- #1
John Creighto
- 495
- 2
In a recent thread, language was described as an activity where: a set of rules is used to define constrains on the world. For instance the word car limits they type of objects in the world which are likely to be denoted by the word car because one might not normally expect one to call a house (RVs aside) a car. Math and music were also given as examples of languages. Some psychologists say that our language both influences what we think and our ability to think.
In the critique of Pure reason, Kant, questioned the idea that all concepts could be represented in terms of constraints because if we did not have some concept a prior how would we express those constraints. From the critique of pure reason:
”4. Space is represented as an infinite given quantity. Now it is quite true that every concept is to be thought as a representation, which is contained in an infinite number of different possible representations (as their common characteristic), and therefore comprehends them: but no concept, as such, can be thought , as if it contained itself an infinite number of representations. Nevertheless, space is so thought, (for all parts of space exist simultaneously ad infinitum). Consequently, the original representation of space is an intuition a priori, and not a concept”
However, Kant’s argument does not convince me. Why can’t I infer space from my senses.
P.S. As I mentioned before. The section I quoted from Kant does not match the project Gutenberg version.
My Sources: Basic Writings of Kant, Allen W. Wood, ISBN 0-37575733-3
In the critique of Pure reason, Kant, questioned the idea that all concepts could be represented in terms of constraints because if we did not have some concept a prior how would we express those constraints. From the critique of pure reason:
”4. Space is represented as an infinite given quantity. Now it is quite true that every concept is to be thought as a representation, which is contained in an infinite number of different possible representations (as their common characteristic), and therefore comprehends them: but no concept, as such, can be thought , as if it contained itself an infinite number of representations. Nevertheless, space is so thought, (for all parts of space exist simultaneously ad infinitum). Consequently, the original representation of space is an intuition a priori, and not a concept”
However, Kant’s argument does not convince me. Why can’t I infer space from my senses.
P.S. As I mentioned before. The section I quoted from Kant does not match the project Gutenberg version.
My Sources: Basic Writings of Kant, Allen W. Wood, ISBN 0-37575733-3