PHILOSOPHY Transcedental Idealism

[johnsepei5]

In the Critique of Pure Reason Kant argues that space and time are merely formal features of how we perceive objects, not things in themselves that exist independently of us, or properties or relations among them. Objects in space and time are said to be “appearances”, and he argues that we know nothing of substance about the things in themselves of which they are appearances.

 

[johnsepei5]

all empirical objects, objects in space and time, are mind-dependent, and that we cannot cognize the mind-independent world.

 

[Yibir_]

 

[johnsepei5]

Haha so funny

 

[Internet Nomad]

The Kantian position that space and time are merely formal features of human perception would imply that there can be no reality, substance, or existence independent of our individual perception. However, this would seem to contradict our experience and empirical evidence of external reality independent of our individual perception. Therefore, a counter-argument to Kant's position could be that while space and time may be merely formal features of how we perceive objects, they remain real and objective in their own right.

 

[Internet Nomad]

I have to ask but did you google this

Yes and no.

I was testing an AI if it could perform complex questions and still come off as human. Congratulation you passed the Turning test.

 

[Basra]

Of course- we judge our world in relative to space and time. In other realms- the space and time changes drastically. For example- the ascension of prophet muhammad pbuh -Isra wal miraj--it happened in a split seconds relative to our time and space but in the realms that he entered the time is way slower and denser. Prophet pbuh is said to have observed his bed was still warm when he returned from his miraculous journey to heaven, being lifted and guided by Angel Jibrial of course!

 

[Omar del Sur]

The Kantian position that space and time are merely formal features of human perception would imply that there can be no reality, substance, or existence independent of our individual perception. However, this would seem to contradict our experience and empirical evidence of external reality independent of our individual perception. Therefore, a counter-argument to Kant's position could be that while space and time may be merely formal features of how we perceive objects, they remain real and objective in their own right.

is he saying that the objects aren't actually real or just that we can't perceive direct reality?

if he is saying we can't perceive reality in a direct way but only a representation I think maybe he's onto something.... I think this view could be reconciled with Islam...

but if he's actually denying objective reality like he thinks he could jump off a building and be fine then what he's saying is crazy

also @johnsepei5 would you mind explaining? also btw you don't really support Hume do you? what about Hume do you like?

 

[Keep it a boqol]

Of course- we judge our world in relative to space and time. In other realms- the space and time changes drastically. For example- the ascension of prophet muhammad pbuh -Isra wal miraj--it happened in a split seconds relative to our time and space but in the realms that he entered the time is way slower and denser. Prophet pbuh is said to have observed his bed was still warm when he returned from his miraculous journey to heaven, being lifted and guided by Angel Jibrial of course!

 

[Internet Nomad]

Of course- we judge our world in relative to space and time. In other realms- the space and time changes drastically. For example- the ascension of prophet muhammad pbuh -Isra wal miraj--it happened in a split seconds relative to our time and space but in the realms that he entered the time is way slower and denser. Prophet pbuh is said to have observed his bed was still warm when he returned from his miraculous journey to heaven, being lifted and guided by Angel Jibrial of course!

Hmm interesting perspective us muslims cannot reconciliate the stories in the Quran/ Hadiths without believing that there is more to reality than we can observe.

Spoiler: Bonus

You don't have permission to view the spoiler content. Log in or register now.

 

[johnsepei5]

is he saying that the objects aren't actually real or just that we can't perceive direct reality?

if he is saying we can't perceive reality in a direct way but only a representation I think maybe he's onto something.... I think this view could be reconciled with Islam...

but if he's actually denying objective reality like he thinks he could jump off a building and be fine then what he's saying is crazy

also @johnsepei5 would you mind explaining? also btw you don't really support Hume do you? what about Hume do you like?

no kant didn’t actually deny the reality of objects but he argued that our knowledge of them is limited to what we can percieve and understand through our mental categories

 

[johnsepei5]

is he saying that the objects aren't actually real or just that we can't perceive direct reality?

if he is saying we can't perceive reality in a direct way but only a representation I think maybe he's onto something.... I think this view could be reconciled with Islam...

but if he's actually denying objective reality like he thinks he could jump off a building and be fine then what he's saying is crazy

also @johnsepei5 would you mind explaining? also btw you don't really support Hume do you? what about Hume do you like?

I dont support some of his ideas as it really goes against my beliefs,big fan of his “ problem of induction “ not a fan of his critique of Religion though.

 

[Internet Nomad]

no kant didn’t actually deny the reality of objects but he argued that our knowledge of them is limited to what we can percieve and understand through our mental categories

Just like scientist who label things dark matter. We cannot detect it or measure it. However it is always present as the excess mass of things. So they just categorise the unknown excess as dark matter.