiricists, which says that objects cause “sensations” (Locke) or “impressions” (Hume) to occur in passive perceivers, Kant’s categories of space and time—which he calls “forms of intuition”—are built upon experiences by the human mind to make experiences meaningful. It said it was loaded.

Kant proudly named it the “Copernican Revolution”. Just as Copernicus denied the idea that the Sun revolves around the Earth, Kant solved the problem of how the mind reaches knowledge from experience by arguing that the mind imposes principles on experience to produce knowledge.

According to Kant, the mind has “concept categories” that list, encode, and extract meaning from the world. The mind cannot experience anything that is not filtered by the mind’s eye. So you can never know the true nature of reality. In this sense, Kant’s claim is actually the understanding that “perception is reality”.

Kant says that in order to have any knowledge, the mind must have a further set of organizing principles. These principles are found in the mind, in the understanding.

Just as a cookie is the product of a certain content (dough) by giving it a certain shape (via the cookie maker), information is the product of the working together of content (what you see) and understanding or comprehension (space and time as forms of intuition).

In other words, both a priori (pre-experience) and a posteriori (post-experience) elements are necessary and important. Without sensation, no object would be perceptible. No object could be understood without understanding or concept.

As Kant stated in his “Critique of Pure Reason”, thoughts without content are empty, perceptions without concepts are blind… Understanding (mind) cannot perceive anything, senses cannot think anything. Knowledge arises only from their combined activity.

Kant uses short and clear statements about the limits of knowledge. According to him, the only world that a person will know is the world of objects that he will see in experience. By objects in the world, it refers to things that appear to us as phenomena or events. The things one cannot access to knowledge are mind-independent things called things-in-itself or noumena.

Immanuel Kant, who made a synthesis of rationalist philosophy and empiricist philosophy in his thought, argued that the contribution of both experience and reason in knowledge is inevitable.

He first showed that even the simplest experience, sense impressions, contains an a priori element, an element which does not derive from experience, but which creates and makes it possible. Kant, who named the time and space corresponding to the aforementioned apriori elements, the transcendental conditions of experiment, thus found the opportunity to reveal the synthetic nature of the judgments of mathematics about space and number, against Hume’s view that mathematical sciences have a purely analytical structure.

In other words, according to Kant, who defines the basic, distinctive activity of the mind in knowledge as synthesizing the raw and unprocessed material from experience and combining this material and giving it a unity, the mind, above all, puts our various experiences into certain patterns of intuition. placing it.

The said patterns of intuition are time and space. Accordingly, we perceive things as necessarily occurring in time and space. However, time and space are not ideas, impressions, or concepts derived from sense-experience. Time and space, according to Kant, are encountered directly and unmediated in intuition.

These are patterns of intuition that are a priori, that is, prior to any experience, and which are the conditions for which any experience cannot be lived. That is, these are the glasses through which we always perceive objects in sense-experience.

After naming this teaching of time and space as transcendental aesthetics, he moved on to transcendental analytics, the doctrine of categories, and, likewise, a priori perceptional forms of sensibility or experience