Търси
български
  • English
  • 正體中文
  • 简体中文
  • Deutsch
  • Español
  • Français
  • Magyar
  • 日本語
  • 한국어
  • Монгол хэл
  • Âu Lạc
  • български
  • Bahasa Melayu
  • فارسی
  • Português
  • Română
  • Bahasa Indonesia
  • ไทย
  • العربية
  • Čeština
  • ਪੰਜਾਬੀ
  • Русский
  • తెలుగు లిపి
  • हिन्दी
  • Polski
  • Italiano
  • Wikang Tagalog
  • Українська Мова
  • Други
  • English
  • 正體中文
  • 简体中文
  • Deutsch
  • Español
  • Français
  • Magyar
  • 日本語
  • 한국어
  • Монгол хэл
  • Âu Lạc
  • български
  • Bahasa Melayu
  • فارسی
  • Português
  • Română
  • Bahasa Indonesia
  • ไทย
  • العربية
  • Čeština
  • ਪੰਜਾਬੀ
  • Русский
  • తెలుగు లిపి
  • हिन्दी
  • Polski
  • Italiano
  • Wikang Tagalog
  • Українська Мова
  • Други
Заглавие
Запис
Следва
 

Selections from “Critique of Pure Reason” by Immanuel Kant: Transcendental Doctrine of Elements – of Space, Part 2 of 2

Подробности
Свали Docx
Прочетете още
“Space does not represent any property of objects as things in themselves, nor does it represent them in their relations to each other; in other words, space does not represent to us any determination of objects such as attaches to the objects themselves, and would remain, even though all subjective conditions of the intuition were abstracted. For neither absolute nor relative determinations of objects can be intuited prior to the existence of the things to which they belong, and therefore not à priori (in principle).”

“It is therefore from the human point of view only that we can speak of space, extended objects, etc. If we depart from the subjective condition, under which alone we can obtain external intuition, or, in other words, by means of which we are affected by objects, the representation of space has no meaning whatsoever. This predicate is only applicable to things in so far as they appear to us, that is, are objects of sensibility. The constant form of this receptivity, which we call sensibility, is a necessary condition of all relations in which objects can be intuited as existing without us, and when abstraction of these objects is made, is a pure intuition, to which we give the name of space. It is clear that we cannot make the special conditions of sensibility into conditions of the possibility of things, but only of the possibility of their existence as far as they are phenomena. And so we may correctly say that space contains all which can appear to us externally, but not all things considered as things in themselves, be they intuited or not, or by whatsoever subject one will.”

“Our expositions, consequently, teach the reality (i.e., the objective validity) of space in regard of all which can be presented to us externally as object, and at the same time also the ideality of space in regard to objects when they are considered by means of reason as things in themselves, that is, without reference to the constitution of our sensibility. We maintain, therefore, the empirical reality of space in regard to all possible external experience, although we must admit its transcendental ideality; in other words, that it is nothing, so soon as we withdraw the condition upon which the possibility of all experience depends and look upon space as something that belongs to things in themselves.”

Гледайте още
Последни предавания
38:04
2024-12-20
40 Преглед
2024-12-20
50 Преглед
Сподели
Сподели с
Запази
Начално време
Свали
Мобилно
Мобилно
iPhone
Android
Гледай на мобилен браузър
GO
GO
Prompt
OK
Приложение
Сканирайте QR кода или изберете подходящата система за вашия телефон
iPhone
Android