Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason

Preface B, Introductions A & B

Preface BPreface B1) Logic vs. Science

a) Mathematicsb) Natural Science / Physi

2) [c) Metaphysics?]

Intuition conform to object a priori? NoObject conform to Intuition a priori? Yes

Concept conform to Object a priori? NoObject (given via exp.) conform to Concept a priori? Yes

3) Thus: Experience is a species of knowledge, which involves understanding, which has rules, which I must presuppose to be prior to my experience of objects [i.e., rules must be a priori].

4) Good and Bad implications for Metaphysics: Good: a prioriBad: cannot transcend limits of the given (via experience)

The Beyond = The Unconditiond (Bxxx)Foreshadowing (Bxxv – xxvi): Space, Time, and the Thing in itself

Introduction B

I) A priori and a posterioriII) Necessary, universal; space, timeIII) Beyond knowledge: God, freedom, immortalityIV) Analytic and Synthetic JudgmentsV) Synthetic a priori sciences (math, physics,

metaphysics)VI) How are synthetic a priori judgments possible?VII) Reason, Pure Reason, transcendental, and

methodology

Methodology and Conclusion

Methodology: “… it must first have a doctrine of the elements, and secondly, a doctrine of the method of pure reason” (A15-B29).

The two stems of human knowledge:Sensibility and understanding

Through sensibility, the object is given to us.Through Understanding, the object is thought.

Insofar as sensibility may be found to have a priori representations constituting the condition by which objects are given to us, it will be included in our transcendental philosophy.

Since objects must be given before they are thought, this givenness will be considered first in the science of the elements.