Skip to content

Commit

Permalink
Add new blog
Browse files Browse the repository at this point in the history
  • Loading branch information
QubitPi committed Jul 29, 2024
1 parent 8e5da8c commit 3d42a20
Show file tree
Hide file tree
Showing 3 changed files with 20 additions and 4 deletions.
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
---
title: Kant's View of the Mind and Consciousness of Self
published: 2024-07-24
published: 2024-07-29
description: Kant's View of the Mind and Consciousness of Self
image: './cover.png'
tags: ["Theory"]
Expand Down Expand Up @@ -219,8 +219,8 @@ Turning now to Kant's view of the mind, we will start with a point about method:
entirely consistent views on the empirical study of the mind. The empirical method for doing psychology that Kant
discussed was introspection.

Sometimes he held such study to be hopeless. The key text on psychology is in The Metaphysical Foundations of Natural
Science. There Kant tell us that “the empirical doctrine of the soul … must remain even further removed than chemistry
Sometimes he held such study to be hopeless. The key text on psychology is in **The Metaphysical Foundations of Natural
Science**. There Kant tell us that “the empirical doctrine of the soul … must remain even further removed than chemistry
from the rank of what may be called a natural science proper”. (In Kant's defence, there was nothing resembling a single
unified theory of chemical reactions in his time.) The contents of introspection, in his terms inner sense, cannot be
studied scientifically for at least 5 reasons.
Expand All @@ -241,7 +241,7 @@ empirical study of the mind, given that he himself did it. He did so elsewhere.
links 'self-observation' and observation of others and calls them both sources of anthropology

Whatever, no kind of empirical psychology can yield necessary truths about the mind. In the light of this limitation,
how _should_ we study the mind? Kant's answer was: transcendental method using transcendental arguments (notions
how _should_ we study the mind? Kant's answer was: _transcendental method using transcendental arguments_ (notions
introduced earlier). If we cannot observe the connections among the denizens of inner sense to any purpose, we can study
what the mind _must_ be like and what capacities and structures (in Kant's jargon, faculties) it _must_ have if it is to
represent things as it does. With this method we can find universally true, that is to say, 'transcendental'
Expand Down
Loading
Sorry, something went wrong. Reload?
Sorry, we cannot display this file.
Sorry, this file is invalid so it cannot be displayed.
16 changes: 16 additions & 0 deletions src/content/posts/reading-notes-critique-of-pure-reason/index.md
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
@@ -0,0 +1,16 @@
---
title: Critique of Pure Reason
published: 2024-07-27
description: Reading Notes
image: './cover.png'
tags: ["Theory"]
category: 'Philosophy'
draft: false
---

Kant argues that our mathematical, physical, and quotidian knowledge of nature requires certain judgments that are
"synthetic" rather than "analytic," that is, going beyond what can be known solely in virtue of the contents of the
concepts involved in them and the application of the logical principles of identity and contradiction to these concepts,
and yet also knowable _a priori_, that is, independently of any particular experience since no particular experience
could ever be sufficient to establish the universal and necessary validity of these judgments.

0 comments on commit 3d42a20

Please sign in to comment.