U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Philosophy
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 08-02-2016, 07:53 AM
 
Location: Michigan
722 posts, read 1,951,999 times
Reputation: 714

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cleverfield View Post
In Critique of Pure Reason Kant says, in his explanation of a priori truths, "If you remove from your empirical concept of any object, corporeal or incorporeal, all properties which experience has taught you, you cannot take away from it that property by which you conceive it as a substance, or inherent in a substance... you will have to admit that it has its seat in your faculty of knowledge a priori."

I'm not sure I quite understand. Is he saying that if I know a guy, Steve, and I take away all the sensory properties that I associate with Steve, I still have the concept of Steve, and therefore Steve is a priori knowledge? That doesn't make any sense to me, because I would first have to have experienced Steve in order to have knowledge of Steve. For all I know a priori, I could be the only person in the universe, and everything around me is an illusion. The concept of Steve only came to me because I had an experience of Steve. Can someone please explain what Kant means here?
First of all, you should tell us where to find the quotation so we can look it up and see the context.

Lacking that, I'm inclined to agree with SmittyJ. The antecedent of the "it" in "it has its seat" is "that property", not any specific object. Its about substantiality itself, not about any particular substance.

Your Steve example does not address this point. It's not about how you know that Steve is Steve. It's about how it is even possible to organize your sensations into thoughts of discrete identifiable beings that you can learn more about through experience.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Philosophy
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 12:30 PM.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top