Immanuel Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason

1389 Words6 Pages
The Transcendental Deductions of the pure concept of the understanding in Immanuel Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, in its most general sense, explains how concepts relate a priori to objects in virtue of the fact that the power of knowing an object through representations is known as understanding. According to Kant, the foundation of all knowledge is the self, our own consciousness because without the self, experience is not possible. The purpose of this essay is to lay out Kant’s deduction of the pure concept of understanding and show how our concepts are not just empirical, but concepts a priori. We will walk through Kant’s argument and reasoning as he uncovers each layer of understanding, eventually leading up to the conclusion mentioned above.
In the Transcendental aesthetics, Kant defines the objective validity of Space and Time as concepts a priori with the help from of Geometry, showing that if we believe in the validity of Geometry, we have to believe that Space and Time are concepts a priori. In the Pure Concepts of Understanding, Kant claims that our intuitions are dependent on sensibility; everything we sense accumulates into our brain and our understanding of the information we sensed relies on organizing that data so that we can recognize the object. Thus, he asserts that understanding is not a faculty of intuition but sensibility. Furthermore, the act of organizing the data into one representation is defined as function and these functions serve as a bridge between the object and its concepts because concepts are not directly related to an object but just some representations of it. This, when function and concepts are put together, Kant concludes is defined as judgment, knowledge of the fact that there is ...

... middle of paper ...

...nd this is the result of the unity of synthesis of imagination and apperception. The unity of apperception which is found in all the knowledge is defined by Kant as affinity because it is the objective ground of knowledge. Furthermore, all things with affinity are associable and they would not be if it was not for imagination because imagination makes synthesis possible. It is only when I assign all perceptions to my apperception that I can be conscious of the knowledge of those perceptions. This understanding of the objects, also known as Faculty of Rules, relies on the sense of self and is thus, the source of the laws of nature.

Works Cited

Kant, Immanuel, and Friedrich Max (Indologe) Müller. "Doctrine 1/The Element of Transcendentalism." Critique of Pure Reason: In Commemoration of the Centenary of Its First Publication. London: Macmillan, 1881. 37-59. Print

More about Immanuel Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason

Open Document