Kant- External and Internal Experineces

Kant discusses internal and external experiences. External experiences mean experiences that occur through our senses, through our bodies, and internal would be our souls. So far, it is safe to say that Descarte, Locke and Hume have all agreed on the same topic of mind and body as two separate entities that make up a human structure. Our body is designed for mechanisms, to carry out what our minds want us to do. Together they work to create and complete tasks. However, some people are not in touch with their internal soul and therefore get lost and lose connection.

Kant,- Nature IS possible

Kant brings up the topic of nature of page 56. The question that he is ultimately asking is, “how is nature possible?” The answer to that question is quite obvious because nature is something that just simply exists. We can breathe in air, we can touch the grass, and we can, see hear, feel, and taste rain. These aren’t properties that we assume or make up, they are properties that are obvious, and that everyone is capable of sensing them. We live in the natural world. We are not always aware of the importance of our natural resources simply because they were there first and we did not ask for them to be put there. Therefore nature is possible because we as humans did not create it ourselves, which means that it is not an opinion nor is it questionable by any means by a human being.

Kant:Cause And Effect

The idea of cause and effect is a pure product of the human understanding, and its range at least seems to expand beyond objects of human experience. However Kant was cautious to note that such a priori concepts cannot be practical to things in themselves because an application would be synthetic. Mere analysis of concepts reveals nothing about the existence of things and their properties. Cause and effect makes sense in Kants terms. One you have the reason and foundation, then you get the result or outcome of a situation.

Kant: Experiences

Kant says our knowledge is resulting from experience; it is possible to have knowledge of objects in progress of experience. Kant saw that there are two resources of human knowledge: sensibility and understanding. He thought that the way in which we perceive, identify, and reflect upon objects might have a structure which contributes to our experience. I agree with Kant on this because in order for a person to understand things or do, they need to experience them, and that is how we percieve. I know that for myself, when I knew how to do things that I was more comfortable through experiences because you learn more from past experiences and percieve.

Impressions

What Kant called "imagination" creates our sense impressions with our concepts of understanding, and does them pleasantly, so that we have confidence in the realism of ourselves and of the outside world. Impresssions are a vital aspect to most people. For example, people want to show themselves good the first day because they think the first impression matters. I know through experiences that first impression does make a difference in a person, but then later on that is not what the persons personality really is because you do not know them good enough. Later on, the person will react in a different way, but the first impression will tell you more of a person . For example, when a person goes for an interview, the interviewers get an impression of the person based on their clothing and their way of talking.

Synthetic a Priori

Synthetic a priori judgments are the vital case, because only they could provide new information that is necessarily true but neither Leibniz nor Hume considered the possibility of any of it. Kant sustained that synthetic a priori judgments not only are possible but actually supply the basis for major portions of human knowledge. He supposed that arithmetic and geometry include such judgments and that natural science depends on them for its power to explain and guess events. Kant questioned how are synthetic a priori judgments possible at all? I think that is a good question that Kant asked.The only issue is that people might be good at solving problems or in math, but we learn to know how to solve the problems trough steps

Kant:Perception

"Quite another judgement therefore is required before perception can become experience."

It is necessary that the perception should be included under some such a concept of the understanding. For example, air ranks under the concept of causes, which decides our judgment about it in view to its expansion as hypothetical. In that way, the expansion of the air is symbolized as belonging to it necessarily. In the judgment situation, "the air is elastic," becomes universally suitable, and a judgment of experience, only by certain judgments foregoing it, which includes the intuition of air under the perception of cause and effect.

Kant Page 27

"If two things are quite equal in all respects as much as can be ascertained by all means possible, quantitatively and qualitatively, it must follow that the one can in all cases and under all circumstances replace the other, and this substitution would not occasion the least recognizable difference." I disagree with Kant on this one. If two things are equal they have to replace eachother. It is proven that nothing in the world can be the same and equal. There is always going to be something different about one object with the other one. It is natures way to recongize things...

Cause and effect= Persception and Consequences

Consequences and perception is almost like cause and effect. In order to decipher which comes first, or how the two are distinguished, something must happen. For example. If the weather is cold outside, and a person goes out with no jacket and short sleeves on, then that person will be extremely cold. The consequences of this event would be that the person would suffer being in the cold without a jacket, and perception would be that they are feeling the cold. The “cause” would be that the person walks outside with no jacket AND in the cold, and the “effect” would be that they would be freezing. All in all, there is a similarity between the two.

Kant- Synthetic a priori

At first Kant explains that there are a variety of judgments that are possible of a synthetic a priori. He then carries on about how Hume and other philosophers find it is quite difficult to discover them. In order to make a connection between two ideas, there needs to be some sort of experience in which the ideas are linked. Meaning, it would be impossible to have both a priori and synthetic. Kant believes that math, especially geometry is a priori. For example, 7+5=12 is synthetic. In conclusion math is a synthetic and a priori judgment. I would have to say that I disagree with this because math isn’t something that we are born knowing. It cannot be considered a priori.
We are taught mathamatics in school through use of objects, therefore making links to numbers. We are using separate ideas to relate to one, therefore not making math a priori.

Kant- Impressions

Just because we are given our senses to recognize things, does not mean that we necessarily understand them. A person can sit and observe something they have never seen, but this doesn’t actually mean that they understand the purpose or meaning behind that structure. Almost everything on earth has a purpose, and most things are complex. Some things though, may be deceiving, where they look completely simple, but inside there is a lot more that we cannot see. It is kind of the same. A perfect example of this would be a first impression. A person can take a quick look at another person walking by and begin to for a judgement. Not knowing anything about him/her, from what we see, we have already decided the person’s character. Little do we know that they can either be the complete opposite, or they can have an amazing life story that may be inspiring, or even sad. Most first impressions are wrong, because we are only observing

Kant- perception and experience

"Quite another judgement therefore is required before perception can become experience."

An experience wouldn’t be an experience if our senses didn’t exist. With our senses, we are able to create our own judgements by perception. In order to form a judgement, we must first analyze what we have observed through our senses.

Hume- Cause and Effect

“our reason, unassisted by experience, can never draw any inference concerning real existence and matter of fact.”

Hume uses the example of bread nourishing our bodies. By looking at the bread we do not know that it can provide us with nutrients, or that it is even healthy for us at all, unless we are told it is and provided with actual evidence.

Hume- on definition and opinion

Hume discusses liberty and necessity in Chapter 8 and says that people define things differently and interpret them based on their own definition. If people were to define things the same exact way, then their opinions would be exactly the same. But, as human beings we are all given our own individual brains to think our own individual thoughts. Conflicts occur when people have different opinions, or views on certain things due to differences in opinions. Without differences in interpretations, there would be no conflict, no debates, and no open minded thinking. Therefore, philosophy would be unheard of because there would no opposition to certain matters.

Memory of pain

Hume says that once pain is inflicted, it is stored in the memory and that there will never be another feeling like that one again. But, it seems to me that he is making it seem that nothing will ever be AS painful as the last. I would have to say that I only slightly agree with this due to pain tolerance. When someone is hurt, and is hurt quite often thereafter, they become more tolerant to the pain so that they can endure a little more each time. As morbid as that sounds, it is the truth. For example, someone who has 15 tattoos is more used to needles and the pain than someone who doesn’t have one or who only has one. There are many different levels of pain, and I think tolerance is what prevents us from feeling the same pain again.

Rolling pool ball

Hume discusses the pool ball and how when the white ball is hit, it is expected to either eventually stop when momentum is lost, or when it hits into another ball. For someone who has experience in playing the game of Pool, they would most likely make this conclusion. But for someone who does not know the game, they will not know what to expect. The ball doesn’t necessarily stop all the time when it hits another ball however. Sometime it just merely rubs against another ball and keeps on rolling past. Either way, whether the ball just bounces from wall to wall, or ball to ball, scientific rule says that it will eventually stop.

expansion of thought- Hume

“It seems a proposition, which will not admit of much dispute, that all our ideas are nothing but copies of our impressions, or, in other words, that it is impossible for us to think of any thing, which we have not antecedently felt, either by our external or internal senses."



I am a bit confused when it comes to this. It seems to me that Hume once said that our thoughts can be expanded upon. But here it seems that Hume is saying that what we have installed in our brains are our only limits of thinking, that he believes, like Locke maybe, that we have a clear slate in our minds and until we have experienced through our senses, it is then that we know about it. Maybe we only know, and are only capable of thinking what we already know? Or are we capable of thinking beyond.

Miracles- Hume

"But it is a miracle that a dead man should come to life, because that has never been observed in any age or country"

Maybe Hume does believe in miracles, regardless if they are small ones or big ones. Hume says that miracles do occur day to da, and when people least expect things, or when something happens without plan, then it is considered a miracle. When someone expects something to happen and it doesn't, maybe that is a miracle in itself because maybe it wasn't MEANT to happen. Miracles can mean many things.

"Quite another judgement therefore is required before perception can become experience."

In order to make something into an experience, there is more than just perceiving it. You must perceive something through your senses, and judge it or understand it. I believe that an experience is more complex than we realize. We compare our perceptions to things, we connect them to other things or people, and we form an opinion of them too.

"Arithmeical judgemnts are synthetic."

Kant explains that although at know 5+7=12, when we think of 12 we do not merely think of 5+7. 12 can be a combination of numbers, and we must analyze the concept and provide aid to show this result. Our concpet,12, is clarified by the addition of 5+7, but can also be clarified by the addition of 6+6 or the subtraction of 13-1.

"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 judgment upon the understanding; and the only question is whether in the determination of the object there is truth or not."

I agree that we observe something, perceive it, and make a judgement. We understand that thing to the best of our ability, and I don't think anyone truly knows the truth about it. We can research, observe, and declare things as they are from what we know, but does anybody really know the truth about anything? I'm just not sure.

"If two things are quite equal in all respects as much as can be ascertained by all means possible, quantitatively and qualitatively, it must follow that the one can in all cases and under all circumstances replace the other, and this substitution would not occasion the least recognizable difference."

I am not sure if I believe that any two things are exactly alike. I believe that there is always something, no matter how minor or small, sets two things apart. I don't believe that God would create anything the same; I believe He would make each individual or thing unique in his/her/its own way.

"Judgment of experience are always synthetic. For it would be absurd to base an analytic judgment on experience."

Synthetic involves a proposition that does not result in contradiction if negated. We discussed in class that all unmarried men are bachelors, which is analytic, but then we stated that all bachelors watch sports center. The definition of bachelor is an unmarried man, not an unmarried man who watches sports center.

"For the predicate of an affirmative analytic judgement is already thought in the concept of the subject, of which it cannot be denied without contradiction...."

Analytic means that something is true becuase denying it raises contradiction. The example we had been using was that all bachelor's are unmarried. This is undeniable because the mere definition of bachelor is an unmarried man. Another example, boys are anatomically different from girls. This is true because research and physical evidence shows so.

"If you tell me, that any person is in love, I easily understand your meaning, and form a just conception of his situation; but never can mistake that conception for real disorders and agitations of the passion "

When we reflect on our past emotions and affections, our thought is a faithful mirror, and copies its objects truly.A man in a well of anger is motivated in a very different behavior from one who only thinks of that emotion. When people say there in love they are blinded by everything around them. They say they have found their other half. But for how long can that keep up. Do people see each other after 50 years in the long run with each other. After their beauty is gone and fatter? When you find out what they are truely with gross habbits can you still say your in love? Love is only for a short period of time, then it turns out to become a job that you dont want to give up.

Experiences

Past experiences: What happens when you cannot reason with your past experience? What if your past experiences do not have the answers for the present or the future? How about those people who don't have acknowledgment of their past experiences? What happens then? Hume says that those who do not have prior experience are not going to understand the process of cause and effect. In this section Hume states that our reasoning of experiences is derived from custom not understanding.

I think that many people learn from their past experiences but then there are people who do not. You only learn by experiencing from past experiences. I agree when hume says that for the people who not have prior experiences are not going to quite understand the process of cause and effect. I agree with Hume thinking that there aren't answers for the present or the future. You just learn and observe from your past experience, and based on that most people change as a person, and others do not, but there are not given answers to how your experiences in the future will be.

"It seems evident that animals as well as men learn many things from experience, and infer that the same events will always follow from the same causes. By this principle they become acquainted with the more obvious properties of external objects, and gradually, from their birth, treasure up a knowledge of the nature of fire, water, earth, stones, heights, depths etc. and of the effects which result from their operation"

The ignorance and inexperience of the young are clearly obvious from the sly and wisdom of the old, who have learned, by long examination to avoid what hurt them, and to follow what gave ease. For example, a horse, that has been familiar to the field, becomes familiar with the proper height which he can leap, and will never attempt what exceeds his force and ability. Hume says that the animal infers some fact past what immediately strikes his senses, and that this inference is in total founded on past experience. Both human and animals learn many things from experience. We observe.

Miracles

"A miracle is a violation of the laws of nature; and as a firm and unalterable experience has established these laws, the proof against a miracle, from the very nature of the fact, is as entire as any argument from experience can possibly be imagined.".....................

I do think that a miracle is an unexpected situation. For example, there has been times where I have heard that a person is really sick and in the verge of dying, but then found out that they became well as opposed to how they were. Many people believe in miracles today and I would perhaps be one of them. Hume is right, miraces do consist with the laws of nature and they are just full of surprises. Hume was alert that no matter how scientific or rational a civilization became, belief in miracles would not be eliminated.

Memory & Senses

"Custom, then, is the great guide of human life. It is that principle alone, which renders our experience useful to us, and makes us expect, for the future, a similar train of events with those which have appeared in the past. Without the influence of custom, we should be entirely ignorant of every matter of fact, beyond what is immediately present to the memory and senses."............

Hume discusses that our conclusions from experience carry us past our memory and senses, and guarantee us of matters of fact which happened in the most far-away places and most isolated ages; however some fact must always be present to the senses or memory, from which we may first carry on in drawing these conclusions.

Ignorance

"Though there be no such thing as Chance in the world; our ignorance of the real cause of any event has the same influence on the understanding...there is certainly a probability"............

I think that regarding with ignorance, veil of ignorance, effectively forces self-interested bargainers to consider other people’s interests. It is the obligation that participants do not know what their own position or any one else’s will be in the society that results from the bargaining game, and know very little about their own talents and skills either. Not only are players in the bargaining game ignorant of their own skills and capacities, they do not know what their interests, their goals, or their conception the good life will be. Apart from these limitations on their knowledge of their own position, the players in the bargaining game are extremely well formed: “They understand political affairs and the principles of economic theory; they know the basis of social organization and the laws of human psychology.”

Forming Thought

When Locke says we are apparent that we as human beings possess the power to form thought. He says we distinguishes us from all other species is that our brain has the capability to think and form thoughts. I sometimes I ask myself that animals out there was once like us. That they to can become what we are today. But they cant for that reason thats why were known as the smartest. What seperates us from anything like us that we embrass learning and teach one another. As Locke says we are able to create ideas, recognize, and compare objects through our senses. We learn from our mistakes and study them. Thats why human beings possess the power to form thought.