With the difficulties I had with the reading of Theme 1’s text, I was glad to get some clarification on the lecture and the seminar. For example, we concluded in our group in the seminar, after discussing on various things, that previous knowledge leads us to conclusions about future knowledge. I was also relieved to know that there were others who also needed clarification on the subjects discussed. One of the things I did as preparation was to write down questions that popped up in my head during the lecture. In the preparation for the theme, I used wiki’s and encyclopaedias when I did not understand a concept in the text.
Many thoughts and concepts in Kant’s thoughts were clarified. For example:
"Thoughts without content are empty, intuitions without concepts are blind.” (Immanuel Kant, Critique of Pure Reason), although I think this phrase was put out a bit different on the lecture, at least the beginning of it. It was something like, “Conception without perception is empty, perception without conception is blind”, which actually at least for me was easier to understand. Because you can’t see anything without previous knowledge about what you see, in my understanding. And if you have knowledge about something, but never can perceive it, that knowledge would be ‘empty’ because it can’t anyway be seen.
This quote can be compared with the part from Plato’s Theaetetus, that we see ‘through’ the eyes and ears, not ‘with’. Because, it would not enough to see ‘with’ the eyes, and comprehend. But you also need the knowledge about it, which the mind possess.
The main question which to be raised (and I think which Kant was asking), was whether we can see the world objectively, or if we see through faculties. And, yes, it is possible according to Kant, we can have a objective view of the world, by objective knowledge, referring to the Kant’s categories. The categories are necessary for the intuition to come about.
I thought that it was good that you wrote about aspects of the texts you were unsure about. I also liked that you wrote down what you experienced as key words in the first post. Even though you did not fully understand the text you were able to show that you understood some concepts that were important. In the reflection you can tell that you have a greater understanding of what Plato and Kant mean with these texts.Regarding your comments about knowledge - have you also considered that you need knowledge in order to have knowledge about something, so then we can ask ourselves the question; when does knowledge start?
SvaraRaderaOverall a really good job!
I found your very final question very interesting: can we see the world objectively or through faculties? Your answer is I think correct but I would have liked you to explain it more by giving for example a definition of « objective knowledge » to make us understand why Kant’s categories allow us to have an objective view of the world. And by the way, does Kant really say that we have an objective view of the world? Do you mean that we can know and see the world in itself? Because in that case, it is wrong. We can’t. Only God knows!
SvaraRaderaHi!
SvaraRaderaGreat post. I also had a hard time understanding the texts but eventually things clear up. I find you discussion about Kant interesting but I would have liked some explanation to why according to you Kant believes we can have a truly objective view of the world.
Hi, nice reflection. I think it's really nice to see you are improving yourself from the lecture and seminar, I have the same problem as you at the beginning, I agree the articles in this theme are hard to read, and it's actually abstract, but obviously you got more understand of this theme after lecture and seminar, nice to see that. Anyhow, good job!
SvaraRadera