Kenneth R.

Westphal

Kenneth R. Westphal
I Kant’s
mmanuel Kant’s ‘Transcendental Deduction of the Categories’ addresses
issues centrally debated today in philosophy and in cognitive sciences,
especially in epistemology, and in theory of perception. Kant’s insights

Transcendental
into these issues are clouded by pervasive misunderstandings of Kant’s
‘Deduction’ and its actual aims, scope, and argument. The present edition
with its fresh and accurate translation and concise commentary aims to

Kant’s Transcendental Deduction of the Categories

serve these contemporary debates as well as continuing intensive and

Deduction of the
extensive scholarship on Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason. Two surprising
results are that ‘Transcendental Deduction’ is valid and sound, and it holds
independently of Kant’s transcendental idealism. This lucid volume is
interesting and useful to students, yet sufficiently detailed to be

Categories
informative to specialists.

Kenneth R. Westphal is Professor of Philosophy at Boğaziçi University,

İstanbul. His research focuses on the character and scope of rational
justification in non-formal, substantive domains, both moral and
theoretical. His books include several volumes on Kant. Critical Re-Examination,
Elucidation and Corroboration
Kant’s Transcendental Deduction
of the Categories
Critical Re-Examination, Elucidation
and Corroboration
Kant’s Revised Second (B) Edition (1787), German Text with New Parallel
Translation, for Students, Cognitive Scientists, Philosophers & Specialists.

Kenneth R. WESTPHAL
Department of Philosophy
Boğaziçi Üniversitesi, İstanbul
ion Kant’s Transcendental Deduction
of the Categories
Critical Re-Examination, Elucidation
and Corroboration
Kant’s Revised Second (B) Edition (1787), German Text with New Parallel
Translation, for Students, Cognitive Scientists, Philosophers & Specialists.

Kenneth R. WESTPHAL
Department of Philosophy
Boğaziçi Üniversitesi, İstanbul
 Published by Published by
Helsinki University Press
Helsinki University Press
www.hup.fi www.hup.fi

© The author 2021 © The author 2021 For Jeff Edwards, For Jeff Edwards,
generous friend, generous friend,
First published in 2021First published in 2021 keen Critical conscience, well-honed
keen Critical
in Marburg
conscience, well-honed in Marburg

Cover design by Ville Karppanen

Cover design by Ville Karppanen
Portrait of Immanuel Kant
Portrait
by unknown
of Immanuel
artist,Kant
circa 1790
by unknown artist, circa 1790

ISBN (Paperback): 978-952-369-028-8

ISBN (Paperback): 978-952-369-028-8
ISBN (PDF): 978-952-369-029-5
ISBN (PDF): 978-952-369-029-5

https://doi.org/10.33134/HUP-7
https://doi.org/10.33134/HUP-7

This work is licensed under

This workthe Creative Commons
is licensed under theAttribution-NonCommercial-
Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-
NoDerivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-ND
NoDerivatives 4.0) License.
4.0 International To view a copy
(CC BY-NC-ND of this To view a copy of this
4.0) License.
license, visit https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ or send a letter
license, visit https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ to or send a letter to
Creative Commons, 444Creative
Castro Commons,
Street, Suite444
900,Castro
Mountain View,
Street, SuiteCalifornia, 94041,View, California, 94041,
900, Mountain
USA. This license allowsUSA. for copying any part
This license of the
allows work forany
for copying personal
part ofuse,
theproviding
work for personal use, providing
author attribution is clearly stated.
author attribution is clearly stated. CONTENTS CONTENTS
The full text of this book
Thehas
fullbeen
text peer reviewed
of this book hasto ensure highreviewed
been peer aca- to ensure high aca-
§ 1. Introduction§ 1. Introduction 1 1
demic standards. For fulldemic
review policies, For
standards. see http://www.hup.fi/
full review policies, see http://www.hup.fi/
§ 2. Kant’s B Deduction:
§ 2. Basic
Kant’sConsiderations
B Deduction: for
Basic
itsConsiderations 4
Understanding for its Understanding 4
§ 3. Text, Translation
§ 3.& Elucidations
Text, Translation & Elucidations 12 12
§ 4. The Concepts
§ ‘Space’,
4. The ‘Time’
Concepts
& the ‘Space’,
Categories
‘Time’ & the Categories 92 92
Suggested citation: Suggested citation:
§ Critical
5. Modality in Sensory
§ 5. Experience
Modality in&Sensory
Perceptual
Experience
Judgment,
& Perceptual 99
in Brief Judgment, in Brief 99
Westphal, Kenneth R.,Westphal,
2021. Kant’s
Kenneth
Transcendental
R., 2021.
Deduction
Kant’s Transcendental
of the Categories:
Deduction
Critical of the Categories:
Re-Examination, Elucidation
Re-Examination,
and Corroboration.
Elucidation
Helsinki:
and Corroboration.
Helsinki University
Helsinki:Press.
Helsinki University § Press.
6. Analytical Contents
§ 6. Analytical Contents 105 105
https://doi.org/10.33134/HUP-7.
https://doi.org/10.33134/HUP-7.
§ 7. References § 7. References 107 107
To read the free, open Toaccess
readversion
the free,
ofopen
this book
access version of this book
online, visit https://doi.org/10.33134/HUP-7
online, visit https://doi.org/10.33134/HUP-7
or or
scan this QR code withscanyourthis
mobile
QR code
device:
with your mobile device:
 Dear Reader,
Welcome to some refreshed considerations of Kant’s revised Deduction of the Cat-
egories! I hope my elucidations may prove fruitful, whether pro or contra.
– K.R. Westphal
Dear Reader, İstanbul, 20 Dec. 2020 1 INTRODUCTION
Welcome to some refreshed considerations of Kant’s revised Deduction of the Cat-
egories! I hope my elucidations may prove fruitful, whether pro or contra. Concerning Kant’s ‘Deduction of the Categories’, Sir Peter Strawson wrote:
– K.R. Westphal
İstanbul, 20 Dec. 2020 1 INTRODUCTION Kant’s genius nowhere shows itself more clearly than in his identification of the
most fundamental of these conditions [of the very possibility of self-conscious expe-
rience] in its most general form … These are very great and novel gains in episte-
Concerning Kant’s ‘Deduction of the
mology, so Categories’,
great and so Sir Peter
novel that,Strawson
nearly twowrote:
hundred years after they were made,
they have still not been fully absorbed into
Kant’s genius nowhere shows itself more clearly than in his identificationthe philosophical
of the consciousness. (Straw-
son 1966, 29)
most fundamental of these conditions [of the very possibility of self-conscious expe-
rience] in its most general form …
Building uponThese are very great
Strawson’s and(also
insights novelingains
his in episte- writings), I submit that
subsequent
mology, so great and so novel that, nearly two hundred years after they were made,
my previous studies of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason (Westphal 2004, 2020) have
they have still not been fully absorbed into the philosophical consciousness. (Straw-
son 1966, 29) made significant further strides in identifying and justifying Kant’s highly original,
profoundly important insights, and demonstrating their crucial importance to the-
Building upon Strawson’s oryinsights (also intohisphilosophy
of knowledge, subsequent of writings),
mind and Itosubmitcognitivethatsciences. This brief book
my previous studies of solely
Kant’saddresses
Critique ofKant’sPure Reason (Westphal 2004,
own ‘Deduction’. 2020)ithave
By design is independent of my other
made significant furthertwostrides
books, of the commentary genre and debate,original,
in identifying and justifying Kant’s highly and is as lucid and exoteric as
profoundly important insights,
possible.and Thedemonstrating their crucial
issues Kant addresses in theimportance
‘Deduction’ to pertain
the- directly to issues cen-
ory of knowledge, to philosophy of mind and to cognitive sciences. This brief book
trally debated today in philosophy and in cognitive sciences, especially in epistemol-
solely addresses Kant’s own
ogy and‘Deduction’.
in theoryBy of design it is independent
perception, of my other
regarding self-consciousness, self-ascription and
two books, of the commentary genre and debate, and is
perceptual judgment. Yet Kant’s important insights as lucid and exoteric as issues are clouded by
into these
possible. The issues Kantprevalent
addressesmisunderstandings
in the ‘Deduction’of pertain
Kant’sdirectly to issues
‘Deduction’ cen-
and its actual aims, scope and
trally debated today in philosophy and in cognitive sciences, especially in epistemol-
argument. This edition, fresh and accurate translation and concise commentary aims
ogy and in theory of perception,
to serve these regarding self-consciousness,
contemporary debates and self-ascription
to refresh and continuing scholarship on
perceptual judgment. YetKant’s
Kant’sCritique
important insights
of Pure Reason. into these issues are clouded by
prevalent misunderstandings of Kant’s
Kant’s ‘Deduction’
Transcendental and its actual
Deduction of theaims,Purescope and of the Understanding,
Concepts
argument. This edition, fresh
i.e., ofand
theaccurate
twelve translation
categories, and has concise commentary
been widely criticisedaims
for failing to demonstrate
to serve these contemporary debates and to refresh continuing
that the categories are and must be applicable to particular scholarship on objects and events we
Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason.
sense in our surroundings (esp. Guyer 1987, 1992; Howell 1992). Förster (1989a, b)
Kant’s Transcendentalsuggests
Deduction of the aims
that Kant’s Pure inConcepts of the Understanding,
‘the Deduction’ (to adopt a brief designation for Kant’s
i.e., of the twelve categories, has been widely criticised for failing
chapter) are more specific and limited than its critics to demonstrate
assume. Bird (2006a, 323) con-
that the categories are and
curs, as do I. Hence Kant’s Transcendental Proof ofevents
must be applicable to particular objects and Realismwe(2004; henceforth ‘KTPR’)
sense in our surroundings said(esp. Guyer
only 1987, 1992;
the necessary Howellabout
minimum 1992).Kant’s
Förster (1989a, b)There I suggested (KTPR,
Deduction.
suggests that Kant’s aims in ‘the Deduction’ (to adopt a brief designation for Kant’s
chapter) are more specific and limited than its critics assume. Bird (2006a, 323) con- 1
curs, as do I. Hence Kant’s Transcendental Proof of Realism (2004; henceforth ‘KTPR’)
1
said only the necessary minimum about Kant’s Deduction. There I suggested (KTPR,

1
11) that Kant’s transcendendental
11) that Kant’s deductiontranscendendental
requires thorough deduction reconsideration
requires thorough reconsideration
these lines of justificatorythese reasoning
lines ofare justificatory
more cogentreasoning
than Kant arehimself
more cogent appreciated.
than Kant himself appreciated.
based upon Michael’s based Wolff ’supon (1995, Michael’s
2009, 2017) Wolff landmark
’s (1995, 2009, reconstruction
2017) landmarkof reconstruction
This controversial of issue Thiscan becontroversial
set aside becauseissue can Kant’s
be set
Deduction
aside becauseaddressesKant’sissues
Deduction addresses issues
Kant’s completeness proof Kant’sof hiscompleteness
Table of Judgments.
proof of his There
Table (KTPRof )Judgments.
I sought inter There (KTPRof ) I validity
sought which
inter are neutral
of validity
with regard
which to are transcendental
neutral with regard idealism.
to transcendental
Setting aside idealism. Setting aside
alia to provide proper context
alia to forprovide
such proper
reconsideration
context for of Kant’s
such reconsideration
Deduction of of theKant’s Deduction of the
Kant’s transcendental idealism
Kant’s transcendental
may seem to Kant’s idealism scholars
may seem a very to large,
Kant’stenden-
scholars a very large, tenden-
categories. I have foundcategories.
since thatI stillhavemore foundcontext
since thatis required
still more to reconsider
context is requiredtious to reconsider
consession, yet my tiouselucidations
consession, pointyetoutmy theelucidations
vast extentpoint to whichout the Kant’s
vastpub-
extent to which Kant’s pub-
Kant’s Deduction, which Kant’s
I offerDeduction,
in Kant’s which CriticalI Epistemology
offer in Kant’s (2020; Critical
henceforth
Epistemology (2020; lished B Deduction is simply
henceforth lishedindependent
B DeductionofisKant’s simplycherished
independent transcendental
of Kant’s cherished
ideal- transcendental ideal-
‘KCE’), where again I say‘KCE only’), the
wherenecessary
again Iminimum
say only the aboutnecessary
Kant’s minimum
Deductionabout it- Kant’sism. Deduction
This shouldit- not beism. so surprising,
This should because
not beKant’s B Deduction
so surprising, because focuses
Kant’s onBis- Deduction focuses on is-
self. self. sues of validity, whereassues transcendental
of validity, whereas
idealism transcendental
concerns issuesidealism of ontology concernsand issues of ontology and
One fortunate result of thisOneextensive
fortunatestage resultsetting
of thisisextensive
to unburden stagethe setting
aims isand to unburdencognitive
the aimsprocess
and (see below, cognitive
§2.15). process (see below, §2.15).
scope of Kant’s Deduction! scope Thisof Kant’s
affordsDeduction!
independent Thisconsideration
affords independentof Kant’s consideration
De- ofRegardless
Kant’s De-of my own views, Regardlessas an of interpretive
my own views, and critical
as an point
interpretive
it is crucial
and critical
to point it is crucial to
duction, without entanglingduction,
it in further
withoutissues entangling
Kant itaddresses
in further elsewhere
issues Kant in the
addresses
Cri- elsewhere
specify in the Cri-
extent to which,
specify
or the extent
regardstoinwhich,
which,orKant’s the regards
Deduction in which,
does (not)
Kant’s Deduction does (not)
tique of Pure Reason (henceforth:
tique of Pure
‘KdrV Reason
’). Such(henceforth:
unencumbered, ‘KdrV ’). independent
Such unencumbered,
consid- independent require consid-
transcendental idealism.
require transcendental
My elucidationsidealism. aim to My showelucidations
how Kant’saim Deduc-
to show how Kant’s Deduc-
eration of Kant’s Deductioneration is the
of Kant’s
aim of Deduction
this brief commentary.
is the aim ofKant’s this brief aimcommentary.
in the Kant’s
tion aimcan in theshould) be
(and tionunderstood
can (and should) without be appeal
understood
to transcendental
without appeal idealism,
to transcendental idealism,
‘Deduction’ is to show that‘Deduction’
not evenisthe to minimal,
show thatincomplete
not even the thought,
minimal, ‘I think
incomplete
…’, thought, which‘I think
would …’,too easily which
short-circuit
would Kant’stoo easilyissues,
short-circuit
aims and Kant’sreasoning. issues,Why aimsandand reasoning. Why and
is humanly possible withoutis humanly
using (ifpossible
implicitly) without
the categories
using (if implicitly)
in some actual the categories
context in somehow actual
so context
is indicated brieflyhow below
so is(§2.15)
indicated by briefly
distinguishing
below (§2.15)
two senses
by distinguishing
of ‘constitu- two senses of ‘constitu-
on some specific occasion onto at
someleastspecific
formulate occasion
a judgment
to at least about
formulate
some (presumptive)
a judgment about sometion (presumptive)
of objects’ of awareness.tion ofRelevant
objects’passages
of awareness.
are notedRelevant
subsequently
passages(§3). are noted subsequently (§3).
particular(s). Constraintsparticular(s).
on humanlyConstraints
identifiableon particulars
humanly are identifiable
examinedparticulars
subse- are examined The next subse-section (§2) states
The next plainlysection
and (§2)directlystates
keyplainly
points and required
directlyto key
un- points required to un-
quently, in Kant’s ‘Analytic
quently,
of Principles’.
in Kant’s ‘Analytic
This basicofdivision
Principles’.of Kant’s
This basictasks division
has of Kant’s
derstand tasksandhasto assess Kant’s
derstandB Deduction.
and to assess ThoseKant’sseeking
B Deduction.
grounds for Thosemy seeking
remarksgrounds for my remarks
been chronically neglected beenin the
chronically
critical literature.
neglected in the critical literature. should please consult theshould two indicated
please consultbooks;the readers
two indicated
willing tobooks;
acceptreadersmy guides,willing to accept my guides,
My elucidations aim to identify
My elucidations
Kant’s key aimissues,
to identify
reasons Kant’s
and proofkey issues,
in thereasons
De- and proof albeitinprovisionally,
the De- may albeit
wish toprovisionally,
read Wolff ’smay (2017)
wishconcise
to readaccount
Wolff ’sof (2017)
why Kant’s
concise account of why Kant’s
duction, thus fulfilling critical
duction, interpretive
thus fulfillingobligations
critical incurred
interpretive by my obligations
previousincurred
two by myTable of Judgments
previous two is ‘precise’
Table ofinJudgments
the sense that is ‘precise’
none ofinthese the sense
judgmental
that none forms of these
is judgmental forms is
books. To provide claritybooks.
and focusTo provide
on Kant’s clarity
reasons
and focus
and reasoning,
on Kant’s this reasons
conciseand reasoning,redundant.
this concise§3 presents Kant’s
redundant. text §3andpresents
my translation
Kant’s text of the
andB myDeduction
translation (verso)
of the B Deduction (verso)
commentary sets aside commentary
Kant’s first edition sets aside (‘A’)Kant’s
Deduction and also(‘Ainterpretive
first edition ’) Deduction and also interpretive
together with my elucidations
together (recto).
with §§4 my and
elucidations
5 present(recto).
and respond
§§4 and to 5 present
two main and respond to two main
controversies. I do not discount
controversies.Kant’sI first
do not edition
discount
Deduction,
Kant’s firstbut Kant’s
editionsuccess
Deduction, but Critical
Kant’s questions
success regarding Critical
my elucidation
questions regarding
of Kant’smy Deduction.
elucidation §6 ofprovides
Kant’s analyt-
Deduction. §6 provides analyt-
B’) edition.
is secured by his revisedis (‘secured by his Readers
revisedinterested
(‘B’) edition.
in theReaders
scholarly interested
debates in the scholarly debates
ical contents, including that
ical of
contents,
Kant’s ‘Deduction’.
including that of Kant’s ‘Deduction’.
may consult de Vleeschauer may (1937),
consult Birdde Vleeschauer
(2006a) and(1937),Motta Bird& alia (2006a)
(2021);and experts
Motta & alia (2021); experts
I describe my commentary I describe
as providingmy commentary
‘elucidations’: as providing
sufficient necessary
‘elucidations’:mini-sufficient necessary mini-
will identify views I takewill
on identify
many ofviews thoseIissues.
take on There
manyis of nowthoseso much
issues.commen-
There is now so much mum commen-
information to re-consider Kant’s B Deduction
mum information to re-consider to better
Kant’sunderstand
B Deduction its actual
to better understand its actual
tary responding to commentary
tary respondingthat there to commentary
is insufficientthat direct
there engagement
is insufficient stated aims,with
with direct engagement scope, character
statedandaims,
success.
scope,Sceptical
character inquirers
and success.
may regard
Sceptical my inquirers
elucida- may regard my elucida-
Kant’s text and issues. What
Kant’s aretext
Kant’s
and issues
issues.isWhat openare to Kant’s
scholarly issues
examination,
is open toin- tions as interpretive
scholarly examination, in- hypotheses,
tions as interpretive
to be considered hypotheses,
and tested,
to be though
considered suchandtesting
tested, though such testing
terpretation and debate, terpretation
but Kant’s carefully
and debate, wrought
but Kant’s
text mustcarefully
be thewrought
fundamentaltext must be the requires scholars also to requires
fundamental test theirscholars
own preferred
also to testapproach
their ownand preferred
presumptions. approach Ulti- and presumptions. Ulti-
basis for all such study, interpretation
basis for all such andstudy,
debate.interpretation
Here Kant’s text and isdebate.
central. mately such inquiry andmately
Here Kant’s text is central. re-consideration
such inquiry is necessary
and re-consideration
also in scholarlyis necessary
debate,also yet in scholarly debate, yet
One controversial issue One should controversial
be noted, to issue
set should
aside. Ibedonoted, not believe aside. I do not that
to set Kant’s over-grown
believe Kant’s genre has thatcome
over-grown
to impede genresuch hasre-consideration.
come to impedeDetailed such re-consideration.
schol- Detailed schol-
Critical philosophy requires
Critical
his philosophy
transcendental requires
idealism;
his transcendental
neither do I think idealism;
any of neither do arly debate
I think anyisofbest suspended
arly debate
for theispresent,
best suspended
for the sake for the
of refreshed
present, for inquiry,
the sake con-of refreshed inquiry, con-
his arguments for it prove histhat
arguments
idealism.forMyit reasons
prove that foridealism.
these strong My reasons
claims arefor de-these strongsideration
claims areand de- above allsideration
reading. Neither
and above is thisall reading.
commentary Neither an isintroduction
this commentary to an introduction to
tailed elsewhere (KTPR). Part
tailedofelsewhere
what I highlight
(KTPR). (also
Part ofin what
KCE) Iishighlight
that Kant(also oftenin de-
KCE) is that Kant’s
Kant often de-of Pure Reason;
Critique Kant’sreaders
Critique seeking
of Puresuch
Reason;background
readers seeking
may consultsuch background
Buroker may consult Buroker
velops parallel yet separable
velops linesparallel
of justification
yet separable for lines
his mainof justification
theses, andfor somehis of main theses, and some
(2006), of
Bird (2006a, b); or
(2006),
BaumBird (1986),
(2006a,
Haagb);(2007).
or Baum (1986), Haag (2007).

2 2 3 3
2 3
2 KANT’S B DEDUCTION
2.1 The brevity of Kant’s
of Kant’s aim in the twoofmain
tion of the categories is to tioncircumscribe
accord with his cardinal distinction
intellect and sensibility within
Both roles involve various
which are guided or structuredwhich by areourguided
egories. This claim concerns egories.the This
forms of combination are
does not entail numericaldoes
In particular, Kant’s account In particular,
numerically distinct combinations
contrast to those combinationscontrastrequired
judgments. Kant is quite judgments.
called) as well as to issuescalled)
or indeed from sensory or
presentation are effectedpresentation
dental power of imagination
1100–10; cf. A79/B104–5).
ceived particulars and their ceived
(however tentative, approximate
standing. (Kant’s contraststanding.
‘intellect’ to ‘sensibility’ just
2.2 A helpful pointer2.2
Mediaeval metaphysics, the
any and all even possible
priori, formal aspects of priori,
human self-conscious thought humanabout self-conscious
2.3 The structure of Kant’s
of Contents is presentedofinContents outline format
Kant’s section and §§ titles Kant’s
ical Contents (§6). Consider ical Contents
Kant’s ‘Transcendental Logic’ Kant’s is‘Transcendental
second division, ‘Transcendental
4 4
4 5
2 :B ANT’SCB
KASIC DEDUCTION: BFOR
ONSIDERATIONS ASICITSCONSIDERATIONS
UNDERSTANDING tal Analytic’ is the ‘Analytic
FOR ITS UNDERSTANDING tal Analytic’
of Concepts’ is the(in‘Analytic
contrastoftoConcepts’
the second(inbook, contrast the ‘Ana-
to the second book, the ‘Ana-
lytic of Principles’). Thelytic firstofchapter
Principles’).
of Kant’s The ‘Analytic
first chapter of Concepts’
of Kant’s is‘Analytic Kant’s of Concepts’ is Kant’s
2.1 designated
The brevity Deduction
of Kant’s (KdrV
designated
§26) indicates
Deduction that(KdrV
much§26) indicates ‘Clue that much
to discovering all pure
‘Clueconcepts
to discovering
of the all understanding’.
pure conceptsHere of the Kantunderstanding’.
examines Here Kant examines
Kant’s sections
aim in(Abschnitten)
the two main of his
sections
chapter (Abschnitten)
on the Deduc- of his chapter the on Table
the Deduc-of judgmental the forms,
Table andofsuggests
judgmental howforms,
that Table
and suggests
can indicate howour thatmost
Table can indicate our most
of the categorieshis issue,is towhich
circumscribe
indeed he hisdoes,
issue,exactly
which in indeed he does,basic exactly
conceptualin categories. basicThe conceptual
second chapter
categories. of Kant’s
The second‘Analytic
chapterof Concepts’
of Kant’s ‘Analytic of Concepts’
accord withbetween his cardinal two distinction
distinct, integrated
betweenroles two played
distinct,byintegrated contains
roles played by
the Deduction; contains
this second the chapter
Deduction; is titled
this ‘Of
second
the deduction
chapter is titled
of the‘Of pure the deduction of the pure
intellecthuman
and sensibility
experiencewithin and knowledge
human experience (B75–6, and 304–5). B75–6, 304–5).
knowledge (concepts of the understanding’.
conceptsThis of the
chapter
understanding’.
contains two Thismain chapter
‘sections’,
contains eachtwo of main ‘sections’, each of
Bothsortsrolesof involve
combination,variousconjoining
sorts of combination,
or ‘synthesis’,conjoining
all of or ‘synthesis’, all of
which is subdivided into which
numbered is subdivided
§§. The first intomainnumbered
section§§. is The
titled,first
‘Ofmain the prin-
section is titled, ‘Of the prin-
mostorfundamental
structured byjudgmental
our most fundamental
forms and cat- judgmentalciples formsofand cat-
a transcendental ciples
deduction
of a transcendental
as such’; it contains deduction §§13–14.
as such’;Kant’sit contains
second §§13–14. Kant’s second
formsclaimof theseconcerns
various theconjoinings!
forms of these Thatvarious
all these conjoinings!main Thatsection
all theseis titled, ‘Transcendental
main section isdeductiontitled, ‘Transcendental
of the pure concepts deduction of the of theunder-
pure concepts of the under-
forms
guidedof combination
by the same are formal
guided
or structural
by the same guides
formal
(types)or structuralstanding’;
guides (types)
it contains §§15–27.standing’;The itpenultimate
contains §§15–27. §26 is titled,
The penultimate
‘Transcendental §26 isdeduc-
titled, ‘Transcendental deduc-
identity
not entail
between numerical
any pairidentity
of effected
between(token)anyconjoinings.
pair of effected (token) tionconjoinings.
of the universally possible tion of experiential
the universally use possible
of the pure experiential
conceptsuse of of thethe under-
pure concepts of the under-
of such Kant’s
conjoining account
or synthesis
of such expressly
conjoiningallows or synthesis
for expressly allows for
standing’. My point in reviewing standing’. this My taxonomy
point in reviewing of Kant’sthis texttaxonomy
is to suggest of Kant’s
that text is to suggest that
numerically required
distinctfor combinations
sensory-perceptual
requiredpresentations,
for sensory-perceptual
in presentations,
Kant’s key task in in these Kant’s
two main keysections
task in theseof histwo chapter,
main specifically
sections of§§13–25 his chapter, and specifically §§13–25 and
to thosefor combinations
explicitly self-conscious
required for (apperceptive)
explicitly self-conscious§27, (apperceptive)
is to carefully circumscribe
§27, is toand carefully
characterise
circumscribe
the exact andissues
characterise
and aims theofexact
his issues and aims of his
alert to issues Kant of issensory-perceptual
quite alert to issues ‘binding’
of sensory-perceptual
(as it is now ‘binding’ (as it is now
Deduction of the categoriesDeduction
(§26). Much of theofcategories
my aim in(§26). the following
Much of my elucidations
aim in theis following elucidations is
of information
as well as to extraction
issues offrominformation
sensory-perceptual
extraction from intakesensory-perceptual
to indicateintake that this is exactly
to indicate
how Kantthat this
proceeds:
is exactly thirteen
how Kant§§ of proceeds:
careful stage-set-
thirteen §§ of careful stage-set-
presentation.
indeed fromSensory-perceptual
sensory presentation. combination
Sensory-perceptual
and sensory combination ting, and
one §sensory
of proof. §26 ting,statesone Kant’s
§ of Deduction
proof. §26 states of the Kant’s
categories.Deduction
Kant has of the
a verycategories. Kant has a very
sub-personally are by
effected
cognitivesub-personally
functioningbyofcognitivethe transcen- functioning ofspecific,the transcen-
unusual point tospecific,
make about unusual humanpointapperception;
to make about consequently,
human apperception; he must consequently, he must
dental (§24,
powerB151–2, ll. 951–2, 961–77,
of imagination (§24, B151–2,
980– 91; ll. 951–2,
§26, B162,961–77,ll. 980– 91; make §26,clear
B162,why ll. this pointmake
matters,
clearandwhywhy thisitpoint
holdsmatters,
true of and
us. Thiswhy requires
it holds true Kant’s of us. This requires Kant’s
Integration
1100–10; cf. A79/of Bconceptual
104–5). Integration
classifications
of of conceptual
sensed, per- classifications of sensed,stage
extensive per-setting (cf.extensive
below, §5). stage setting (cf. below, §5).
features,
particulars
required andtotheir
form features,
explicitrequired
cognitivetojudgments
form explicit cognitive judgments
2.4 One challenge of reading 2.4 One Kant’schallenge
KdrV isofthat reading
he examines
Kant’s KdrV issuesisboth that of he cog-
examines issues both of cog-
(however ortentative,
precise) approximate
about them, or Kantprecise)
assigns to under-
about them, Kant assigns nitive to under-and of cognitive
process nitive process
validity.and These of cognitive
two kindsvalidity.
of issues Thesehe contrasts
two kindsbyof issues he contrasts by
between(Kant’s these two contrast
functions
between
is mythese
reason twofor functions
contrasting is my reasondistinguishing
for contrastingbetween his distinguishing
‘subjective’ between
and ‘objective’his ‘subjective’
deductions and(A‘objective’
xvii , cf. B393). deductions (Axvii , cf. B393).
‘intellect’
above.)to ‘sensibility’ just above.) The former concerns howThe we former
can sense, concerns
perceive, howdiscriminate
we can sense, or perceive,
judge anydiscriminate
particu- or judge any particu-
aboutAKant’s helpfulkeypointerterm ‘transcendental’
about Kant’s key is term
this: In‘transcendental’
much islars
this: In much
at all; the latter concerns lars atthe all;athe
priori,
latter
formal
concernsconditions
the a priori,
under formal
which conditions
alone we under which alone we
Mediaeval
‘transcendental’
metaphysics, categories
the ‘transcendental’
are supposed categories
to pertain are to supposed cantomakepertain
anytocognitive judgment
can makeabout any cognitive
any sensed judgment
particular(s)
aboutvalidly,
any sensedby achieving
particular(s) validly, by achieving
anybeing(s).
and all Kanteven re-assigns
possible being(s).
the termKant to designate
re-assignsthose the terma to designate those a
sufficiently accurate and sufficiently
justified reference
accuratetoand any justified
particular(s)
reference
and ascription
to any particular(s)
of fea- and ascription of fea-
humanformal cognisance
aspectsrequired
of human for cognisance
any and all required
even possiblefor any and allture(s) even to possible
that (or to those) ture(s)
particular(s).
to that (orBytocarefully
those) particular(s).
considering basic By carefully
issues aboutconsidering basic issues about
or experience thought
of particulars.
about or experience of particulars. sensory binding and information sensory binding extraction,
and together
information withextraction,
our most togetherbasic formal with our most basic formal
2.3 text The isstructure
complex,ofyet Kant’s
worth text
considering.
is complex,Kant’s yet worthTableconsidering. Kant’s
aspects of Table
judging, to addressaspects issues
of judging,
about how to address
it is at all
issues
possible
aboutfor how anyitcognisant
is at all possible for any cognisant
is presented
by Pluhar’s
in outline
translation
format(1996,by Pluhar’s
viii–xvi).translation human
(1996, viii–xvi).
being to integratehuman sensory being
experience
to integrateover sensory
time andexperience
through space over so timeas and
to through space so as to
within section
the ‘Deduction’
and §§ titlesare within
outlined
the ‘Deduction’
below in theare Analyt-
outlined belowbeinable the to Analyt-
judge anythingbeitable experiences,
to judge Kant anything constructs
it experiences,
a very sophisticated
Kant constructs func-a very sophisticated func-
here these(§6). titlesConsider
and taxonomy.
here these Thetitles
firstand
division
taxonomy.of The first division
tionalist of architecture
cognitive tionalist
(KCE cognitive
§§30, 43).architecture
By identifying(KCE §§30,
these 43).features
By identifying
of cogni- these features of cogni-
the ‘Transcendental Logic’Analytic’
is the ‘Transcendental
(in contrast to Analytic’
the (in tive
contrast to the
process, Kant identifiestive much
process, moreKantspecifically
identifieswhich muchissues
moreregarding
specifically cognitive
which issues regarding cognitive
second division,
Dialectic’). ‘Transcendental
The first bookDialectic’).
of Kant’s The ‘Transcenden-
first book of Kant’svalidity ‘Transcenden-
require solution, and validity
what require
philosophical
solution,resources
and whatmay philosophical
be broughtresourcesto bear inmay be brought to bear in
5 5
resolving these issues ofresolving
validity (theseKCE, C issues
hs. 4–8).
validity run throughout validity
Kant’s Deduction;
run throughout
is required to recognise isthat
required
Kant distinguishes
to recognisethem,
itly. itly.
2.5 Kant’s subtle and2.5 successfulKant’s discernment
subtle and issuccessful
diagnostic clues from Ryle.diagnostic
One is to clues
beware
fromofRyle.‘para-mechanical
the mind. Ryle (1949, 19, the23, mind.
64, 68,Ryle&c) (1949,
potheses, but para-mechanical
potheses, hypotheses
but para-mechanical
ogy, also amongst empiricists,
ogy, also materialists,
amongst empiricists,
sophical account of howsophical
the mindaccount (supposedly)of how works.
Deduction is his lengthyDeduction
aside aboutis the his apparent
lengthy aside paradoxabout ofthe
6). It overtly concerns process
6). It overtly
rather concerns
than validity; processit is rather
sis because the paradox sisarisesbecause
from the attempting
paradoxtoarises model fromsensory
our sensory awareness of ourthings
sensory other awareness
than ourselves,
(and para-mechanical) by (andKant’s
para-mechanical)
distinction between by Kant’s
Accordingly, I have elided Accordingly,
it from theI presenthave elidededition,it from
of Kant’s Deduction. of Kant’s Deduction.
2.6 Ryle’s (1932 [2009, 2.641–62]) Ryle’s second
(1932clue [2009,is to41–62])
leading expressions. Fourleading
examples expressions.
pertainingFour
tion’, ‘cognition’, ‘determine’
tion’, and‘cognition’,
‘sinnliche ‘determine’
Anschauung ’.and
lung’ (representation) as alung’
genus (representation)
for all sorts ofasfactorsa genuspertaining
from individual sensations fromupindividual
to the most sensations
reason. Always bear in mindreason.Kant’s Always taxonomy
bear in mind of representations
Within this taxonomy, Kant Within typically
this taxonomy,
uses the term Kant ‘cognition’
singular) to designate a singular)
state of atosubject,designate a ‘perception’,
other object, in contrastother
to a sensation,
object, in acontrast
‘perception’
tains) to a condition of tains)
the cognisant
to a condition
subject.ofPossible
than oneself is fundamentalthan to oneself
KdrV.is Recall,
fundamental
guishes between perception guishesand between
apperception;perception
like sense data, ‘perceptions’
like sense
are not data,automatically
‘perceptions’
scious awareness (apperception).
scious awareness (apperception).
2.7 I render ‘sinnliche 2.7Anschauung I render
’ as ‘sensory
‘sinnliche intuition’.
but too easily suggests sensed
but tooqualities
easily suggests
of whichsensed one isqualities
data or Humean impressions.data or‘Intuition’
Humean in impressions.
to some particular(s) otherto some
than oneself:
particular(s)sensoryother
cation, which are neither cation,
sensed which
nor sensory
are neither qualities
6 6
6 7
of validity
Issues (of KCE process
, Chs. 4–8).
and issues
Issuesofof processlookingand issues
at something.
of Kant’s
looking viewsat something.
on human Kant’s sensibility viewsareon complex
humanand sensibility
sophisti- are complex and sophisti-
bearing Kant’stheirDeduction;
distinction bearing
clearly in theirminddistinction cated;
clearly assimilating
in mind his approach cated; assimilating
to either Cartesianism
his approachortoempiricismeither Cartesianism
causes nothing or empiricism causes nothing
that Kant
indeed,distinguishes
repeatedlythem, and explic-
indeed, repeatedly
but and
confusion.
explic- (See further
but confusion.
§5 below; cf. (See
Buroker
further1981, §5 below;
Georgecf. 1981,
Buroker Falkenstein
1981, George 1981, Falkenstein
1995.) 1995.)
better appreciated
discernment by isusing
bettertwoappreciated2.8by using
In English,
two many 2.8 of the In aspects
English, of cognisance
many of theKant aspects
designates
of cognisance
by Vorstellung
Kant designates by Vorstellung
One is to beware hypotheses’
of ‘para-mechanical
about hypotheses’
or the verb, aboutvorstellen, in
or connection
the verb, vorstellen,
with sensory in connection
perception, withwouldsensorybe better
perception, would be better
criticised
19, 23,Cartesian
64, 68, &c) para-mechanical
criticised Cartesianhy- para-mechanical
thought of as hy-sensory presentation(s).
thought of as Kant sensory is apresentation(s).
direct Critical Kant realistisabout
a directsensory
Critical realist about sensory
run rampanthypothesesin philosophicalrun rampantpsychol- in philosophical
perception;
psychol-he rejects indirect,
perception;representationalist
he rejects indirect, theories representationalist
of perception. This theoriesholdsof perception. This holds
physicalists materialists,
and indeed most physicalists
any philo- and indeed most
regardless
any philo-
of his transcendental
regardless idealism,
of his transcendental
within his ‘empirical idealism,realism’;
withinorhis regardless
‘empirical realism’; or regardless
the mind One (supposedly)
example from works.Kant’sOne example of from
eitherKant’s
qualification, if of
hiseither
idealism qualification,
be set aside. if his
(Seeidealism
further be below,
set aside.
§5.) (See further below, §5.)
self-affection
apparent paradox (B152– of self-affection
2.9 In(BEnglish152– as in German,
2.9 In‘determine’
English as (bestimmen)
in German,can ‘determine’
mean: cause (bestimmen)
to be ascan it mean: cause to be as it
a para-mechanical
than validity;hypothe- is; yet hypothe-
it is a para-mechanical it can also mean: specify,
is; yet itascan in also
the instruction,
mean: specify, ‘Phelps,
as in the
pleaseinstruction,
determine‘Phelps, what please determine what
attempting
self-awareness
to modelon became of the
sensory self-awareness onHiggins dossier!’
became In of this
the Higgins
sense ‘determine’
dossier!’ In means
this sense
to find ‘determine’
out or spec- means to find out or spec-
of thingsmade otheryetthan
more ourselves,
complicated made yet more ify complicated
what has happened. ify In what
connection
has happened.
with concepts, In connection
to ‘specify’ witha concepts,
concept istoto‘specify’ a concept is to
phenomena
distinctionand between
noumena. phenomena make it more precise, bymake
and noumena. providing
it more a more
precise, exact,by providing
hence more a more
restricted
exact,meaning
hence more or restricted meaning or
translation
the present
and commentary
edition, translation and intension
commentary (with an ‘s’). Kant
intension
frequently(withusesan ‘s’).
bestimmen
Kant frequently
and its cognatesuses bestimmen
in this sense.
and its cognates in this sense.
2.10 A fifth systematically 2.10misleading
A fifth systematically
expression is misleading
‘analytic truth’,
expression
a directisdescen-
‘analytic truth’, a direct descen-
bewaresecondof systematically
clue is to beware dant of Hume’s
mis- of systematically mis- ‘relations dantof ofideas’.
Hume’sKant‘relations
repeatedly of stresses
ideas’. Kantthat all
repeatedly
which can stresses
be that all which can be
to Kant’s
examples Deduction
pertaining areto‘representa-
Kant’s Deduction are known by conceptual analysis,
‘representa- knownstrictly
by conceptual
speaking,analysis,
is whether strictly
anyspeaking,
specific sub-concept
is whether any specific sub-concept
Kant‘sinnliche
uses the
Anschauung ’. Kant uses theis term
term ‘Vorstel- or is not included within
‘Vorstel- is orsome
is not designated
included concept.
within some Hencedesignated
‘analyticconcept.
truth’ pertains
Hence ‘analytic truth’ pertains
for all sortsto our
of factors
cognisance, onlycognisance,
pertaining to our to conceptual content onlyortointension
conceptual (with content
an ‘s’),orinintension
contrast (with
both to an intentions
‘s’), in contrast both to intentions
idealised, up comprehensive
to the most idealised, conceptscomprehensive
of (agents’
conceptsaims)ofand to extentions
(agents’ aims) (actual andinstances
to extentionsof any (actual
conceptinstances
or term).of Truth,any concept or term). Truth,
Kant’s taxonomy (A320/ ofBrepresentations
376–7). (properly
A320/B376–7). speaking, concernsproperlythe relation
speaking, between
concerns a judgment
the relation or between
claim, formulated
a judgment or claim, formulated
typically uses (in the
the term
distributive using
‘cognition’ (in the some classificatoryusing
distributive concepts,
some and classificatory
any particular(s)concepts, judged
and any or claimed
particular(s)to in-judged or claimed to in-
a state of a which subject,connects
a ‘perception’,
to somewhich connects stantiate to the
some relevant predicate
stantiateconcepts
the relevant (in affirmative
predicate concepts
judgments). (in affirmative
Hence truth, judgments). Hence truth,
to a sensation,
which onlya connects
‘perception’ (or which properly(orspeaking,
per- only connects per- is never
properly
merely speaking,
analytical; is never
it is always
merelysynthetic,
analytical;because
it is alwaystruth synthetic, because truth
the cognisant
reference subject.
to objects
Possible reference toinvolves
other objects both
otherreference involves
and attribution
both reference
to indicated and particular(s);
attribution to these indicatedcannot particular(s);
be these cannot be
too, that to KdrV.
Kant (likeRecall,
Leibniz)
too, that distin- containeddistin-
Kant (like Leibniz) merely within contained
any concept, merelytheywithin
shouldany never
concept,
be mistaken
they shouldfor merenever con-
be mistaken for mere con-
unlikeand Hume’s
apperception;
impressions unlike andHume’s ceptual and
un- impressions content
un- or intension.
ceptual The content
convenientor intension.
tag, ‘analytic
The convenient
truth’ obscures tag, ‘analytic
a host oftruth’ obscures a host of
objects
are not (orautomatically
aspects) of self-con-
objects (or aspects) distinct, important conceptual,
of self-con- distinct,referential,
importantascriptive
conceptual, andreferential,
judgmental ascriptive
issues. Even and judgmental
if, issues. Even if,
e.g., anything coloured must e.g., anything
be extended coloured(cf. Quine
must 1961,be extended
32ff ), this(cf. is
Quine
a complex
1961, 32ff ), this is a complex
Anschauung‘Sensible’
’ as ‘sensoryis not intuition’.
incorrect, hypothetical
‘Sensible’ is not incorrect, proposition,hypothetical
which (qua proposition
proposition,or which
judgment)
(qua proposition
may have no orrelevant
judgment) may have no relevant
explictlyofaware,
whichasone in sense
is explictly aware, as in sense
instances and so may express
instances no and
truth,soevenmayifexpress
it may express
no truth,aevensignificant
if it may relation
express a significant relation
Kant’s taxonomy ‘Intuition’indicates
in Kant’sdirectedness
taxonomy indicates between the concepts ‘coloured’
directedness between the andconcepts
‘extended’, ‘coloured’
and hence and a‘extended’,
significant and (though hence a significant (though
intuition
than oneself:
concernssensory
directionintuition
and lo- entirely and
concerns direction counter-factual,
lo- entirely
inferential) counter-factual,
relation between inferential)
any possible
relationinstances
between of any‘col-possible instances of ‘col-
sensed; mostnor literally,
sensory ‘anschauen’
qualities ; most oured’
is literally, and ‘extended’
‘anschauen’ is particulars.
oured’ andThe ‘extended’
apparentparticulars.
clarity of convenient
The apparent philosophical
clarity of convenient philosophical
7 7
short-hand may obfuscate! short-hand
Quine ismay correctobfuscate!
of ‘analyticity’, yet his of
extensionalist
‘analyticity’,semantics
yet his extensionalist
(Westphal 2015, Parrini (Westphal
2018). 2015, Parrini 2018).
2.11 The key points of2.11
2.11 Kant’s The Deduction
key pointsconcern of Kant’s cognitive
independently of Kant’sindependently
transcendentalofidealism,
pirical realism’. Kant’s pirical
Deduction realism’. addresses
Kant’snecessary
quired for us at all to think
quired
so asfortous identify
at all toany think
able competently to ascribeable competently
actual features
trasts accurate attributiontrasts
of what
accurate some attribution
particularofIS,what
pear to some one of us.pear Theto contrast
some one is correct,
that it appears to be such-and-so
that it appearsrequires to be identifying
putatively. Even this minimal
putatively.
identification
Even thisinvolvesminimalindividuation
tion (however approximate tion (however
or provisional). approximateThese or
require using the categories
requirein order,
using the as Kantcategories
pears to oneself – to any pears
apperceptive
to oneselfhuman – to any
pronoun ‘I’ to express any pronoun
thought, ‘I’ belief,
to express judgment
2.12 Central to Kant’s2.12 Deduction Central aretotheKant’s
ition and intellect withinition
human andexperience:
intellect within
ticulars to us; thinking can
ticulars
onlytojudge us; thinking
those particulars
ition (B75–6, 304–5; cf. ition
§14, B(B125,75–6, ll. 304–5;
195–205,
(and elsewhere) Kant expressly
(and elsewhere)
distinguishes Kant between
candidate knowing by stressing
candidateissues knowing of reference.
more than thinking a logically
more than consistent,
thinkinggrammatically
Kant’s view, as the contentKant’sof aview,
judgmentas theone content
Knowing something requires,Knowing in something
addition torequires, thought,inindicating
(deictically) within space(deictically)
and time within some particular(s)
ascribing characteristicsascribing
to it (or characteristics
to them). In this
(1975), that predication (1975),
as ascription
that predication
of featuresas
lar(s) is constitutive of empirical
lar(s) is constitutive
knowledge.ofTheir
‘descriptions theories’ of‘descriptions
reference, that theories’
propositions
is described by their fullyis described
explicatedby meanings
their fully
correct, because in any correct,
case, whether because there
in anybe case,
only one such particularonly (foroneunique,
suchsingular
particular reference)
pendently, upon what inpendently,
the world upon there whatis. Quine’s
spy’, may fail of uniquespy’,
reference
may fail if instead
of unique the reference
exactly the same statureexactly
and profession,
the same or stature
8 8
8 9
that problems
Quine islurk correct
in empiricist
that problems notionslurk in empiricist
entire profession
notions disappears. entireKant
profession
makes disappears.
this deictic Kant
point makes
againstthis
Leibniz
deictic with
pointtwoagainst Leibniz with two
fails to identify semantics
and rectify
fails to themidentify andraindrops
rectify them (B328). Furthermore,
raindropsfor(Bunique
328). Furthermore,
reference to for serveunique
knowledge
reference
requiresto serve
lo- knowledge requires lo-
cating the particular(s) cating purportedly
the particular(s)
known; thispurportedly
requires demonstrative
known; this requires
reference,demonstrative reference,
Deductionsemantics;
concern they cognitive
hold semantics; directly theyorhold indirectly; mere
directly
truth-values
or indirectly;do not meresuffice
truth-values
for cognition.
do notThat’s
sufficewhy for cognition. That’s why
Kant’s transcendental
within the domain idealism,
he callswithin
his ‘em-
the domain heKant’s
calls hisand‘em-Evans’ referential,
Kant’sdemonstrative
and Evans’ referential,
point is deictic.
demonstrative point is deictic.
Deduction conceptual
addressesconditions
necessary re- conceptual 2.13
conditions Kant’s re-Deduction2.13 does Kant’s
imply there Deduction
are anddoesmustimply
be constraints
there are and upon must
objects
be constraints upon objects
particular(s)
so as to identify
whatsoever,any particular(s)
so as to be whatsoever, andso uponas toour be deictic reference
and upon to our
discriminated
deictic reference
particulars,
to discriminated
such that weparticulars,
can think such that we can think
to toascribe
it (or actual
to them).features
Kanttoexpressly
it (or to con- them). Kant of expressly
them and con- can know them,
of them
butand these canconstraints
know them, upon
but objects
these constraints
are examined upon in objects
the are examined in the
some particular
to however it may merely IS, to ap-
however it maysecond merelyBook ap-of the ‘Transcendental
second Book of Analytic’,
the ‘Transcendental
the ‘Analytic Analytic’,
of Principles’.
the ‘Analytic
In the of Principles’. In the
of us. The yet even
contrast
sayingis correct,
of someyet particular
even saying of some DeductionparticularKant focusesDeduction
on the keyKant intellectual
focuses conditions
on the keyrequired
intellectual
for conditions
us at all to required for us at all to
such-and-so that requires
manifestidentifying
particular, that at least think any
manifest particular, at such
least specific, think
determinate
any such thought,
specific,which
determinate
we could thought,
think towhich
refer weto any
could think to refer to any
identificationand involves
characterisa-
individuation and particulars.
characterisa- (Much commentary
particulars. and(Much
criticismcommentary
neglects this andbasic
criticism
pointneglects
and so thismis-basic point and so mis-
proto-cognitive
provisional). These achievementsproto-cognitive takes the aim and scope takes
achievements of Kant’s
the aimDeduction.)
and scope of Kant’s Deduction.)
stresses,in order,
to thinkasthat
Kant such-and-so
stresses, toap- think that such-and-so
2.14 Kantap-explicitly and 2.14repeatedly
Kant explicitly
parallelsandthe repeatedly
Deductionparallels
of the categories
the Deduction to of the categories to
being,
apperceptive
who can human use the being,
first person
who can use the what firstheperson
here calls the transcendental
what he here calls Deduction
the transcendental
of the a priori Deduction
concepts of of the
‘space’
a priori concepts of ‘space’
any thought,
or claimbelief,
whatsoever.
judgment or claim whatsoever. and of ‘time’ (cf. B118–9,and 159,ofmy‘time’ (cf. B118–9,
comments below 159,onmyll. 58–75,
comments and below
§4). Theseon ll.two58–75, and §4). These two
distinct,Deduction
distinctiveareroles
the distinct,
of sensory distinctive
intu- roles of a priori
sensory concepts
intu- must pertain
a prioritoconcepts
any particulars
must pertain
of whichto anywe particulars
can be aware, of which
because we can be aware, because
Sensoryhuman intuition
experience:
can only Sensory
present intuition
par- can only wepresent
can onlypar- respond to wespatio-temporal
can only respond sensory
to spatio-temporal
stimulations, and sensory
only bystimulations,
such sen- and only by such sen-
can only presented
judge thosebyparticulars
sensory intu- presented bysorysensory intu- can anysory
receptivity particulars
receptivitybe presented
can any particulars
to us, so asbetopresented
afford any to thought
us, so as to afford any thought
cf. B§14,
126,Bll.
125,
216–33).
ll. 195–205,
In theB126,Deduction about
ll. 216–33). In the any particular(s) about
Deduction at all. (This
any particular(s)
states Kant’s at constraint
all. (This states
on sensory
Kant’s receptivity
constraint on sensory receptivity
expresslymere distinguishes
thought and between
any, mereeven thought very minimally,
and any, even to suggest veryhowminimally,
Kant’s transcendental
to suggest howidealist Kant’saccount
transcendental
of spaceidealist
and account of space and
by stressing Thinkingissuesa thought
of reference.requires
Thinking no a thought time = nothing
requires no but human timeforms
= nothingof sensory
but humanreceptivity
forms(Bof sensory
37–8, 59–60)receptivity
may be (set B37–8, 59–60) may be set
a logically consistent,
completegrammatically
proposition (in aside. For present
complete proposition (in purposes,
aside. this
For suggestion
present purposes,
suffices;this
I dosuggestion
not pretend suffices;
to justify
I doitnot pretend to justify it
can affirm,
of a judgment
deny or one reject canaltogether).
affirm, deny or reject here.)
altogether). here.)
addition demonstratively
to thought, indicating demonstratively Kant’s parallel between Kant’s these two parallel
Deductions
betweenunderscores
these two Deductions
how Kant’sunderscores
point in how Kant’s point in
space and time aboutsome which particular(s)
one judgesabout by which one judges by of the categories
the Deduction the Deduction concerns of thethecategories
possible connection
concerns the of possible
any human connection of any human
to regard,
it (or toKant them).agrees
In thiswith regard,
EvansKant agrees withtoEvans
thought objects, and sothought
of anytoself-conscious
objects, and sohuman of anyawareness
self-conscious
to objects.
humanKant’s awareness to objects. Kant’s
to ascription
some specified,of features
localisedto some
particu-
specified, localised
Deduction particu-does not concern
Deductionobjects,does
exceptnottoconcern
specifyobjects,
that anyexcept
objects
to specify
of which thatweany objects of which we
empirical
view knowledge.
rejects what Their are known view rejects
as whatcanarebe known as
self-consciously aware
can bemustself-consciously
be spatio-temporal
aware must and be must
spatio-temporal
afford discrimina- and must afford discrimina-
of reference,
or sentences
that propositions
refer to whateveror sentences refer tionto andwhatever
identification tionby using
and identification
our most basic by categories,
using our because
most basic these categories,
a priori because these a priori
or explicated
intension. meanings
Such viewsorcannot intension.be Such views cannot
concepts arebe constitutiveconcepts
of any humanly
are constitutive
possibleof thought
any humanly
(whichpossible
can pertainthought
to par- (which can pertain to par-
no such whether
particulars,
there be manyno such,
such particulars,
or many
ticulars). such,
Theorspecification ticulars).
of objects,
The specification
however, is left of objects,
wide open however,
in the isDeduction,
left wide open in the Deduction,
(for unique,dependssingular
also, reference)
entirely inde- depends also,byentirely
design;inde- it is Kant’s topic
by design;
in the Analytic
it is Kant’sof Principles.
topic in theKant Analytic
certainly
of Principles.
is aware that Kant certainly is aware that
in the favourite
world there example,
is. Quine’s
‘the shortest
favourite example, his‘the shortest of the categories
Deduction his Deduction entailsofconstraints
the categories uponentails
the character
constraints of spatio-
upon the character of spatio-
shortest spiesif instead
are dwarfthe shortest
triplets of spies are dwarf triplets
temporal of
particulars which
temporal
we canparticulars
perceive and which identify,
we canbut perceive
those andconstraints
identify,are but those constraints are
if by andsome profession,
stroke of or great
if by
fortune,
some stroketheir of greatnot fortune,
Kant’stheir topic in the Deduction
not Kant’s itselftopic(cf.
in below,
the Deduction
§§4, 5). itself (cf. below, §§4, 5).
9 9
2.15 In this regard it 2.15is helpful In tothisconsider
regard ittwo is helpful
different to senses
considerof two different senses ofysis
the ‘constitu- theand justification ofysis
‘constitu- the and
necessary
justification
formalofand thematerial
necessary conditions
formal and of possible
material conditions of possible
tion’ of objects of experience.
tion’ ofOne objects
sense of of
experience.
‘constitution Oneofsense objects’
of ‘constitution
involves ourof objects’ human
involves experience
our and human
cognitive experience
judgmentand identifies
cognitiveandjudgment
justifies robust
identifiesexternal-
and justifies robust external-
generation of those objects,
generation
or at leastof those
of theirobjects,
key features.
or at least A distinct
of theirsense
key features.
of ‘consti- ist aspects
A distinct sense of semantic content
of ‘consti- ist aspects (intension),
of semantic mentalcontent
content(intension),
and cognitive
mentaljustifica-
content and cognitive justifica-
tution of objects’ concerns
tution necessary
of objects’conditions
concerns (typically:
necessary a priori
conditions
and formal, espe-a priori andtion,
(typically: all ofespe-
formal, which stand tion,
entirely
all of
independently
which stand of entirely
transcendental
independentlyidealism.
of transcendental
Indeed, idealism. Indeed,
cially conceptual or judgmental
cially conceptual
conditions) or judgmental
which must conditions)
be satisfied whichif we are must be satisfied the
to be if wereasons
are to whybe they hold theshow
reasons that,why andthey
how, holdhisshow
key arguments
that, and how,for transcenden-
his key arguments for transcenden-
able to be aware of any ableobject to as
bean aware
object,of any
or asobject
the objectas an itobject,
is. Thisorsecond sense it is. Thistalsecond
as the object idealism senseare invalid (and
tal idealism
leave noareobvious
invalid replacements
(and leave noinobvious view). These
replacements
strong in view). These strong
of ‘constitution of objects’
of ‘constitution
concerns how of we
objects’
can recognise
concerns or how identify
we canobjects;recognise claimsobjects;
it or identify contra transcendental
it claims
idealism
contra transcendental
are detailed andidealismdefended areindetailed
KTPR. Hereand defended
I only in KTPR. Here I only
concerns issues of validity
concerns
and need issuesnotof appeal
validityto any
and formneed of notidealism;
appeal toI shallany form aim to
call of idealism; elucidate
I shall call how Kant’saim toTranscendental
elucidate how Deduction
Kant’s Transcendental
of the Pure Deduction
Categories of the Pure Categories of
it the ‘presuppositional’ itsense.
the ‘presuppositional’
The first, generative sense.
sense The offirst,
‘constitution
generative ofsense
objects’ the Understanding
of ‘constitution of objects’ holds,theand
Understanding
can hold entirely holds, independently
and can holdofentirely
transcendental
independently
ide- of transcendental ide-
involves an account of (purported)
involves an cognitive
account ofprocess.(purported)
Whether cognitive
or how process. Whether or howalism.
such process suchIn exactly this regard,
process alism.theIn‘presuppositional’
exactly this regard,sense the ‘presuppositional’
of object constitution sensesuf-of object constitution suf-
can also address issues ofcanvalidity
also address
is not obvious;
issues ofsuch validitya demonstration
is not obvious;is such a taska for
demonstration ficesis for Kant’s
a task fices for
for B Deduction, Kant’s his
although B Deduction,
transcendental althoughidealism
his transcendental
purports to de-idealism purports to de-
advocates of such views.advocates
(The divide of marked
such views. by these
(The two divide senses
markedof ‘constitution fend a very of
by these twoofsenses of ‘constitution subtle version
fendofa thevery‘generative’
subtle version sense.ofKant’s
the ‘generative’
achievement sense.
is indeed
Kant’s achievement is indeed
objects’ divided Husserlobjects’
and Roman divided
Ingarden;
Husserlcf.and Ingarden
Roman(1968, Ingarden;
1975).)cf. IIngarden
mention(1968, 1975).)extraordinary;
I mentionwe do both extraordinary;
him and ourselves we do both a gravehimphilosophical
and ourselvesdisservice
a grave philosophical
if we disservice if we
this contrast here becausethisKant’s
contrast transcendental
here becauseidealismKant’s transcendental
appears to involve or in-appears toremain
idealism involvecaptive
or in- to the above
remaindichotomy,
captive toorthe otherwise
above dichotomy,
miss the detailsor otherwise
of his scrutiny
miss the details of his scrutiny
voke the generative sense,voke whereas
the generative
the focussense,of Kant’s
whereas Deduction
the focus onofissues
Kant’s of Deduction
va- and
on justification
issues of va- of conditions
and justification
of cognitivelyof conditions
valid judgment
of cognitively
due to preoccupation
valid judgment due to preoccupation
lidity – expressly the aimlidity
of his – expressly
‘objectivethe deduction’
aim of his – appears
‘objective to deduction’
invoke or require with or
– appears to invoke ‘bigrequire
picture’ contrastswithamongst
‘big picture’
apparentcontrasts
ontological
amongst alternatives.
apparent ontological alternatives.
(only) the presuppositional
(only) sense
the ofpresuppositional
‘constitution ofsense objects’ of ‘constitution
as objects of of ourobjects’
self- as objects2.16 of ourMy self-
cautions above 2.16about My appeal
cautions to above
transcendental
about appeal idealismto transcendental
in connection idealism in connection
conscious (apperceptive)conscious
awareness. (apperceptive) awareness. with Kant’s Deduction aims with toKant’s
avoidDeduction
short-circuiting
aims to Kant’s
avoidaccount
short-circuiting
of the validKant’s
use account of the valid use
The grand dichotomy driving The grandKant’s dichotomy
transcendental drivingidealism
Kant’s and transcendental
his opposition idealism and of histhe categories by premature
opposition of the categories
appeal tobyissues premature
of (putative,
appeal cognitive)
to issues of process.
(putative, cognitive) process.
to empiricism is stated attothe empiricism
start of §14 is stated
in these at the
term: start of §14 in these term: Conversely, identifying exactly Conversely,
why and identifying
how transcendental
exactly why and idealism
how transcendental
is required by idealism is required by
Kant’s Deduction can be Kant’s
ascertained
Deduction only can
by scrutinising
be ascertained theonly
prospect
by scrutinising
(presentedthe prospect (presented
There are only two possible Therecasesare only
undertwo whichpossible
syntheticcasesrepresentations
under which synthetic and representations and
their objects can come together,
their objects
connect cantocomeeachtogether,
other necessarily
connect to andeachas itother
were necessarily andhere)
as itthat
wereit may not be required
here) thatatitall.may not be required at all.
meet one another: eithermeet if theoneobject
another:
makeseitherthe representation,
if the object makes or this the[latter] In my
representation, or this [latter] elucidations (§3) In
I indicate
my elucidations
Kant’s key (§3)concern
I indicatewithKant’s
intellectual
key concern
= judg-with intellectual = judg-
alone makes the object possible.
alone makes(KdrVthe §14, B 124–5,
object cf. Bxiv)
possible. (KdrV §14, B124–5, cf. Bxiv) mental synthesis of concepts mentalbysynthesis
which we ofidentify
concepts sensed
by which
particulars
we identify
and their
sensedfea-particulars and their fea-
Kant’s formulation concerns
Kant’sproduction
formulationorconcernsgeneration; production
it states aorpara-mechanical tures.
generation; it states a para-mechanical This judgmental synthesis
tures. Thisholds
judgmental
regardless synthesis
of issues holds
about
regardless
sensory of
presenta-
issues about sensory presenta-
hypothesis concerning process.
hypothesis How concerning
such issues process.
of process How can suchaddress
issues of issues
process tion ofissues
of can address particulars;
of expressly,
tion of such
particulars;
judgmental expressly,
‘conjoining’
such judgmental
is an intellectual
‘conjoining’
achieve-is an intellectual achieve-
validity is not indicated validity
here. Thereis notisindicated
no question here.thatThere Kant is thought
no question in termsthat Kant ment.
of thought in terms of This strongly suggests,
ment. indeed
This strongly
it may entail,
suggests,thatindeed
the non-idealist,
it may entail,
non-process
that the non-idealist, non-process
transcendental idealism transcendental
as the only tenable idealismmetaphysical
as the only position.
tenableThe metaphysical
astonishing gloss
position. The on ‘constitution’ ofgloss
astonishing objects
on ‘constitution’
as objects of our of objects
possibleasself-conscious
objects of our awareness
possible self-conscious awareness
feature of his KdrV is that,
feature
and how,
of hisunder
KdrV the is that,
cover and ofhow,this macro-level
under the cover metaphysi- – the second,
of this macro-level metaphysi- presuppositional
– the second,
sense –presuppositional
suffices within and
sense for– Kant’s
suffices Deduction
within andoffor Kant’s Deduction of
cal contrast Kant developed
cal contrast
in minute, Kantaccurate
developed and in sufficient
minute, detail
accuratean account
and sufficient
of detailthe
an categories.
account of the categories.
the validity of possible human
the validity
experience
of possible
and our
human
cognitive
experience
judgments
and our
which
cognitive
holds judgments which holds
entirely within the domainentirely
he designates
within theasdomain
‘empirical
he designates
realism’, and
as yet
‘empirical
his account
realism’, and yet his account
of the necessary conditions
of the
fornecessary
the possible
conditions
validity for
of apperceptive
the possible validity
human ofexperi-
apperceptive human experi-
ence and cognitive judgment
ence andultimately
cognitive
shows
judgment
that the
ultimately
above dichotomy
shows thatisthespe-
above dichotomy is spe-
cious; they are not the only
cious;
options!
they are
Instead,
not theKant’s
only options!
revolutionary
Instead,
examination,
Kant’s revolutionary
anal- examination, anal-

10 10 11 11

10 11
3 TEXT, TRANSLATION3 &TEEXT, TRANSLATION & ELUCIDATIONS
LUCIDATIONS I welcome sincere attempts I welcometo assess my attempts
sincere translation, to elucidations or editorialelucidations or editorial
assess my translation,
omissions, by which critics may also
omissions, byassess
whichtheir
critics preferred
may alsoalternatives.
assess theirKant’s De- alternatives. Kant’s De-
preferred
This section presents Kant’s This section
text with presents
my elucidations
Kant’s text onwithfacing mypages.
elucidations
Kant’s on duction
sec-facing pages. Kant’s sec-may deserve or require
duction more
may ambitious
deserve or reconstruction
require more than
ambitious that presented
reconstruction than that presented
ond edition Deduction ond is printed
editionwith Deduction
some omissions
is printedinwith the some
left column
omissions in the left here.
(verso), column I respectfully
(verso), submit
here.that any alternative
I respectfully submit can that
benefitany by scrutinising
alternative can both it by scrutinising both it
benefit
and newly translated in and the right
newlycolumn
translated (verso).
in theMyright
elucidations
column and (verso).
notesMy are elucidations
on and the present
and notes are on considerations,
and the which
present I believe suffice,
considerations, yet
whichare Ineither
believe complete
suffice, nor
yet are neither complete nor
the facing page (recto). Omitted
the facing arepage
most(recto).
passagesOmitted
overtlyareconcerning
most passages Kant’s overtly
tran-concerning final. The tran-
Kant’s elided passagesfinal.certainly are ofpassages
The elided interest, certainly
but as furtherare ofcomments
interest, butby as
Kant
further comments by Kant
scendental idealism which scendental
do not concern
idealismissues whichofdovalidity,
not concernand thoseissuesconcerning
of validity, and those on various
concerning related topics, onnot as central
various relatedcomponents
topics, not of, nor guides
as central to, the Deduc-
components of, nor guides to, the Deduc-
self-affection, i.e., how we self-affection,
can be sensibly i.e., howaware we ofcanourselves
be sensibly withinawareinner of sense.
ourselves within tioninner
itself.sense.
I respectfullytion submit that,
itself. even with its
I respectfully tactical
submit omissions,
that, even withtheitsattention
tactical omissions, the attention
Most of Kant’s footnotes Most
are omitted;
of Kant’ssome footnotes
few are areplaced
omitted; within
some thefewtext.
areAll ellip-within thedevoted
placed text. Allhere B Deduction
ellip-to Kant’s devoted here tois more
Kant’sthorough
B Deduction and careful
is morethan thorough
what hasand careful than what has
ses are marked; longer elisions by ‘[…]’ at
ses are marked; the right
longer margin.
elisions by ‘[…] Line’ atnumbers
the right (outside
margin. Line numbers become(outside
accepted in much become
contemporary
acceptedscholarship.
in much contemporary scholarship.
the far left margin) are cited
the farin left
comments
margin) on arethecited
facing
in comments
page as ‘l.’onorthe ‘ll.’ facing
(plural).page as ‘l.’ or ‘ll.’ (plural).
Line numbers indicate Kant’s Line numbers
Germanindicatetext; I have
Kant’s keptGerman
the Englishtext; Itranslation
have kept as the English translation as
closely sequenced to Kant’s closely original
sequencedas possible,
to Kant’s whilst
original
allowingas possible,
proper paragraph
whilst allowing proper paragraph
format. Lines are numbered format.consecutively
Lines are numbered
throughoutconsecutively
to simplify references.
throughoutKant’s to simplify references. Kant’s
first edition (‘A’) is cited first
for passages
edition (‘occurring
A’) is citedinfor that
passages
editionoccurring
alone; otherwise
in that edition
only alone; otherwise only
the second (‘B’) edition the is cited,
secondexcept
(‘B’) when
edition identifying
is cited, except
a passage when in identifying
both editions a passage in both editions
is especially important.. is especially important..
The German text is Kant’s The original
German(1787), text is unmodernised.
Kant’s original Kant’s (1787), page
unmodernised.
breaks Kant’s page breaks
are indicated to the nearest are indicated
whole word to theby nearest wholeinword
B pagination square by brackets,
B pagination set in in square brackets, set in
petit font; e.g.: [B118]. Kant’s
petitownfont;spelling
e.g.: [B118]
is less
. Kant’s
a problem
own spelling
for foreigners,
is less a whoproblem learn- for foreigners, who learn-
ing abroad are taught beautiful
ing abroad 18th-century
are taught beautiful 18
Hochdeutsch. th
Kant -century
contributed
Hochdeutsch.
greatlyKantto contributed greatly to
establishing the German establishing
philosophical the German
vocabulary. philosophical
As this involved vocabulary.developingAs this involved developing
German counterparts toGerman Latin terminology,
counterpartsKant’s to Latin German
terminology,
spellingsKant’s
often German
retain spellings often retain
more Latin than soon became more Latin standard
than Hochdeutsch,
soon became yetstandard
these Latinate
Hochdeutsch,
features yet ofthese Latinate features of
Kant’s spelling are closerKant’sto English.
spellingI have
are closer
checkedto English.
Kant’s text, I haveandchecked
my edition Kant’sof text, and my edition of
Kant’s text, against two Kant’s
very reliable
text, against
modern twoeditions,
very reliable
those modern
of Weischädeleditions, andthose
of of Weischädel and of
Timmermann. Modern Timmermann.
printing better Modern indicatesprinting
Kant’s Sbetterp e r r dindicates
r u c k (for Kant’s
empha- S p e r r d r u c k (for empha- Abbreviations Abbreviations
sis), but Modern German sis),
omits
but some
Modern of German
Kant’s subjunctive
omits somemoods. of Kant’s In the
subjunctive
Deduc- moods. In the Deduc-
tion, these are only stylistic
tion, niceties,
these areyet onlyKant stylistic
had absolute
niceties, command
yet Kant had of German
absolute command KdrV of German Kant, Critik derKdrV
reinen Vernunft,
Kant,1781
Critik(‘Ader’),reinen
1787 Vernunft,
(‘B’); (Riga1781
1787).
(‘A’), 1787 (‘B’); (Riga 1787).
and wrote with great care andand wrote
clarity,
withand great
often
carewithandremarkable
clarity, andexpressive
often withpower. Prol.
remarkable expressive power. Kant, Prolegomena
Prol.
to Any Future
Kant, Metaphysics
Prolegomena (Riga
to Any 1783).
Future Metaphysics (Riga 1783).
Yes, he struggled with expressing
Yes, he struggled
fundamentally
with expressing
revolutionary fundamentally
new ideas,revolutionary
but more new ideas, Anth. but more Kant, AnthropologyAnth.from a Pragmatic
Kant, Anthropology
Point of View from(Königsberg, 2 ed.
a Pragmatic Pointnd
1800).
of View (Königsberg, 2nd ed. 1800).
often readers confront often problems readers
comprehending
confront problems Kant’s comprehending
often brilliant concision. Kant’s often brilliant Prin. concision.
Descartes, The Principles
Prin. ofDescartes,
Philosophy (Amsterdam
The Principles 1644).of Philosophy (Amsterdam 1644).
(Some examples are noted (Some
in §3.)
examples
All merelyare noted
philological
in §3.)orAlltypographical
merely philological details areor typographical En.1 details Hume,
are Enquiry En.1
Concerning Hume,
Human Enquiry
UnderstandingConcerning
(LondonHuman 1748,
Understanding
1756). (London 1748, 1756).
omitted. Kant’s own editions omitted. of Kant’s
KdrV are own now editions
readilyofavailable
KdrV are onnow the web,
readilyforavailable
all KTPR
on the web, for all Westphal, Kant’s Transcendental
KTPR Westphal,
Proof of
Kant’s
Realism Transcendental
(Cambridge Proof
2004).
of Realism (Cambridge 2004).
who wish to scrutinise them. who wish to scrutinise them. KCE Westphal, Kant’sKCE Critical Epistemology
Westphal, Kant’s
(Routledge Critical2020).
Epistemology (Routledge 2020).

12 12 13 13

12 13
 ZweitesHauptstück.
Zweites
Zweites Hauptstück.
Hauptstück.Von
Zweites
der Hauptstück.
Deduction Chapter
Von der Deduction
Chapter
Chapter Two.
Two. Chapter Two.
Two.Of the Deduction Of the3.1
of the Deduction
§13: of Of
the the Principles
3.1 §13: of a Of
Transcendental
the PrinciplesDeduction
of a Transcendental
as such. Deduction as such.
der reinen Verstandesbegriffe.
der reinen [Verstandesbegriffe.
B116] Pure Concepts [B116] Pure Concepts of the Understanding.
of the Understanding.
Erster Abschnitt. B116–7 (ll. 6–33): Kant’s B116–7
emphatic
(ll. 6–33):
contrast
Kant’sbetween
emphatic questions
contrastof fact
between
and questions
questions of of nor-
fact and questions of nor-
Erster Abschnitt. Erster Abschnitt. First First Section.
Section.
First Section. First Section.
mative validity marks the mative
same validity
distinction
marksbetween,
the samee.g., distinction
issues ofbetween,
psychologicale.g., issues
process of psychological
and process and
§ 13. Von den Principien § 13. einerVontransscen-
den Principien
§ 13.einerOf thetransscen-
Principles of a Of
§ 13. the Principles
Transcen- thoseofofa Transcen-
logical validity those
stressed
of logical
by Frege
validity(1884);
stressedlikelybyFrege
Fregeadopted
(1884); this likelycontrast
Frege adopted
from this contrast from
5 dentalen Deduction
5 überhaupt.
dentalen Deduction überhaupt. dental Deduction as such. dental Deduction as such.
Kant’s KdrV. Kant’s KdrV Kant’sdoes
KdrV.investigate
Kant’s KdrV
issues does
of cognitive
investigate process
issuesand of origins
cognitive of process
various and origins of various
Die Rechtslehrer, wenn Diesie Rechtslehrer,
von Be- wenn sie von
Speaking Be-
of entitlements Speaking
and claimsof entitlements and claims
factors involved in human
factors
experience
involvedand in human
cognition, experience
for three andreasons:
cognition, (1) to foridentify
three reasons:
as well (1) to identify as well
fugnißen und Anmaßungen fugnißen reden,
undunter-
Anmaßungen
in casesreden,
at law,unter-juristsindistinguish
cases at law, the jurists distinguish the
as possible precisely which as possible
issues precisely
of cognitivewhich validity,
issuesconcerning
of cognitivetruth,validity,
accuracy,
concerning
justifica-
truth, accuracy, justifica-
scheiden in einem Rechtshandel
scheiden indie einem
Fra-Rechtshandel die Fra- justice
question concerning question (quidconcerning
iuris) justice
tion (quid iuris)
or other such normative
tion or other
modalitiessuch must
normativebe addressed,
modalities(2)must to suggest
be addressed,some consider-
(2) to suggest some consider-
ge über das, was Rechtens ge über ist das,
(quidwas ), fromistthat
iurisRechtens (quid iuris),concerns
which from facts
that which
(quid concerns
ations infacts
view(quid
of which ations
theyinmay viewbeofaddressed
which they andmay (3) to be support
addressed hisand claims
(3) tothatsupport
the ac-his claims that the ac-
10 von der, die die Thatsache
10 von der, angeht
die die (quid
Thatsache angeht
facti), and since(quid facti), and
they demand sinceoftheycount
proof demand proof of
he develops holds count
trueheofdevelops
us. Kantholdsmarkstrue theirofdistinction
us. Kant marks by contrasting
their distinction
his ‘subjec-
by contrasting his ‘subjec-
facti), und indem sie von facti),beiden
und indem Beweissie von
both,beiden
they Beweis
call the first,both,whichthey shall
call the tive
first,deduction’,
which shall whichtive concerns
deduction’,
how experience
which concerns or cognition
how experience
is (possibly) or cognition
generated,isto(possibly)
his generated, to his
fordern, so nennen sie fordern,
den erstern,
so nennen der sieprovide
den erstern,
the titlederor the provide
claim the title or ‘objective
of jus- the claim deduction’,
of jus- ‘objective
which aims deduction’,
to demonstratewhich aims undertowhat demonstrate
conditionsunder cognitive
what judg-
conditions cognitive judg-
die Befugniß oder auch die Befugniß
den Rechtsan- oder auchtice,den
the Rechtsan-
deduction. Wetice, use thea hostdeduction.
of We mentsusearea host of
cognitively ments
justified
areorcognitively (Axvii, cf.orB393).
justifiable justified This (same
justifiable Axvii, contrast
cf. B393).recurs
This in same contrast recurs in
spruch darthun soll, spruch die D edarthun
d u c t i o nsoll,
. die D e d uconcepts
empirical c t i o n . without
empiricalanyone concepts Kant’swithout anyone between
distinction Kant’sa transcendental
distinction between deduction
a transcendental
of a priori concepts
deduction and oftheir
a priori
empiri-
concepts and their empiri-
15 Wir bedienen uns15einer Wir Menge
bedienen empiri-
uns einer Menge
taking empiri- andtaking
exception we take exception
our- and cal deduction,
we take our- which concerns
cal deduction,
their acquisition
which concerns (B117,theirll. 47–57).
acquisition (B117, ll. 47–57).
scher Begriffe ohne jemandesscher BegriffeWiderrede ohne jemandes
selves even Widerrede
without a selves
deduction eventowithout
be a deduction to be
und halten uns auch ohne und halten
Deduction uns auch
be- ohne Deduction
entitled to ascribe be-to these
entitled to ascribe
concepts a to these concepts a
rechtigt, ihnen einen rechtigt,
Sinn undihnen eingebil-einen Sinn
senseund andeingebil-
a presumed sense and a presumed significance,
significance,
dete Bedeutung zuzueignen, dete Bedeutung
weil wir je- zuzueignen,
becauseweil we wiralways je- have
because
experiencewe always
at have experience at
20 derzeit die Erfahrung 20 derzeit
bey die der Erfahrung
Hand hand beytoder prove Hand hand to prove
their objective reality.their objective reality.
[B117] haben, ihre objective[B117] haben,
Realitätihre zu objective
There are Realität zu There concepts,
also surreptitious B117 (l. 21;
are also surreptitious cf. B148, ll. B839–51):
concepts, 117 (l. 21;The cf. designation
B148, ll. 839–51):‘objective
The reality’
designation
is common
‘objective throughout
reality’ isthe
common throughout the
beweisen. Es giebt indessen beweisen. auchEs usur-
giebt indessen
such asauch luck usur-
or fate, such luck or fate,Mediaeval
whichascirculate and ModernMediaeval
which circulate periods, and Modern retains use periods,
in optics:and In retains
contrast
use in to optics:
the eyepiece,
In contrast
the to the eyepiece, the
pirte Begriffe, wiepirte etwaBegriffe,
G l ü c k ,wie withetwanearly G l ü c kunanimous
, with nearly lens at
accord, unanimous accord, the other end which
lens at aims
the other
at an end
objectwhichis called
aims the
at an
‘objective’
object is lens
called(of the
a binoculars,
‘objective’ lens (of a binoculars,
camera, microscope orcamera, telescope).
microscope
The sense or oftelescope).
‘objectiveThe reality’
sense= of directed
‘objective towards
reality’
an =ob-directed towards an ob-
S c h i c k s a l , die zwarSmit
c h i cfast
k s aallgemei-
l , die zwar though
mit fastoccasionally
allgemei- are though
protestedoccasionally
by are protested by
ject. Despite all naturalisticject. Despite
attemptsalltonaturalistic
reduce, explain attempts or explain
to reduce,away explain
‘objective
or explain
reality’away
or ‘objective reality’ or
25 ner Nachsicht herumlaufen,
25 ner Nachsichtaber doch herumlaufen,
posing aber doch posing
the question: quid iuris;the andquestion: quid iuris; and
representational content representational
in terms of nothing content but in terms
the ‘formal
of nothing
reality’but of the
whatever
‘formalphysical
reality’ of whatever physical
bisweilen durch die Frage: bisweilen quiddurch
iuris, die
in Frage:
then by quidtheiriuris , in then
deduction onebyfalls
theirintodeduction one falls into
objects or events (i.e., objects
their reality
or events
as actual,
(i.e., their
existing reality
particulars),
as actual,noneexistinghaveparticulars),
(remotely) none suc- have (remotely) suc-
Anspruch genommenAnspruch werden; da genommen
man a werden; da man quandary,
not insignificant a not insignificant
since quandary, since
ceeded (cf. Westphal 2017). ceeded About
(cf. Westphal
this duality2017).
Descartes
Aboutwas this right
duality(cf.Descartes
Moran 2014). was right (cf. Moran 2014).
alsdann wegen der Deduction alsdann wegen derselben der Deduction derselbenno clear
one can provide one cangroundsprovide of no clear grounds of
in nicht geringe Verlegenheit
in nicht geräth,
geringe in- Verlegenheit geräth,whether
justification, in- justification,
from experi- whether from experi-
30 dem man keinen deutlichen30 dem man Rechtsgrund
keinen deutlichen
ence, Rechtsgrund
or by reason, byence, which or the
by reason,
title by which the title
weder aus der Erfahrung, wedernoch aus der
der Ver-
Erfahrung, noch der Ver-
to use these concepts to use these
would be made concepts would be made
nunft anführen kann, nunft dadurch anführen
die Befug- kann, dadurch
clear anddie Befug- clear and evident.
evident.
niß ihres Gebrauchs deutlichniß ihreswürde.Gebrauchs deutlich würde.

14
14
14 14 15
15
15 15

14 15
 Unter den mancherleyUnter Begriffen
den mancherley
aber, Begriffenamongst
However, aber, theHowever,
various con- amongstB117 (l. 36): Within
the various con- hisB117taxonomy
(l. 36): ofWithin
specieshisoftaxonomy
representation
of species(A320/ of Brepresentation
376–7), hence(within
A320/B376–7), hence within
35 die das sehr vermischte 35 die das Gewebe
sehr vermischte
der cepts Gewebe der cepts
which constitute the very
which mixed
constitutethethecontext
very of his ‘Deduction’,
mixed the context Kantof his
typically
‘Deduction’,
(thoughKant not exclusively)
typically (though uses Erkenntniß
not exclusively)
(cog- uses Erkenntniß (cog-
menschlichen Erkenntniß menschlichen
ausmachen, Erkenntniß
fabric of ausmachen,
human cognition,fabric of therehuman nition), whether
are cognition, there aresingular
nition),
or plural,
whether to designate
singular orsubjective
plural, tostates,
designate ‘perceptions’,
subjectivewhich
states,con-
‘perceptions’, which con-
giebt es einige, die auch giebt
zum es reinen
einige, Ge-
die auch zumdestined
some reinen Ge- to a pure
someuse destined nect to some
a priorito a pure use a priori object distinct
nect to tosome
the Subject
object distinct
whose to
perception
the Subject it is.
whose
(Recallperception
that by ‘percep-
it is. (Recall that by ‘percep-
brauch a priori (völligbrauch unabhängig
a priorivon (völlig(entirely
unabhängig von (entirely
independent from all independent
experi- tion’
fromKant does not automatically
all experi- tion’ Kant does mean not‘apperception’!)
automatically mean As George ‘apperception’!)
(1981) indicates,
As George
at the(1981) indicates, at the
aller Erfahrung) bestimmt aller Erfahrung)
sind, und die- bestimmt
ence),sind,
andund die- ence),toand
the entitlement theirtheuse time, the term
entitlement to their use Erkenntniß
time, was
the used
term (inter
Erkenntniß
alia) towas
denote
used indexical,
(inter alia) demonstrative,
to denote indexical,
ostensive demonstrative, ostensive
40 ser ihre Befugniß 40 bedarf
ser ihre
jederzeit
Befugniß
einerbedarf jederzeit
always requires einera deduction:
always requires or deictic because
because a deduction: reference toor (putative)
deictic reference
particulars.to (putative)
Which factor(s)
particulars.or what Whichcognitive
factor(s)
achieve-
or what cognitive achieve-
Deduction: weil zu der Deduction:
Rechtmäßigkeit
weil zu der Rechtmäßigkeit
proofs from experience proofsdo notfromsuf- ment(s) Kant
experience do not suf- may designate
ment(s) by
Kantthese may terms
designate
must by
be these
discernedterms in must
context,
be discerned
which usually
in context, which usually
eines solchen Gebrauchs eines Beweise
solchen Gebrauchs
aus fice for Beweise aus fice
the legitimacy of their
for the usage,
legitimacymakes his point
of their quite clear.
usage, makes(Always
his point keepquiteKant’s
clear.taxonomy
(Always keep (A320/ B376–7)
Kant’s in mind.)
taxonomy (A320/B376–7) in mind.)
der Erfahrung nicht der hinreichend
Erfahrungsind, nicht yet
hinreichend
one mustsind, of course
yet oneknowmust howof course
B117 (ll. know
47–8):how
On ‘Erklärung’
B117 (ll. and47–8):‘explication’,
On ‘Erklärung’see Band
755–8.‘explication’,
‘Explanation’ see Bconnotes
755–8. ‘Explanation’
quid facti; connotes quid facti;
man aber doch wissen manmuß, aberwie dochdiesewissen muß,concepts
these wie diese can connect
these concepts
to ob- canexplication
connect to ob- of explication
admits addressing (normative,
admits of addressing
justificatory)(normative,
quid iuris.justificatory)
Kant’s reasons quid for
iuris.re-Kant’s reasons for re-
45 Begriffe sich auf Objecte 45 Begriffebeziehen
sich aufkön-Objecte
jects,beziehen
althoughkön- these concepts
jects, although
are notthesejecting
concepts are not demoting
‘definition’, jecting ‘definition’,
the status ofdemoting‘analytic thetruth’
status
andofinstead
‘analyticadvocating
truth’ and ‘explica-
instead advocating ‘explica-
nen, die sie doch ausnen, keinerdie Erfahrung
sie doch ausderived
keiner Erfahrung
from any experience.
derived from tion’ in philosophical
I callany experience. I call tion’
inquiryin are
philosophical
decisive: All inquiry
we can are know
decisive:by conceptual
All we can analysis
know byis conceptual
the analysis is the
hernehmen. Ich nenne hernehmen.
daher die Ich Erklä- nennethedaher die Erklä-
explication of howtheaexplication
priori con- of how intension
a priorior classificatory
con- intension
content or ofclassificatory
a concept, none content of of
whicha concept,
can be none justified
of which
as necessary
can be justified as necessary
rung der Art, wie sich rungBegriffe
der Art, wie sichcepts
a priori Begriffe
can aconnect
priori to ceptsobjects
can theirconnect truth merely by
to objects conceptual
their truth merely
analysis.byExplication
conceptualroots analysis.
Kant’sExplication
justificatory rootsfallibilism
Kant’s justificatory
deeply fallibilism deeply
auf Gegenstände beziehen auf Gegenstände
können, diebeziehen können,deduction,
transcendental die transcendental
and distinguish within
deduction, and the methodological
distinguish withinandthe substantive
methodological core ofand KdrV.
substantive core of KdrV.
50 t r a n s s c e n d e n t a50
l e tD
r aendsusccteinodne nder-
tale D e d ufrom
this c t i o nander-empirical
this from
deduction, an empirical
B117 (ll.deduction,
47–51): Kant’s B117central
(ll. 47–51):
issue is Kant’s
whether central
or how issue
pure is awhether
priori concepts
or how can pure‘connect’
a priori concepts can ‘connect’
selben und unterscheide selbensieund vonunterscheide
der whichsie von der
indicates how awhich
concept indicates
can be how(beziehen)
a concept can be
or be referred(beziehen)
to objects. or beSuch referred
(possible)
to objects.
referenceSuch to (possible)
objects is reference
the ‘objective
to objects
valid- is the ‘objective valid-
e m p i r i s c h e n Deduction,e m p i r iwelche
s c h e n die
Deduction,
acquiredwelche die acquired
from experience and from
reflec-experience and reflec-
ity’ of these concept; toity’show
of these
that concept;
a priori concepts
to show have that asuchprioriobjective
conceptsvalidity
have suchby demon-
objective validity by demon-
Art anzeigt, wie ein Begriff Art anzeigt,
durch wieErfah-ein Begriff durchit,Erfah-
tion upon and so addresses
tion uponnot it, the
and so strating
addresses thatnot thecan be
they strating
referredthatinthey
determinate,
can be referred
cognitively
in determinate,
legitimate (accurate,
cognitivelytrue,
legitimate
justifi- (accurate, true, justifi-
rung und Reflexion über rungdieselbe
und Reflexion
erwor- über dieselbe but
legitimacy erwor- ratherlegitimacy
the fact but by rather the fact by
able) ways is to ‘realise’able) theseways
concepts.
is to ‘realise’
Kant adopted
these concepts.
this sense Kant of the
adopted
verb ‘to
thisrealise’
sense of fromthe verb ‘to realise’ from
55 ben worden, und daher 55 bennichtworden,die Recht-
und daher nichtthe
which diepossession
Recht- arose.which the possessionTetens arose.(1775, 1777), who Tetensheld(1775,
that demonstrating
1777), who held thatthat
a concept
demonstratingis cognitively
that a legitimate
concept isre- cognitively legitimate re-
mäßigkeit, sondern das mäßigkeit,
Factum sondern
betrifft, das Factum betrifft, quires indicating, picking quires
out,indicating,
deicticallypicking
demonstrating
out, deictically
at leastdemonstrating
one relevant instanceat least of
one that
relevant instance of that
wodurch der Besitz entsprungen. wodurch der Besitz [B118] entsprungen. [B118] concept. Kant realisedconcept. that thisKant is precisely
realisedwhatthat must
this isbeprecisely
shown what of ourmustpurebea shown
priori con-of our pure a priori con-
117, ll.the
cepts, the categories (Bcepts, 34–47).
categories (B117, ll. 34–47).
B117 (ll. 45, 49): Where
B117 English
(ll. 45,has49):two
Where
terms,English
Kant hasusestwothree:
terms,
‘Object’,
Kant‘Gegenstand’
uses three:and ‘Object’, ‘Gegenstand’ and
‘Ding’ (ll. 765, 785, 790,‘Ding’
793, (ll.
808,765,
884);785,
English
790, 793,
provides
808, 884);
‘object’
English
and ‘thing’.
provides Kant’s
‘object’
terminol-
and ‘thing’. Kant’s terminol-
ogy is flexible and oftenogy vexing
is flexible
to readers,
and oftenbecause
vexing(per
to his
readers,
use ofbecause
conceptual
(per his
explication,
use of conceptual explication,
noted above) he oftennoted develops
above)or glosses
he oftenhisdevelops
terms sufficiently
or glosses for his aterms
particular
sufficiently
contextforofa particular context of
use. He is not inconsistent,
use. He andis his
notflexibility
inconsistent,
serves
andtohis
avoidflexibility
entrapment
servesintorigidified
avoid entrapment
termi- in rigidified termi-
nology, but it does require
nology,great
butcare
it does
by his
require
readers.
great
In care
laterby parts
his of
readers.
the Deduction,
In later parts
he con-
of the Deduction, he con-
trasts ‘Object’ to ‘Gegenstand’,
trasts ‘Object’
plainly to using
‘Gegenstand’,
the former plainly
to markusinga concept
the former
of antoobject
mark as
a concept
such, of an object as such,
whereas the latter canwhereas
be an actual
the latter
particular
can bepresented
an actualtoparticular
us by sensory
presented
intake.
to By
us by‘given’
sensory intake. By ‘given’
Kant usually means ‘presented’
Kant usually or ‘available
means ‘presented’
in’; at no or
point
‘available
does he in’;mistake
at no point
any ‘given’
does he formistake any ‘given’ for
aconceptual knowledgeaconceptual
of any particulars.
knowledge of any particulars.

16 16 17 17

16 17
 Wir haben jetzt schonWir zweierley
haben jetztBe- schon Wezweierley
have already Be- found We two havequite 118 (ll.two
already Bfound 58–86):
quiteKantB118 appeals(ll. 58–86):
to results Kant of appeals
his Transcendental
to results ofAesthetic his Transcendental
(hereafter: ‘Tr. Aesthetic (hereafter: ‘Tr.
griffe von ganz verschiedener
griffe von Art, ganzdie verschiedener
distinctive Art, kindsdieof concepts,
distinctivewhich kinds ofAesth.’),
concepts, thatwhich
we have two Aesth.’),
a priorithatconcepts,
we haveone twoof a priori
‘space’, concepts,
one of ‘time’,
one of which ‘space’,mustone pertain
of ‘time’, which must pertain
60 doch darin mit einander
60 doch übereinkom-
darin mit einander übereinkom-
nevertheless agree insofar
neverthelessas both agree orinsofar
‘connect’ as (sich
bothbeziehen)
or ‘connect’
to any objects (sich beziehen)
of which to weanycan objects
be aware,
of which becausewe can we can
be aware,only be because we can only be
men, daß sie beiderseits men,völlig
daß sie beiderseits
a priori völlig fully
connect a priori a priori
connectto objects, aware of
fully a priori to objects, objects presented
aware toof us
objects
in or presented
through sensory
to us in
intuition,
or through which sensory
is spatio-temporal
intuition, which is spatio-temporal
sich auf Gegenständesich beziehen,
auf Gegenstände
nämlich namely, beziehen,thenämlich
concepts namely,
of spacethe andconcepts
of (inofatspace
least andthe of
sense (inthatatwe least
arethe onlysensesensitive
that we or responsive
are only sensitiveto spatio-temporal
or responsive sensory
to spatio-temporal sensory
die Begriffe des Raumes die und
Begriffe
der Zeit
des Raumes
als time undasder formsZeit ofals sensibility
time as and forms stimuli; this
theof sensibility and the minimal sense
stimuli; is this
furtherminimal
undergirded
sense is byfurther
his transcendental
undergirded by
idealism,
his transcendental
but this idealism, but this
Formen der Sinnlichkeit Formen
und die derCatego-
Sinnlichkeit und die Catego-
categories as conceptscategories
of the under- as concepts latterofisthe
set under-
aside in these latterelucidations).
is set aside in Thisthese result
elucidations).
from the Tr. This Aesth.resultis from
here (for
the Tr. theAesth.
first is here (for the first
65 rien als Begriffe des65 Verstandes.
rien als Begriffe
Von ih- des Verstandes.
standing. To Von wantih- to standing.
attempt an Toem- time) described
want to attempt an em- as their
time)
transcendental
described asdeduction.
their transcendental
Kant claims deduction.
the parallel Kantpoint
claims regarding
the parallel point regarding
nen eine empirische nen Deduction
eine empirische
versuc- Deduction
pirical deduction versuc-of these
pirical would
deduction be ofthethese categories,
would firstbe identified
the categories,
by following first identified
out the implications
by followingofout histhe Tableimplications
of twelve of formal
his Table of twelve formal
hen wollen, würde ganz henvergebliche
wollen, würde Ar- ganzan vergebliche
utterly futileAr- task, an
because
utterlywhat aspects of judging
futileis task, because what is for aspects
our most of basic
judging classifications
for our most of basic
whatever
classifications
we can possibly
of whatever
judge, we i.e.,can possibly judge, i.e.,
the categories as our most the categories
basic, general as our classifications.
most basic, general To justifyclassifications.
a priori his key To claim
justifythat a priori his key claim that
beit seyn, weil eben beit darinseyn,
das weil
Unter-eben distinctive
darin das of Unter-
their nature
distinctivelies of pre-their nature lies pre-
the a priori categories do thepertain
a priorior categories
connect do to any
pertain particulars
or connect we can to any possibly
particulars
experience we can orpossibly experience or
scheidende ihrer Naturscheidende
liegt, daß ihrer
sie sichNaturcisely
liegt,indaßthis,siethat
sichtheycisely
connectin this,them-that they connect them-
judge is the task of thisjudge chapter,is thethe task
Transcendental
of this chapter, Deduction
the Transcendental
of the PureDeduction Concepts of the Pure Concepts of the
70 auf ihre Gegenstände 70 auf
beziehen,
ihre Gegenstände
ohne et- beziehen,
selves to ohne objects et-without
selvesborrowing
to objects without borrowing
Understanding. In contrast, Understanding.
their connectionIn contrast, to our theirforms connection
of sensibility,to ourand formsso to of particu-
sensibility, and so to particu-
was zu deren Vorstellung was zu ausderen
der Erfah-
Vorstellung aus der
anything fromErfah-
experience.
anything If, then,
from aexperience. If, then, a
lars presented to us inlars sensory
presented perception,
to us inmakes sensory theperception,
Deduction makes of ‘space’ the Deduction
and of ‘time’ of ‘space’ and of ‘time’
rung entlehnt zu haben. rungWennentlehnt
also zu einehaben. Wenn also
deduction eine concepts
of these deduction is neces-
of these concepts is neces-
straightforward (cf. ll. 120–5).straightforward (cf. ll. 120–5).
Deduction derselben Deduction
nöthig ist, so derselben
wird nöthig
sary, it ist,
must so bewirdaltogether
sary, ittranscen-
must be altogether transcen-
sie jederzeit transscendental
sie jederzeit
seyn transscendental
müs- dental. seyn müs- dental. […] B120 (l. 86): Kant […] often B120uses(l.the86):termKantbestimmen
often uses andthe its term
cognates
bestimmen
in theand senseits of
cognates
specify,inra- the sense of specify, ra-
75 sen. 75 sen. [… B119] [… B119] ther than in the sense ther of ‘tothan make in theto besenseas itofis’.‘toBothmakesenses to beare as italso is’.common
Both senses in English,
are also common in English,
Ob nun aber gleich dieOb einzige
nun aber
Art ei-
gleich dieNow einzige
if the Artsole
ei- possible
Now kind though
if theofsole possible kind ofcontemporary though
Anglophones contemporarytoo often Anglophones
neglect the too
formeroften sense,
neglectillustrated
the former in the sense, illustrated in the
ner möglichen Deduction ner möglichen
der reinen Deduction
Er- deduction der reinen of pureEr- cognitions
deductiona priori, executive request,
of pure cognitions a priori, ‘Phelps,
executive determine
request,what ‘Phelps,became determineof the what Higgins became dossier of forthwith!’.
the Higgins dossier forthwith!’.
kenntniß a priori, nämlich
kenntniß die aauf dem
priori , nämlich
namely die aauftranscendental
dem namelykind, a transcendental
be Thinking of Kant’s
kind, be aims
Thinking
as ‘explanatory’
of Kant’s rather
aims as
than ‘explanatory’
‘explicatory’ rather
(per above,
than B 117,
‘explicatory’ll. 47–52)(per above, B117, ll. 47–52)
transscendentalen Wege, transscendentalen
eingeräumet Wege, granted, eingeräumet
that does notgranted, yet illuminate re-enforces
that does not yet illuminate misleading re-enforces
causal connotations
misleading ofcausal
‘bestimmen’
connotations
as ‘make of to‘bestimmen’
be’; whereasas ‘make
Kant’s to be’; whereas Kant’s
concern is ‘specify’. concern is ‘specify’.
80 wird, so erhellet 80dadurch
wird, sodoch erhellet
eben dadurch
whetherdoch it be eben
so ineluctably
whetherrequired.
it be so ineluctably required.
nicht, daß sie so unumgänglich
nicht, daßnothwen-
sie so unumgänglich
Above we nothwen-
have, withAbove little difficulty,
we have, with little (ll.
B122–3 difficulty,
88–145): Kant B122–3
highlights
(ll. 88–145):
how the KantDeduction
highlights of how
the categories
the Deduction differsoffromthe categories
the De- differs from the De-
dig sey. Wir haben oben dig die
sey.Begriffe
Wir haben des oben die Begriffe
pursued des pursued
the concepts of space the andconcepts
of of space
duction and aofpriori duction
of the conceptsofofthe‘space’ a priori and concepts
of ‘time’, of because
‘space’ and any of objects
‘time’,webecause
can (soany to objects we can (so to
Raumes und der ZeitRaumes vermittelst
und einer
der Zeittime vermittelst
through einer a transcendental
time through deduc- speak) encounter,
a transcendental deduc-or which speak)can encounter,
affect ourorsensibility,
which canoraffect which ourcan sensibility,
at all be or presented
which can to our at all be presented to our
transscendentalen Deduction
transscendentalen
zu ihren Deduction
tion to their zu ihren
sources tion
and haveto their sourcessenses,
expli- must expli-
and have be spatio-temporal,
senses, must so be thatspatio-temporal,
the concepts ‘space’ so that and
the‘time’
concepts must‘space’
pertainand to them.
‘time’ must pertain to them.
85 Quellen verfolgt und 85 ihre
Quellenobjective
verfolgt und ihre
[B120] catedobjective
and specified
[B120] a priori
catedtheir
and specified
valid- a(Kant
prioriquite
their deliberately
valid- (Kant
here quite
leavesdeliberately
entirely open herehow, leaves in what
entirelyspecific
open ways, how, in those
whatconcepts
specific ways, those concepts
Gültigkeit a priori erklärt
Gültigkeit
und bestimmt.
a priori erklärtity.und bestimmt. ity. […] may pertain to sensed […] particulars;
may pertainsee 137–8,particulars;
to Bsensed ll. 527–38.)see However,
B137–8,spatio-temporal
ll. 527–38.) However, objectsspatio-temporal
or objects or
[… B122] [… B122] appearances or phenomena,
appearances though or spatio-temporal
phenomena, though
and though
spatio-temporal
affecting and
our though
sensibility, affecting our sensibility,
Die Categorien des Verstandes
Die Categoriendage- des Verstandes
The categories dage- of understanding,
The categories of might be so confused and
understanding, might confusing (B123, ll.and
be so confused 130–45)
confusing that (they
B123, would
ll. 130–45)
not at that
all afford
they would or ex- not at all afford or ex-
gen stellen uns gar nichtgen stellen
die Bedingun-
uns gar nicht on thedie other
Bedingun-hand, doon nottheprovide
other hand, hibit the
us do not provide us kinds of features
hibit or
the regularities
kinds of features
required orfor regularities
any humanly required possiblefor any
thought,
humanly which possible thought, which
90 gen vor, unter denen 90 Gegenstände
gen vor, unterindenen der Gegenstände
the conditions in derunderthe which
conditions
objects under requires
whichjudgmental
objects synthesis
requiresofjudgmental
sensory representations
synthesis of sensory so thatrepresentations
we can identifyso(classify) that weany can identify (classify) any
Anschauung gegebenAnschauung werden, mithin gegebenarewerden,
given within mithin[sensory]
are given intuition, instance of
within [sensory] intuition, any category.instance
Such of
a condition
any category.
may Such
be called
a condition
‘transcendental
may be chaos’
called KTPR §§15– chaos’ (KTPR §§15–
‘transcendental
(
können uns allerdingskönnen Gegenstände
uns allerdings
er- hence Gegenstände
objects could er- well
henceappear
objects could 29.)
to us, wellIappear
intercalate ‘[sensory]’
to us, 29.) Ito intercalate
qualify ‘intuition’
‘[sensory]’(l.to91)qualify to stress
‘intuition’
that Kant (l. 91)
is not
to stress
(at all)that con- Kant is not (at all) con-
sidering anything intellectual, sideringbut anything
intuition intellectual,
as sensory butpresentation,
intuition as which sensoryhepresentation,
contrasts both which he contrasts both
scheinen, ohne daß sie scheinen,
sich nothwendig
ohne daß siethough sich nothwendig
without any though necessity without
that any necessity that
18 18 19 19
18 19
 auf Functionen des Verstandes
auf Functionen beziehen des Verstandes
they mustbeziehen
connect to functions
they must of the totofunctions
connect sensation(s), and to to
of the apperceptive
sensation(s),experience and to apperceptive
or thought experience(cf. below, §5); or thought
hence neither(cf. below, is he§5); hence neither is he
95 müssen, und dieser95also müssen,
die Bedingungen
und dieser alsounderstanding,
die Bedingungen whichunderstanding,
would thus which considerng
wouldanything
thus like considerng
Humean anything impressions like ofHumean
sense, nor impressions
of sense data. of sense, nor of sense data.
derselben a priori enthielte.
derselben Daher zeigtenthielte.
a priori containDaher zeigt contain
their conditions a priori.their
Thus conditionsAa further important point
priori. Thus A further very important
strongly suggestedpoint verybystrongly Kant’s formulation
suggested byofKant’s the key formulation of the key
sich hier eine Schwierigkeit,
sich hierdieeine wirSchwierigkeit,
im in this regarddie wira difficulty
im in this arises
regard
which problem of the
a difficulty arises which Deduction
problem is that,
of the
whatever
Deduction sub-personal
is that, whatever
cognitive sub-personal
functions must
cognitive
be struc-
functions must be struc-
Felde der Sinnlichkeit Feldenicht derantrafen,
Sinnlichkeit
wie nichtwe didantrafen,
not confront wie inwethe diddomain
not confront
of tured
in thebydomain
our basicof formal
turedaspects
by ourofbasic judging
formal andaspects
our categories,
of judging Kantandhas ourexcellent
categories, reason
Kant has excellent reason
nemlich s u b j e c t i v enemlich
B e d i nsguubnjgeecnt i v e sensibility,
B e d i n g unamely:
n g e n How sensibility,
subjectivenamely:
con- to distinguish
How subjective con-two different
to distinguish
uses of the
two categories,
different uses
one of
in guiding
the categories,
such sub-personal
one in guiding sensory
such sub-personal sensory
100 d e s D e n k e n s 100sollten
d e s Do ebnj ekcetni vs e sollten
ditions oofb thought
j e c t i v eare to
ditions thought aresyntheses,
haveof objective to have quite another
objective syntheses,
one in structuring
quite another our onehumanlyin structuring
possible our explicit
humanly
formspossible
of cognitive explicit forms of cognitive
G ü l t i g k e i t haben, Gd.i.
ü l t iBedingungen
g k e i t haben, validity,
d.i. Bedingungen
i.e. how can they validity,
furnish
i.e. how judgment
con- can they furnish con-about whatever
judgment particulars
about we
whatever
happen particulars
to sense (see
we happen
below, to
B134–5,
sense ll. 456–68;
(see below, B134–5, ll. 456–68;

der Möglichkeit aller Erkenntniß

der Möglichkeit der Ge- aller Erkenntniß
ditions of der the Ge- 151, ll. 943–90).
ditions of oftheallveryBpossibility
very possibility of allThoughB151, it ll.
cannot
943–90). be proven
ThoughbyitKant’s cannotformulation
be proven by alone,
Kant’stheformulation
further rele-alone, the further rele-
genstände abgeben: denn genstände
ohne Functio-
abgeben: denn ohne Functio-
knowledge of objects:knowledge
since without vant evidence
of objects: since without (I have argued
vant evidence
elsewhere) (I have
supports
argued Kant’s
elsewhere)formulation
supports and Kant’s
its clear
formulation
indicationand its clear indication
that he agrees, e.g., with thatDretske
he agrees,(1969) e.g.,about
with theDretskedistinction
(1969)betweenabout thesimple, distinction
non-cognitive
between simple, non-cognitive
nen des Verstandes nen könnendes allerdings
Verstandes functions
können allerdingsof the understanding
functions ofap- the understanding ap-
(‘non-epistemic’) seeing (‘non-epistemic’)
and any explicitly seeingcognitive
and any seeing
explicitly
that such-and-so
cognitive seeing is thethat case,such-and-so
or is the case, or
105 Erscheinungen in105 der Erscheinungen
Anschauung gege- in der pearances
Anschauungcan gege- of course
pearancesbe given can of course be given
likewise with Travis (2004) likewise aboutwiththe Travis
silence(2004)
of the about
senses the(cf.silence
A293/B350).
of the senses This (cf.view A293/B350).
does This view does
ben werden. Ich nehme benz.B.
werden.
den Begriff
Ich nehme z.B. den
within BegriffI take,
intuition. within
e.g., the
intuition.
con- I take, e.g., the con-
not (at all) invoke or entailnot (at anyall)aconceptual
invoke or entail ‘knowledgeany aconceptual
by acquaintance’ ‘knowledge or mythical
by acquaintance’
‘given- or mythical ‘given-
der Ursache, welcher eine der Ursache,
besondere welcher
Art eine ceptbesondere
of cause, which Art signifies
cept of cause,
a partic- which signifies a partic-
ness’, precisely because ness’,
cognition
precisely requires
because andcognition
involves requires
judgment, and identifying
involvesand judgment,
classifyingidentifying and classifying
der Synthesis bedeutet, derdaSynthesis
auf etwas bedeutet,
A ular dakind
auf of etwas A ular
synthesis, whereby
kind of uponsynthesis, whereby upon
some particular(s) as exhibiting
some particular(s)
such-and-so as exhibiting
features –such-and-so
exactly in accord features with
– exactly
Evans in (1975).
accord with Evans (1975).
was ganz Verschiedenes was B ganz nach Verschiedenes
einer someB Anach some einerentirely
somedistinct
A some B is entirely distinct and
The textual B isexegetical
The textualevidence andmust exegetical
be carefullyevidence examined,
must bebecause carefully byexamined,
design Kant because by design Kant
110 Regel gesetzt wird. 110 Es
Regel priori nicht
ist agesetzt wird. Esposited
ist a priori
accordingnicht to posited
a rule. Itaccording
is not topursues a rule.(functional)
It is not issuespursues of (functional)
cognitive processes issues ofincognitive
order to processes
identify key in order
epistemological
to identify key epistemological
klar, warum Erscheinungen klar, warum etwasErscheinungen
der- clear a priori etwaswhy der-appearances
clear a priorishould why appearances should
issues of proper functioning
issuesand of proper
especiallyfunctioning
of possible and genuine
especiallyand of justifiable
possible genuinecognitive and refer-
justifiable cognitive refer-
gleichen enthalten sollten gleichen(denn enthalten
Erfah- solltencontain(denn Erfah-of the
anything contain
kind (for
anythingit is of ence
the kind (for it is
to and classificatory enceidentification
to and classificatory of particulars.
identification
These are of the
particulars.
two tasksThese of hisare‘subjec-
the two tasks of his ‘subjec-
rungen kann man nicht rungen
zum Beweise
kann man an-nichtuseless
zum Beweise
to appeal an- to useless
experience to appeal
for to tive’experience for
and his ‘objective’ tive’
deductions Axvii, cf. B393).
and his (‘objective’ deductions (Axvii, cf. B393).
führen, weil die objective führen,
Gültigkeit
weil diedie- objective Gültigkeit
proof, becausedie- the objective
proof, becausevalidity the objective validity
115 ses Begriffs a priori 115muß dargethana priori
ses Begriffs wer- muß dargethan
of this concept wer- can only
of this concepta can Bonly
be proven 122 (ll.
be 106–10):
proven aKant’s B122 illustrating
(ll. 106–10): the issue
Kant’swith illustrating
the concept the issue
‘cause’ withcannot
the concept
be merely ‘cause’
con-cannot be merely con-
tingent. The concept ‘cause’ tingent.is The a priori
concept
and is‘cause’
modally is adefined
priori and in ways
is modally
which defined
cannot be in ways
speci-which cannot be speci-
den können); und esden ist können);
daher a priori und es priori);
ist daherhence it is doubtful
a priori priori); hencea prioriit is doubtful a priori
fied in accord with concept fied in empiricism
accord withnor concept
verification
empiricism empiricism;
nor verification
Kant discusses empiricism;these Kant discusses these
zweifelhaft, ob ein solcherzweifelhaft,
Begriffobnicht ein solcher
whether Begriff
suchnichta concept whether
might such not be a concept might not be
points shortly (see below, points re: shortly
‘dignity’, (seel. 171).
below,Kant’sre: ‘dignity’,
issue inl.the 171).Deduction
Kant’s issue expressly
in thecon- Deduction expressly con-
etwa gar leer sei undetwa überall
gar unter
leer sei denund utterly
überallemptyunter and den pertain
utterlytoemptyno ob-and pertain to no ob-
cerns how the mere possessioncerns howofthea priori mere concepts
possession(e.g., of thea priori
categories)
conceptsdoes (e.g.,notthesuffice
categories)to does not suffice to
Erscheinungen keinenErscheinungen
Gegenstand an- keinenject Gegenstand
whatsoeveran-within jectappearances.
whatsoever within appearances.
show that these concepts show have thatanythesepossible
concepts validhave cognitive
any possibleuse. Demonstrating
valid cognitive thatuse.theyDemonstrating
can that they can
120 treffe. Denn daß Gegenstände
120 treffe. Denn der sinnli-
daß Gegenstände
That objectsder sinnli- of sensible
That objects
intuitionof sensible intuition
have such use requireshave ‘realising’
such use them requires
by showing
‘realising’howthem it is byhumanly
showing possible
how ittois indicate
humanly possible to indicate
chen Anschauung denchen im Gemüth
Anschauung a pri-denmustim Gemüth
accord with a pri-thosemust
formal
accord condi-with those formal(ifcondi-
accurately approximately)
accurately any,(ifthough
approximately)
at least one, any,relevant
thoughinstance at least one,(per ll.relevant
110–20). instance
This (per ll. 110–20). This
ori liegenden [B123] formalen
ori liegendenBedingun-
[B123] formalen
tions ofBedingun-
sensibility which tions lieof asensibility
priori which lie a priori
is the deictic point about is thethedeictic
cognitive point (andabout
so thethe epistemological)
cognitive (and sosignificance the epistemological)
of indexical significance of indexical
gen der Sinnlichkeit gemäß gen der seynSinnlichkeit
müssen, gemäß withinseynourmüssen,
mentality within
is clearour for mentality
this orisdemonstrative
clear for this reference
or demonstrative
Kant learnt reference from Tetens. Kant(This learntpoint fromisTetens.
neglected (Thisby point
‘analytic is neglected by ‘analytic
ist daraus klar, weil sie ist sonst
darausnicht klar, Ge-weil siereason,
sonst thatnichtotherwise
Ge- reason,
they would that otherwise
not they would not
transcendental arguments’,
transcendental
which onlyarguments’,focus uponwhich concept onlypossession;
focus uponKTPR 28–9,possession;
concept KCE §14.) KTPR 28–9, KCE §14.)
125 genstände für uns125seyn genstände
würden;für daßuns sie seyn
bewürden;
objects for daß us; sie however,
be objectsthat for theyus; however, that they
aber auch überdem aber den Bedingungen,
auch überdem den also Bedingungen,
must further accord also with
must those B123 (ll.with
further accord 125–45):
thoseKantBhere123 (ll. makes
125–45):the point
Kantalready
here makes mentioned,
the point thatalready
spatio-temporal
mentioned,objects that spatio-temporal objects
deren der Verstand deren zur synthetischen
der Verstand conditions
zur synthetischen required conditions
by the under- or appearances
required by the under- or phenomena,
or appearancesthough orspatio-temporal
phenomena, though
and though
spatio-temporal
affecting our
and sensibility,
though affecting our sensibility,
Einheit des Denkens bedarf,Einheit gemäß
des Denkens
seyn bedarf,
standing gemäß seyn standing
for synthetic unity of for think- might be so
synthetic unity of think-confused might
and confusing
be so confused
that they andwould
confusing
not at that
all afford
they would
or exhibit
not at
theall kinds
afford of or exhibit the kinds of
features or regularitiesfeatures
requiredorfor regularities
any humanly required
possible
for any thought,
humanly which possible
requires thought,
judgmen- which requires judgmen-
müssen, davon ist diemüssen, Schlußfolgedavonnicht ist die ing;
Schlußfolge
insight into nicht this inference
ing; insightis into not this inference is not
20 20 21 21
20 21
130 so leicht einzusehen. 130 so Dennleichtes einzusehen.
könnten so Denn easy.es For
könntenappearances
so easy. could tal synthesis
Forbeappearances could of sensory
be talrepresentations
synthesis of sensory so thatrepresentations
we can identifyso(classify) that we any can instance
identify (classify)
of any any instance of any
wohl allenfalls Erscheinungen
wohl allenfalls so be- Erscheinungen
altogether so soconstituted,
be- altogetherthat thesoun- category.
constituted, thatSuchthe un-a condition
category.of ‘transcendental
Such a condition chaos’of ‘transcendental
would block thechaos’ very possibility
would block of thehu- very possibility of hu-
schaffen seyn, daß derschaffen Verstand seyn,
sie daß
den derderstanding
Verstand siewould den not derstanding
find themwould at man thought
not find themand at judgment,
man thought even the andbarejudgment,
‘I think even
…’. Kant’s
the bare Deduction
‘I think …’. doesKant’s
implyDeduction
con- does imply con-
Bedingungen seiner Einheit Bedingungen
gar nicht seiner
ge- Einheit
all in gar nichtwith
accord ge- theallconditions
in accord of straints upon
with the conditions of particulars
straints
which upon are particulars
humanly identifiable
which are by
humanly
sensory identifiable
perception, by yetsensory
those perception, yet those
mäß fände, und allesmäß so infände,
Verwirrung
und alles its so unity,
in Verwirrung
so that everything
its unity, lay so in constraints are
that everything lay not
in theconstraints
topic of theareDeduction;
not the topic theyofare
theexamined
Deduction; in thetheyAnalytic
are examined
of Princi- in the Analytic of Princi-
135 läge, daß z.B. in der 135 Reihenfolge
läge, daß z.B. derinEr- der Reihenfolge
such confusion, der Er-so that,
such e.g.,
confusion, ples. In the
in the so that, e.g., in the Deduction ples.
Kant In focuses
the Deduction
on the barest
Kant focuses
necessary on conditions
the barest for
necessary
any humanly
conditions for any humanly
scheinungen sich nichts scheinungen
darböte, was sichei-nichts darböte,
series was ei- series
of appearances nothing
of appearances
pre- possible
nothingthinking pre-of anypossible
thought thinking
at all, including
of any thoughtthe bare at self-referential
all, including the ‘I think
bare self-referential
…’. ‘I think …’.
ne Regel der SynthesisneanRegel die Hand
der Synthesis
gäbe sented an die itself
Hand which
gäbe would sentedprovide
itself whicha Bwould
123–4 (ll.provide
146–85): a Kant
B123–4 characterises
(ll. 146–85): whyKantand characterises
how the empiricist why and (Humean)
how thealternative
empiricist of (Humean) alternative of
und also dem Begriffeund deralso
Ursache
dem Begriffe
und rule derofUrsache
synthesis undand sorulewould
of synthesis
corre- andsettling
so would corre-
for customary settling
associationsfor customary
or empirical associations
generalities or cannot
empirical address
generalities
key issuescannot about address key issues about
Wirkung entspräche, Wirkung so daß dieser entspräche,
Be- so daß to
spond dieser Be- spond
the concept of cause
to the andconcept of cause
logically contingentand yetlogically
strictly contingent
universal empirical
yet strictly propositions
universal empirical
concerning propositions
natural kinds concerning
or natural kinds or
140 griff also ganz leer, 140nichtig
griff also
und ganz
ohneleer, Be- nichtigeffect,undsoohne thatBe- this effect,
conceptsowould that this(also)
concept
causalwould necessities,
(also)
and causal
concerningnecessities,
our fallible
and concerning
empirical knowledge
our fallibleofempirical
them. The knowledge
first of them. The first
deutung wäre. Erscheinungendeutung wäre. würden Erscheinungen
thus be entirelywürden empty,thusnullbeandentirely
insig- empty,ordernullofandKant’sinsig-business
order is to
of identify
Kant’s business
the key aispriorito identify
concepts therequired
key a priori evenconcepts
to formulate required even to formulate
nichts destoweniger unserernichts destoweniger
Anschauung unserer nificant.Anschauung
Appearancesnificant.would Appearances
never- thesewould
issues never-
and judgments,
these issues
and then andtojudgments,
demonstrate andthat
thenwetocan demonstrate
use these that concepts
we can in suf-
use these concepts in suf-
Gegenstände darbieten, Gegenstände
denn die darbieten,
An- theless dennpresent
die An- objects
theless
to our present ficiently
intu- objects to ouraccurateintu-and justified
ficiently cognitive
accurate and judgments.
justifiedReaders
cognitiveaccustomed
judgments.toReaders Hume’saccustomed
empiri- to Hume’s empiri-
schauung bedarf derschauung Functionen bedarf des derition, Functionen des ition,
since intuition does notsinceatintuition
all cism
doesfindnot Kant’s
at allpresumption
cism findthat Kant’s
therepresumption
are such a priori that concepts
there are as suchtheacategories
priori concepts‘unmoti- as the categories ‘unmoti-
145 Denkens auf keine145 Weise.
Denkens auf keine Weise. require the functions of require the functionsvated’.
thinking. The best demonstration
of thinking. vated’. The that
bestKant
demonstration
is right about thattheKant
a priori
is right
statusabout
of these
the aconcepts
priori status of these concepts
Gedächte man sich von Gedächte
der Mühsam- man sich von Didder weMühsam-
think to extricate Did ourselves is a strictly
we think to extricate internal critique
ourselves is a strictly
of Hume’sinternalor critique
also C.D. of Broad’s
Hume’s concept
or also C.D. empiricism;
Broad’ssee concept
West- empiricism; see West-
keit dieser Untersuchungen keit dieser
dadurchUntersuchungen
los- from dadurch los- offrom
the difficulty suchthe difficulty phal
inquiries (1998,
of such §4; 2013), phal
inquiries Turnbull
(1998,(1959).
§4; 2013),
On the Turnbull
concept (1959).
‘cause’On seethe B240–1
concept and‘cause’
Beck (1975,see B240–1 and Beck (1975,
zuwickeln, daß man sagte: zuwickeln,
die Erfahrung
daß man sagte: die Erfahrung
by saying, experience by affords
saying,contin- 120–9), whose
experience affords contin- elucidation
120–9), showswhose how elucidation
very much shows
Kant can
how state
very and
much argue,
Kant accurately,
can state inci-
and argue, accurately, inci-
böte unablässig Beyspiele böte einer
unablässig
solchen Beyspieleual einer
examples solchen of such regularities of sively
ual examples such and so very concisely
regularities sivelyin andone sobrief
very aside.
concisely in one brief aside.
150 Regelmäßigkeit der 150 Erscheinungen
Regelmäßigkeit dar, der Erscheinungen
within appearances dar, within
which appearances
furnish which(ll. furnish
B123–4 146–85): Kant B123–4 highlights
(ll. 146–85):
here (and
Kantrepeatedly
highlightsbelow)
here (and whatrepeatedly
are in effect below) Hume’s what are in effect Hume’s
die genugsam Anlaß die geben, genugsam
den Begriff Anlaß geben, abundant den occasion
Begriff abundant
for abstracting occasionlessons
for abstracting
about how empirical lessons evidence
about how as empirical
understood evidence
by empiricists
as understood providesbyno empiricists
more thanprovides no more than
der Ursache davon abzusondern
der Ursacheund davon da- abzusondern
from themund the da-
conceptfrom of them
cause the and concept of cause
customary and
associations customary
which cannot associations
at all identify
whichorcannotjustifyatthe all kinds
identify of or
modality
justify the involvedkinds of modality involved
durch zugleich die objective
durch zugleichGültigkeit die objective
thus alsoGültigkeit
ratifying the thusobjective
also ratifying
valid- the objective
either in any valid-
causal production
either in any of an causal
effect,production
or in any of cognitive
an effect, judgment
or in anyabout cognitive
what is judgment
the about what is the
eines solchen Begriffseines zu bewähren,
solchen Begriffs so ityzuofbewähren, so ityone
such a concept, of such
thus ane-concept, case one thus ne-
regarding any such
case causal
regarding modality.
any such Thiscausal
latter modality.
modal issue Thisis latter
more modalexplicitissue later is more explicit later
155 bemerkt man nicht, 155 daß
bemerkt
auf diesemanWeise nicht, daß auf that
glects dieseinWeise
this wayglects
the concept
that in of this way(B141–2, ll. 612–21;
the concept of B165–6,
(B141–2, ll. 1190–1202).
ll. 612–21; B165–6,
Part of ll. Kant’s
1190–1202).
aim is toPart demonstrate
of Kant’s that aim ouris tokey demonstrate that our key
der Begriff der Ursache der Begriff
gar nicht derent- Ursache causegarcannot
nicht at ent-all arise,
causebut cannot
that at it all concepts
arise, butand thattheir
it useconcepts
are modally and their
structured
use are andmodally
significant
structured
in waysand which
significant
cannotinbeways re- which cannot be re-
springen kann, sondern springen
daß er kann,
entweder sondern daßeither
must er entweder
be grounded mustfully
eithera priori duced fully
be grounded to empiricist
a priori accounts
duced toofempiricist
meaning or accounts
evidence of (concept
meaning empiricism
or evidenceor(concept meaningempiricismem- or meaning em-
völlig a priori im Verstande
völlig a müssepriori im ge-Verstande müsse ge-
in the understanding,in or theotherwise piricism).
understanding, or otherwise One surprise piricism).
is that this
One modal
surprise
significance
is that this
(intension)
modal significance
is required (intension)
even for (appar-
is required even for (appar-
gründet seyn, oder alsgründet
ein bloßes seyn,
Hirnge-
oder als ein must bloßes Hirnge-
be utterly abandoned
must be as utterly ently) simple
a mere abandoned as a mere affirmative
ently)
judgments
simple affirmative
about what judgments
anything IS ,
aboutin contrast
what to however
anything IS , in itcontrast
may to however it may
160 spinst gänzlich [B124]160 aufgegeben
spinst gänzlich werden [B124] aufgegeben
chimera. For werden
this concept
chimera.absolutely seem to absolutely
For this concept one or anotherseem of us.to one or another of us.
müsse. Denn dieser müsse. BegriffDenn erfordert dieser requires
Begriff that erfordert
something requires
A be of thatsuch
somethingB124A(l.be of such
171): ‘Dignity’B124indicates
(l. 171):a status
‘Dignity’or standing.
indicatesKant a statuspaysorconcerted
standing. attention
Kant paystoconcerted the attention to the
durchaus, daß etwas A durchaus,
von derdaß Art etwassei, Aa kind von der thatArt sei, a else
something kindBthat follows
something else Bcontent
semantic follows (intension)
semanticofcontent key concepts,
(intension) especially
of keythe concepts,
categories, especially
and thetheprinciples
categories, and the principles
daß ein anderes B daraus daß einnothwendig
anderes B daraus from it,nothwendig
necessarily and from according
it, necessarily
to and particular
and accordingjudgmentsto and (claims)
particular wejudgments
formulate,(claims)considerweand formulate,
often affirm, considerand andhowoften theseaffirm, and how these
und nach e i n e r s c hund l e c hnach
t h i ne ianl legre -s c h lan
e c altogether
h t h i n a luniversal
l g e - rule.
an altogether
Of course universalintensions
rule. Of are course
modallyintensions
specified inareways modally
whichspecified
cannot be in ways
defined,which identified
cannot or bejustified
defined,on identified
a or justified on a
165 m e i n e n R e g e l 165
folge.
m e iErscheinungen
n e n R e g e l folge. Erscheinungen
appearances provide examples,
appearances which
provide examples, which

22 22 23 23
22 23
 geben gar wohl Fällegeben an diegar Hand,
wohlaus Fälle can
an die Hand,
afford ausaccording
a rule, can affordto which strictly empiricist
a rule, according to whichbasisstrictly
(Hume’s empiricist
theory of basis
ideas
(Hume’s
+ concept theoryempiricism
of ideas ++ concept
verification empiricism
empiri- + verification empiri-
denen eine Regel möglich denen ist,einenach
Regel dermöglich ist, nach
something der occurs,
usually something
but never cism; En.1,
usually occurs, but §§1–7),
never in cism;
order En.1,
to pose,
§§1–7),
address
in order
and ultimately
to pose, address
to resolve andquestions
ultimatelyabout to resolve
how, questions about how,
etwas gewöhnlicher maßen etwas gewöhnlicher
geschieht, a- maßen that the geschieht, a- that be thenecessary.
consequence how well
consequence and with what
be necessary. howvalidity
well andor justification
with what validity
(quid iuris)
or justification
we can use (quid such iuris)
concepts,
we can form use such concepts, form
ber niemals, daß der Erfolg
ber niemals,
nothw daß e nder
- Erfolg
Hencento o t the
h w esynthesis
n - Hence of causeto the such of
andsynthesis judgments
cause andand affirm
such judgments
(or reject) suchand affirm
claims,(or in reject)
view ofsuch the claims,
sharp semantic
in view of and themodal
sharp semantic and modal
170 d i g s e y : daher der
170Synthesis
d i g s e y der
: daher
Ursac-der Synthesis der Ursac-
effect pertains a dignity
effectwhich
pertains contrasts between
one a dignity which one our contrasts
(apparent) between
empiricistour ‘basis’
(apparent)
and the
empiricist
content ‘basis’
of these
and claims.
the content
In KdrV of these claims. In KdrV
he und Wirkung auchheeine undDignität
Wirkungan-auchcannot eine Dignität
at all an- express
cannotempirically, Kant argues
at all express empirically, that we must
Kant be argues
able to
that
use we
themust
categories
be able with
to use
sufficient
the categories
accuracy withand sufficient
justifica- accuracy and justifica-
hängt, die man gar nicht hängt,empirisch
die manaus- gar nicht empirisch
namely that the aus-
effectnamely
not merely that the tionnot
co- effect if we are ever
merely co- abletion
even if we
to think
are ever‘I think
able …’.
evenOne to think
key reason
‘I thinkjustifying
…’. Onethis keyveryreason strong
justifying this very strong
drücken kann, nämlichdrückendaß diekann,
Wirkungnämlichmes daßafter
die Wirkung
the cause, but mesis after
positedthe by cause,
it thesis, which is equally
but is posited by it thesis,
anti-empiricist
which is equally
and anti-rationalist
anti-empiricist (andand anti-Cartesian)
anti-rationalist is (and
developed
anti-Cartesian) is developed
nicht bloß zu der Ursachenichthinzu
bloß zukomme,
der Ursacheand hinzu
issueskomme,
from it. The andstrict
issues univer- in thestrict
from it. The Deduction.
univer- Oneindirect
the Deduction.
corollary ofOne Kant’s
directDeduction
corollary isofthatKant’swe could
Deduction not even is thatcol-we could not even col-
175 sondern d u r c h dieselbe
175 sondern
gesetzt
d usei
r c hunddieselbe gesetzt
sality of the sei rule,
und too,sality
is not
of the at all lect the empiricists’
rule, too, is not at all preferred
lect the empirical
empiricists’ evidence
preferred and empirical
form theirevidence
preferred and customary
form their beliefs,
preferred customary beliefs,
a u s ihr erfolge. Die astrenge
u s ihr Allgemein-
erfolge. Die strenge Allgemein- unless we succeed, with
unless
sufficient
we succeed,
if approximate
with sufficient
accuracy if approximate
and justifiedness,
accuracyto identify
and justifiedness,
at to identify at
characteristic of empirical
characteristic rules,of empirical rules,
least some particulars leastin our some surroundings,
particulars so in our
as tosurroundings,
distinguish them, so as and
to distinguish
our perceiving them, and our perceiving
heit der Regel ist auch heitgarder
keine
Regel
Eigen-
ist auchwhich
gar keine Eigen- can
by induction which
obtainby induction
only a can obtain only a
them, as we perceive them, from as we ourselves
perceive them,
as self-consciously
from ourselves perceiving
as self-consciously
those particulars.perceiving those particulars.
schaft empirischer Regeln,
schaftdieempirischer
durch In- Regeln, die durchuniversality,
comparative In- comparative
i.e., an ex- universality, i.e., an ex-
These commonsense discriminations
These commonsense and identifications
discriminations of atandleast
identifications
some perceptible of at least
particu-some perceptible particu-
duction keine andereduction als comparative
keine anderetensive als comparative
usefulness. Now tensive
the usefulness.
use of Now the use of
lars all require competent,lars all
accurate
requireusecompetent,
of the categories
accurate(cf.use B125, ll. 205–9;
of the B126,
categories (cf. ll.
B125,
215–43).
ll. 205–9; B126, ll. 215–43).
180 Allgemeinheit, d.i.180 ausgebreitete
Allgemeinheit, Brauch-
d.i. ausgebreitete Brauch- would
the pure categories the pure
be entirely
categories would be entirely
Such self-conscious self-awareness
Such self-consciousis a cognitive
self-awareness
achievement,is a cognitive
not a mere achievement,
assumptionnot of aanmere assumption of an
barkeit, bekommen können.barkeit, Nun
bekommen
würde können.altered,Nun if onewürde
wantedaltered,
to treat if them
one wanted to treat them
ego-centric predicament. ego-centric
(The questionpredicament.
whether(The Kant’squestion
account whether
of ‘judgments
Kant’s account of percep- of ‘judgments of percep-
sich aber der Gebrauch sichderaber
reinen
der Gebrauch
Ver- only derasreinen
empiricalVer-products.
only as empirical products.tion’ (Prol. §29), abouttion’
how (Prol.
something
§29), about
merelyhow appears
something
to oneself,
merely is consistent
appears towith oneself,KdrV is is
consistent with KdrV is
standesbegriffe gänzlich standesbegriffe
ändern, wenn gänzlich ändern, wenn a pseudo-issue, becausea pseudo-issue,
even to wonder because
whether eventhetosun
wonder
warmswhether
a stonethe requires
sun warms
recognising
a stone requires recognising
man sie nur als empirische
man sie Producte
nur als be-empirische Producte be- and identifying both the andsunidentifying
and the both
stone,the andsuntheandwarmth
the stone,
of each;and these
the warmth
identifications
of each; these identifications
185 handeln wollte. 185 handeln wollte. require fulfilling the transcendental
require fulfilling conditions
the transcendental
of the possibility
conditionsof apperceptive
of the possibility
humanofex- apperceptive human ex-
perience examined only
perience
within examined
KdrV.) only within KdrV.)

§ 14. Uebergang zur§ 14. transscendentalen 14. Transition to the

Uebergang zur§ transscendentalen § 14. Transition to 3.2
Transcenden- §14: Transition
the Transcenden- 3.2to the §14:
Transcendental
Transition to Deduction
the Transcendental
of the Categories.
Deduction of the Categories.
Deduction der Categorien. Deduction[…B125] der Categorien.
tal Deduction
[…B125] of the tal Categories.
Deduction Bof 125the(ll.Categories.
188–97): KantB125 acknowledges
(ll. 188–97):two Kant
unproblematic
acknowledges casestwoinunproblematic
which object and casesconcept
in which object and concept
Ist aber das zweite, weil Ist aber
Vorstellung
das zweite, an weil
[…] Vorstellung
In the second an case,
[…] because
In the second
rep- case, because rep-if either
may correspond: may one
correspond:
producesifthe either
other
one(see
produces
above, the §2.15).other
Surprisingly,
(see above,neither
§2.15). is Surprisingly, neither is
sich selbst (denn vonsich deren
selbstCausalität
(denn vonresentation
deren Causalität
in itself resentation
(since causalityin itselfrelevant
(since tocausality
Kant’s Deduction,
relevant to regardless
Kant’s Deduction,
of his transcendental
regardless of idealism
his transcendental
and how often idealism
it and how often it
190 vermittelst des Willens
190 vermittelst
ist hier gar desnicht
Willensthrough
ist hier thegar will
nichtis not
through
here attheissue)
will is suggests
not herewe at do
issue)create suggests
at least wethe do
structure
create of
at least
objects
theofstructure
empiricalofexperience
objects of andempirical
knowl-experience and knowl-
die Rede) ihren Gegenstand die Rede)dem ihren D aGegenstand
- does notdem D a - itsdoes
produce object notwith
produce
re- itsedge.object
Kant’s with re- edge.
Deduction turns
Kant’s
instead
Deduction
on identifying
turns instead
necessary onaidentifying
priori conditions
necessary
of thought
a priori conditions of thought
s e y n n a c h nicht hervorbringt,
s e y n n a c h so nicht
ist hervorbringt, so ist nevertheless
spect to its existence, spect to its existence,
the and nevertheless the
judgment, and arguing and judgment,
that we must and satisfy
arguingthese
that conditions
we must satisfy if we these
are toconditions
be at all awareif we are to be at all aware
doch die Vorstellungdoch in Ansehung
die Vorstellung des representation
in Ansehung des in regard
representation
to its objectin regard to its object
of ourselves as being aware
of ourselves
of any as being(intuited)
sensed aware of particular(s)
any sensed (intuited)
(apperception),
particular(s)
as his (apperception),
next as his next
a priori bestim-
Gegenstandes alsdannGegenstandes priori bestim-
alsdannis aa priori determining, is aif priori
through it question
determining, indicatesit (ll. question
if through 205–9, 215–32,
indicates247–53).
(ll. 205–9,
Kant’s
215–32,
disuse247–53).
of the first
Kant’stwodisuse
models, of theby first two models, by
195 mend, wenn durch 195sie
mend,
alleinwenn
es möglich durch siealone
alleinitesis möglich
possible to alone
know something as towhich
it is possible knoweither the object
something as whichproduces
eitherthe
therepresentation
object produces or vice
theversa,
representation
is a considerable
or vice versa,
reason is aforconsiderable reason for
ist, etwas a l s e i n e n ist,
G eetwas
g e n s taal ns de iznue n G e g e nThere
object. s t a n darez uhowever
object. two
Therecondi- stressingtwo
are however Kant’s
condi- use ofstressing
the second,
Kant’spresuppositional
use of the second, sensepresuppositional
of ‘constitution senseof objects’
of ‘constitution
(a- of objects’ (a-
e r k e n n e n . Es sind eaber
r k e nzwei
n e n . Bedin-
Es sind tions
aber zweiunderBedin-
which alone
tions theunder which bove,
cogni- alone§2.15), i.e., examining
the cogni- bove, the
§2.15),
a priori
i.e., conditions
examining required
the a priori
to conditions
constitute objects
requiredastoobjects
constituteof objects as objects of
gungen, unter denen gungen,allein dieunterErkennt- denen allein
tion of dieanErkennt-
object is possible,
tion of first
an object human thought,
intu- is possible, first intu- perception
human orthought,
experience.perception
Here Kant
or experience.
expressly contrasts
Here Kant theexpressly
existence contrasts
of the existence of
niß eines Gegenstandes nißmöglich
eines Gegenstandes
ist, erst- ition, möglich ist, erst-
by which, though
ition,only
by as
which, objects and
ap- though only as ap- any knowledge
objects
we and
may any
have knowledge
of them as
we objects
may have
(ll. 192–7,
of them 202–4).
as objects (ll. 192–7, 202–4).

24 24 25 25
24 25
200 lich A n s c h a u u n200
g , lich
dadurch
A n s cderselbe,
h a u u n g , pearance,
dadurch derselbe,it is given; pearance,
second concept,it is given;B125 (ll. 197–204):
second concept, Kant B125 clearly
(ll. 197–204):
and unambiguously,
Kant clearlythough and unambiguously,
briefly, recalls though
his key briefly,
doctrinerecalls his key doctrine
aber nur als Erscheinung, aber nur
gegeben als Erscheinung,
wird; by which gegeben wird; isbythought
an object which whichan object of is the
thought two distinct,
which mutuallyof the two integrated
distinct,roles mutually
of sensoryintegrated
intuition
rolesandof sensory
intellectualintuition
concep- and intellectual concep-
zweitens B e g r i f f , dadurch
zweitenseinB eGegen- g r i f f , dadurch
correspondsein Gegen-
to this intuition.
corresponds […] to this tualisation
intuition. […] within human tualisation
experience within andhuman
knowledge (B75–6,and
experience 304–5), and at(B126
knowledge 75–6,(ll.304–5),
215–32). and at B126 (ll. 215–32).
stand gedacht wird, der stand
dieser
gedacht
Anschau-wird, der dieser Anschau-
ung entspricht. […] ung entspricht. […]
205 Nun frägt es sich,205 obNun nichtfrägtauchesBe- sich, obHerenichtarises
auch theBe- question,
Here whether B125 (ll. 206–10):
arises the question, whether Kant B125
hints (ll.at206–10):
the key Kant to thehintstranscendental
at the key to deduction
the transcendental
of the categories,
deduction of the categories,
griffe a priori vorausgehen,griffeals Bedingun-
a priori vorausgehen, als Bedingun-
any concepts a priori precede,
any concepts as con- a priorithat their use
precede, is necessary
as con- that intheirorder
usefor is necessary
us at all toin think
orderoffor something
us at all to wethink
(apparently)
of somethingintuit we (apparently) intuit
gen, unter denen allein gen, unter
etwas, denen wenn allein ditions etwas,
underwenn which alone,
ditions if not
under now through sensation
which alone, if not now to be
through
some sensation
object or to
other,
be some
so as object
to be able
or other,
to experience
so as to it.
be This
able point
to experience it. This point
gleich nicht angeschauet, gleich dennoch
nicht angeschauet,
als intuited, dennoch als intuited,
something nevertheless something
is he amplifies
nevertheless is at B126 (ll.he215–43).
amplifies at B126 (ll. 215–43).

Gegenstand überhaupt Gegenstand

gedacht überhaupt
wird; thought gedacht as [an]wird;
objectthought
as such;assince [an] object as such; since
210 denn alsdann ist210 alledenn
empirische
alsdann [Bist 126]alle inempirische
that case all[B126]empirical
in that
cognition
case allofempirical
B125–6 cognition
(ll. 210–5, of 220–7,
B125–6 227–32):
(ll. 210–5,Kant 220–7,
formulates 227–32):his keyKant claim
formulates
three times, his key
thatclaim
only three
by times, that only by
Erkenntniß der Gegenstände Erkenntniß solchen der Gegenstände solchen accords
objects necessarily objectswith necessarily
such accords
assumingwith thatsuch
objects assuming
of humanthat experience
objects conform
of humantoexperiencethe categories conform is anything
to the categories
possibly is anything possibly
Begriffen nothwendiger Begriffen
Weise nothwendiger
gemäß, concepts, Weise since gemäß,
withoutconcepts,
their presup-
since withoutan object of our experience
their presup- an object (cf. ofabove,
our experience
§2.15). Kant’s (cf. above,
formulation
§2.15).is Kant’s
consistentformulation
with theis consistent with the
weil ohne deren Voraussetzung
weil ohne deren nichtsVoraussetzung
position nothing nichtsis possible
position as [an] ispresuppositional
nothing possible as [an]sensepresuppositional
of ‘constitution’sense of objects,
of ‘constitution’
that the proper of objects,
use ofthat the the
categories
proper be use of the categories be
als O b j e c t d e r E r als
f a hOr ubnj eg c möglich
t d e r E r fobject
a h r uofn gexperience.
möglichNowobject besides
of experience.
intui- Now necessary
besides to constitute
intui- necessary
any particular to constitute
as an object
any particular
of our apperceptive
as an objectexperience.
of our apperceptive
This read- experience. This read-
215 ist. Nun enthält215aber ist. alle
NunErfahrung
enthält aber tionalleof Erfahrung
the senses, by tionwhich
of the some- senses, ingby disregards
which some- Kant’s transcendental
ing disregards Kant’s idealism, transcendental
yet it may suffice idealism,
for his
yet Deduction.
it may suffice ‘Proper’
for his Deduction. ‘Proper’
außer der Anschauung außerder derSinne,Anschauung
wo- thing derisSinne, wo-experience
given, all thing isalsogiven,con- use is an ambitious
all experience also con- claim,
use justifying
is an ambitious
which claim,
requiresjustifying
also thewhich
Analyticrequires
of Principles.
also the Analytic of Principles.
durch etwas gegebendurch wird, etwas
noch gegeben
einen tains wird, anoch concepteinen
of an object
tains a which
concept isof an object which is
B e g r i f f von einem Gegenstande,
B e g r i f f vonder einemin Gegenstande,
given in intuition der inor [which]
given inappears:
intuition or [which] appears:
der Anschauung gegeben der Anschauung
wird oder er- gegeben wird oderconcepts
Accordingly er- Accordingly
of objects conceptsas of objects as
220 scheint: demnach220werden scheint: Begriffe
demnach von werden such Begriffe
as conditionsvon a such
priori asof conditions
experi- a priori of experi-
Gegenständen überhaupt Gegenständen
als Bedingun- überhaupt entialalscognition
Bedingun- underlie
entialall cognition
such ex- underlie all such ex-
gen a priori aller Erfahrungserkenntniß
gen a priori aller Erfahrungserkenntniß
perience: consequently perience:
the objective
consequently the objective
zum Grunde liegen: zum folglich
Grunde wird liegen:
die validity
folglich ofwird the die
categories
validityas of a priori
the categories as a priori
objective Gültigkeit der objective
CategorienGültigkeit als der Categorien
concepts would als be based
concepts
on this: would
that be based on this: that
225 Begriffe a priori 225 darauf beruhen,
Begriffe a priori daßdarauf only beruhen,
by them daß would only
experience
by them (ac-would experience (ac-
durch sie allein Erfahrung durch(der sie Form
allein Erfahrung
des cording (der to Formthe des
form cording
of thinking) to the be formB126 (ll. 227–32):
of thinking) beKantB126states (ll.the
227–32):
key aim Kant
of the
statesDeduction,
the key aim to demonstrate
of the Deduction, that the toademonstrate
priori that the a priori
Denkens nach) möglich Denkens
sei. Denn nach) als- möglich sei. Denn
possible. For inals-this case
possible.
they For neces- in thiscategories
case theyare objectively
neces- categories
valid because
are objectively
they alone validrender
because experience
they alone possible
renderinexperience
regard to possible in regard to
dann beziehen sie sich dann nothwendiger
beziehen sie sich nothwendiger
sarily and a priori connect sarilythemselves the very
and a priori connect themselves form of thought;
the very
that form
only by
of using
thought;the that
categories
only by can
using
any the
object
categories
of experience
can anybeobject of experience be
Weise und a priori aufWeise Gegenstände
und a priori der auftoGegenstände der to objects
objects of experience, becauseofonly at all thought
experience, because only (l. 232) as
at an
all object.
thought This
(l. 232)
principle
as an object.
is Kant’s This keyprinciple
to the entire
is Kant’s
Deduction
key to (ll.
the entire Deduction (ll.
230 Erfahrung, weil 230 nurErfahrung,
vermittelst weil ihrernur byvermittelst
their mediation ihrer can byanytheirobject
mediation
of 233–43).
can Sceptics
any object of and 233–43).
critical enquirers
Sceptics may and already
critical enquirers
ask, why think may already
that such ask,thoughts
why think mustthat such thoughts must
überhaupt irgend einüberhaupt Gegenstand irgend der einexperience
Gegenstand be atder
all thought.
experience be at all thought.be either accurate or justified
be either oraccurate
justifiable?or justified
These questions
or justifiable?
are crucial,
These questions
but they are
are not
crucial, but they are not
Erfahrung gedacht werden Erfahrung
kann. gedacht werden kann. Kant’s topic in the Deduction! Kant’s topic Althoughin the he Deduction!
does illustrateAlthough (§26)hehow does andillustrate
why proper (§26)usehowofand why proper use of
Die transscendentale Die Deduction
transscendentale
aller Deduction
The aller deduction
transcendental The transcendental
of all the categories
deduction of all is necessary
the categories
for any humanly
is necessarypossible
for any
experience
humanly of possible
any particulars,
experience at of
theany particulars, at the
Begriffe a priori hat also ein Principium,
Begriffe a priori hat also ein Principium, very end of the Deduction;
very end
proof of that
the Deduction;
those illustrations
proof that
are those
justified
illustrations
is provided, are byjustified
design, is provided, by design,
a priori concepts thus ahas priori
a principle
concepts thus has a principle
in the Analytic of Principles, in the Analytic
includingofthe Principles,
Refutation including
of [material]
the Refutation
Idealism. of [material] Idealism.
235 worauf die ganze 235 Nachforschung
worauf die ganze gerich-Nachforschung
by which the gerich-
whole enquiry
by which must the be whole enquiry must be
26 26 27 27
26 27
 tet werden muß, nämlich
tet werden
dieses: muß,
daß sie
nämlich dieses:
guided, daß this:
namely sie that
guided,
they namely
must bethis: that they must be
als der
als Bedingungen a priori Möglichkeit
Bedingungen a priori der Möglichkeit
recognised to be a priori
recognised
conditions to of
be a priori conditions of
Kant’s pronoun, ihr (l.Kant’s 239) ispronoun,
not plural,
ihrbut
(l. 239)
feminie
is notsingular
plural,dative:
but feminie
‘her’; itsingular
refers back
dative:
to ‘her’; it refers back to
der Erfahrung erkannt derwerden
Erfahrungmüssen
erkanntthewerden müssen
possibility of experience
the possibility
(whetherof experience (whether
conditions found within conditions
sensory intuition
found within
(Anschauung,
sensory fem.).
intuition (Anschauung, fem.).
(es sei der Anschauung,
(es die
sei in
derihr
Anschauung,
ange- of die in ihr in
intuition, ange-
which oftheyintuition,
are met,inorwhich they are met, or
240 troffen wird, oder240
destroffen
Denkens).
wird,Begrif-
oder des of
Denkens).
thinking).Begrif-
Concepts of which
thinking).
afford B126which
Concepts (ll. 240–7):
affordKantB126 contrasts
(ll. 240–7):
the Deduction
Kant contrasts
to anythe examination
Deductionoftoexperiences
any examinationwithin of experiences within
fe, die den objectivenfe,Grund
die denderobjectiven
Mög- the Grund der Mög-
objective ground theof the
objective
possibil- which any category
ground of the possibil- may
which
be instantiated;
any category this
may stresses
be instantiated;
yet again the
thisdistinctive
stresses yet modality
again the
ofdistinctive
the modality of the
lichkeit der Erfahrunglichkeit
abgeben,
der sind
Erfahrung
e- ityabgeben, sind e-
of experience are for
ity that very rea- areclaims
of experience for thatat very
issue rea-
in the Deduction,
claims at issue
in contrast
in the Deduction,
to the ineluctable
in contrast
contingencies
to the ineluctable
involvedcontingencies
in any involved in any
ben darum nothwendig. ben Die
darum Entwicke-
nothwendig.sonDie Entwicke-
necessary. However,sonunravelling illustrative
necessary. However,
- instances.
unravelling - To
illustrative
this contrast
instances.
belongs
To Kant’s
this contrast
concern belongs
about Kant’s
the ‘dignity’
concernor (modal
about the ‘dignity’ or (modal
lung der Erfahrung aber,
lungworin
der Erfahrung
sie ange- aber,
the worin sie ange-
experience in whichthethey
experience and justificatory)
found isin which they found is status
and
of the
justificatory)
concept ‘cause’
status (B124,
of the l. 171).
concept ‘cause’ (B124, l. 171).

245 troffen werden, ist245nicht

troffen
ihre werden,
Deduction ist nicht
notihre
theirDeduction
deduction not (thattheir
is rather
deductionB126–7
(that (ll.
is 247–53):
rather Kant’s
B126–7 stress
(ll. 247–53):
upon theKant’s
possiblestress
‘connection’
upon the (Beziehung)
possible ‘connection’
of a priori cate-
(Beziehung) of a priori cate-
(sondern Illustration), (sondern
weil sieIllustration),
dabei their weilillustration),
sie dabei since theirin illustration),
that way since goriesinto that waywhere
objects, gories
thesetomust objects,
be (ifwhere
indeed
thesethere
must
be be
any(iffor
indeed
us human
there beings)
be any for objects
us human beings) objects
doch nur zufällig seyn dochwürden.
nur zufällig
Ohne seyn theywürden.
would yet Ohneremaintheymerely
would contin-
yet remain merely contin-
of experience, underscores
of experience,
his concern underscores
with usinghis concepts
concerninwith connection
using concepts
with, i.e.,ininconnection
deic- with, i.e., in deic-
diese ursprüngliche Beziehung [B127] auf Beziehung
diese ursprüngliche gent. Without[B127] auf
this original connec-this tic
gent. Without reference
original to, objects
connec- tic we
reference
can perceive.
to, objects
Thisweis Tetens’s
can perceive.
pointThisaboutis ‘realising’
Tetens’s point
concepts,
about ‘realising’ concepts,
mögliche Erfahrung, in mögliche
welcherErfahrung,
alle Ge- intion welcher alle Ge-
to possible experience,
tion to inpossible and Kant’s
which experience, point about
in which and‘objective
Kant’s point reality’
about
and ‘objective
‘objective reality’
validity’,andboth
‘objective
of whichvalidity’,
concern both of which concern
250 genstände der Erkenntniß
250 genstände vorkommen,
der Erkenntnißoccur vorkommen,
all objects of occurcognition, their ofpossible
all objects reference
cognition, their to actual
possible particulars
referencewhichto actual
we canparticulars
locate, discriminate,
which we canidentify
locate, anddiscriminate,
ex- identify and ex-
würde die Beziehungwürde derselben
die Beziehung
auf ir- connection
derselben auf to anyir- object
connection
whatsoever perience.
to any object whatsoever perience.
gend ein Object gar nicht
gend begriffen
ein Object wer-
gar nicht
couldbegriffen
not at allwer-be comprehended.
could not at all […]be comprehended. […]
den können. den können.[… B128] [… B128]
Vorher will ich nur nochVorher diewill
Erklä-
ich nur Consider
noch die firstErklä-the explication 128 (ll. 254–60):
the the Bexplication
Consideroffirst of the Kant B128explicates
(ll. 254–60):
the categories:
Kant explicates
They arethe each
categories:
concepts Theyof are
an object
each concepts
as of an object as
255 rung der Categorien
255 rung
voranschicken.
der Categorien
Sie voranschicken.
categories. TheySieare categories.
concepts ofThey an aresuch, by which
concepts any intuited
of an such, by object
which (anyanysensed
intuited
particular)
object (any
can sensed
be determined
particular)(specified)
can be determined
in (specified) in
sind Begriffe von einem sindGegenstande
Begriffe vonü-einem Gegenstande
object as such, by ü- which
objectits as
intuition regard to one
such, by which its intuition or another
regard
of the
to one
formal
or another
aspects of logical
the formal
functions
aspects ofofjudgment.
logical functions
On Kant’s
of judgment. On Kant’s
berhaupt, dadurch dessenberhaupt,Anschauung
dadurch dessen Anschauung
in respect of one or morein respect
of theoflogi- Table of logical
one or more of the logi- functions
Table of of
judgment
logical functions
see Wolff of
(2017).
judgment see Wolff (2017).
in Ansehung einer der in logischen
Ansehung Func- einer dercallogischen
functionsFunc- of judgment
cal functions
is regarded of judgment is regarded
tionen zu Urtheilen alstionen
bestimmt
zu Urtheilen
angese- alsasbestimmt
determinate.angese-Thus asthedeterminate.
function of Thus the function of
B128–9 (ll. 260–77): Kant B128–9remarks
(ll. 260–77):
on how,Kant in a categorical
remarks onjudgment,
how, in a which
categorical
concept
judgment,
is usedwhich concept is used
260 hen wird. So war 260die hen
Function
wird. des
So war
cate-die Function des cate-
the categorical judgmenttheiscategorical
that of thejudgment is that of the
as the subject term andaswhich the subject
as thetermpredicate
and which
can beasindifferent,
the predicate or they
can be canindifferent,
be converted, or they can be converted,
gorischen Urtheils diegorischen
des Verhältnißes
Urtheils dierelation
des Verhältnißes
of subject torelation
predicate,of subject
e.g., to predicate, e.g.,
per Aristotle’s Square of perOppositions.
Aristotle’s SquareHere Kant
of Oppositions.
shrewdly exploits
Here Kant the existential
shrewdly exploits
presuppo- the existential presuppo-
des Subjects zum Prädicat,
des Subjectsz. B. zumalle Prädicat,
all bodies z. are
B. alle
divisible.
all bodies
However areindivisible. However in
sitions of Aristoteliansitions
syllogistic
of Aristotelian
for epistemological
syllogisticinsight,
for epistemological
noting that the insight,
mere noting
logical that the mere logical
Körper sind theilbar. Allein
KörperinsindAnsehung
theilbar. Allein
regardintoAnsehung
the mere logical
regarduse to of
thethe
mere inter-convertibility
logical use of the of inter-convertibility
subject and predicate of subject
terms isand abandoned
predicatebyterms
judgingis abandoned
any sensedby ob-judging any sensed ob-
des bloß logischen Gebrauchs
des bloß logischen
des Ver- Gebrauchs
understanding des Ver-
it remains
understanding
unspecified,it remains unspecified,
ject to be a substance jectexhibiting
to be asome substance
feature
exhibiting
(now ascribed
some feature
to, or predicated
(now ascribed of it,to,byorthepredicated of it, by the
265 standes blieb es 265unbestimmt,
standes blieb welchem
es unbestimmt,
to which welchem
of the twotoconcepts
which ofone the two conceptsillustrative
exemplary, one exemplary,
categoricalillustrative
judgment).categorical
On Aristotle’s
judgment).
logicalOn square,
Aristotle’s
see Parsons
logical square, see Parsons
von beyden Begriffen von beyden
[B129] die Function
Begriffen [may die Function
B129] assign the functionmayofassignthe sub-
the function
(2015).of the sub- (2015).
des Subjects, und welchem
des Subjects,
die des Prädi-
und welchemject, die
anddes to Prädi-
which that ject,
of and
the to
predi-
which that of the predi-
cats man geben wolle.cats Denn
manman geben kannwolle.cate.
DennFor man onekann can also
cate. say:
For Some
one can also say: Some
auch sagen: Einiges auch Theilbare
sagen:istEiniges
ein divisibles
Theilbareareistbodies.
ein However,
divisibles by arethe
bodies. However, by the
270 Körper. Durch die 270 Categorie
Körper. Durchder Sub- die Categorie
category der Sub- category
of substance, if I subsume
of substance, if I subsume
stanz aber, wenn ichstanz den Begriff
aber, wenn einesich under
den Begriff eines under
it the concept of a body,it theitconcept
is of a body, it is

28 28 29 29
28 29
 Körpers
Körpers darunter
darunter bringe,
bringe,
Körperswird eses be-
wirddarunter specified:
be- bringe, wirdthat
specified: es its
that its empirical
be- empirical intuition
specified:intuition
that its empirical
3.3 §15: intuition 3.3 §15:
Of the Possibility of a Of the Possibility
Combination of a Combination as such.
as such.
stimmt:
stimmt: daß
Körpers daß seine
seine empirische
darunter empirische
stimmt:
bringe, Anschau-
daß
wirdAnschau-
esseine inspecified:
inexperience
be- empirische thatmust
Anschau-
experience must always
always be regard-
in experience
its empirical beintuition
regard-
must always be regard-
§15 begins Kant’s Second §15 begins
SectionKant’s Second
(Abschnitt), Section
titled (Abschnitt), titled
‘Transcendental ‘Transcendental
Deduction of the PureDeduction of the Pure
ung
ung ininder
derErfahrung
Erfahrung immer
ung
immer in nur
der
nur als Sub-
Erfahrung
als Sub- ed only
immer
ed as
nur
only as subject,
als Sub-
subject,
stimmt: daß seine empirische Anschau- in experience must always be regard- never
never
ed as
only
as a a
asmere
mere
subject, never as a mere
Concepts ofYet
Concepts of the Understanding’. theeleven
Understanding’. Yet eleven
more §§ continue more §§
to prepare forcontinue to prepare for §26: ‘Transcen-
§26: ‘Transcen-
ject, in
275 ung niemals als bloßes
der Erfahrung ject,
Prädicat
275 immer niemals
nur betrach-
alsals
Sub- predicate;
bloßesed only asand
Prädicat
predicate; likewise
betrach-
and likewise
subject, ininas
never allallaother
predicate; other
and likewise
mere dentalindeduction
all otherof thedental deduction
universally of the
possible universallyuse
experiential possible
of theexperiential
pure concepts use of
of the
the un-
pure concepts of the un-
tet werden müsse; und tetso
werden
in allenmüsse; categories.
übri- und so in allen
categories.
predicate; andübri- categories.
likewise in all other derstanding’; in §21 Kantderstanding’;
remarks thatin §21 Kanthas
a start remarks that a on
been made start
thehas been made
Deduction (B144, ll. Deduction (B144, ll.
on the
gen Categorien. gen Categorien. categories. 703–6), i.e., in the first703–6),
part ofi.e.,
that
in very
the first
Remark
part (i.e.,
of that
§21).very
§§15–21,
Remarkat (i.e.,
least,§21).
are expressly
§§15–21, at least, are expressly
Zweiter Abschnitt. preparatory. preparatory.
Zweiter Abschnitt.
Zweiter Abschnitt.Zweiter
Transscendentale
Abschnitt. Second
Transscendentale
Second Section. Transcendental
Section. Second Section.
De- Transcendental De-
Deduction der reinenDeduction
Verstandesbe-
der reinen Verstandesbe-
duction of the Pure duction
Conceptsof of B129 Concepts
the Pure (l. 283): Kant’s
of term
B129‘manifold’
(l. 283): Kant’s
simplyterm
designates
‘manifold’
somesimply
(unspecified)
designates
plurality
some (unspecified)
or vari- plurality or vari-
Second Section.
280
280 griffe. 280 griffe. the Understanding. the Understanding.ety; which kind is specified ety; whichby context.
kind is Here
specifiedit is by
a plurality
context.ofHere representations
it is a plurality within
of representations
sen- within sen-
sory intuition. (Below sory Kantintuition.
comments (Below
on a Kantmanifold commentsof representations
on a manifold whichof representations
are concepts which are concepts
280 § 15. Von der Möglichkeit
§ 15. Von einerderVer- Möglichkeit
§ 15. Ofeiner Ver- § 15.
the Possibility of Ofa Combi-
the Possibility of a Combi-
integrated within someintegrated
candidatewithin someB129,
judgment; ll. 299–303).
candidate judgment; Here B129,
(ll. 285–6)
ll. 299–303).
Kant stresses
Here (ll. 285–6) Kant stresses
bindung überhaupt. bindung überhaupt. nation as such. nation as such.
that mere sensibility isthat merely
merereceptive
sensibility(i.e.,
is merely
receptive receptive
to sensory (i.e., stimulations
receptive to resulting
sensory stimulations
in resulting in
Das Mannigfaltige derDas Vorstellungen
Mannigfaltige der TheVorstellungen
manifold of representations
The manifold of representations
sensations). sensations).
kann in einer Anschauungkann gegeben
in einer Anschauung
wer- can be gegeben
given in wer-an intuition
can be which
given in is an intuition which is
285 den, die bloß sinnlich,
285 den, d.i.die nichts
bloß sinnlich,
als merely d.i. sensuous,
nichts alsi.e., merely
nothingsensuous,
but re- i.e., B129 (ll. 283–90):
nothing but re- Kant’s
B129 term
(ll. ‘representation’
283–90): Kant’s (Vorstellung),
term ‘representation’
especially(Vorstellung),
when used in especially
sensory when used in sensory
Empfänglichkeit ist, undEmpfänglichkeit
die Form dieser ist, und die Form
ceptivity, anddieser
the form ceptivity,
of thisand intu-the formor perceptual contexts,
of this intu- or must
perceptual
be handled
contexts, carefully.
must be Withinhandledphilosophy
carefully.ofWithin perception,
philosophy
the of perception, the
priori in unserem
Anschauung kann a Anschauung kann a priori
ition can in lie
unserem
a priori inition
our capacity
can lie aof sense of Kant’s
priori in our capacity of term often
sense would
of Kant’s
better
termbe often
conveyed would by better
‘presentation’
be conveyed than by
by ‘presentation’
‘representa- than by ‘representa-
VorstellungsvermögenVorstellungsvermögen
liegen, ohne doch representing,
liegen, ohne doch without representing,
however being without tion’, which being
however to Anglophone
tion’, which
readerstoreadily
Anglophonesuggestsreaders
an indirect
readilytheory
suggestsof perception.
an indirect Kant theory of perception. Kant
etwas andres als die Artetwas
zu seyn,
andreswiealsdas
die Art zu seyn,other
anything wie dasthan how
anything
the subject holds a
other than how the subject direct critical holds
(rather a direct
than naïve)
critical realism
(rather about
than naïve)
sensory realism
perception.about This
sensory
is one
perception. This is one
290 Subject afficirt wird.
290 Allein
Subject dieafficirt
V e r b wird.
i n - Allein die V e rYet
is affected. b i nthe
- combination
is affected.(con- Yet theconsequence
combination (of con-not mistaking
consequence sensations
of not for mistaking
objectssensations
of self-conscious
for objects awareness,
of self-conscious
but in- awareness, but in-
d u n g (conjunctio) eines
d u nMannigfaltigen
g (conjunctio) eines Mannigfaltigen
junctio ) of this manifold as )such
junctio of this stead treating
canmanifold as such can sensationsstead as treating
sub-personal
sensations
factors as insub-personal
sensory awareness
factors of
in sensory
other particulars
awareness of other particulars
überhaupt kann niemals überhaupt
durch Sinne
kann niemals
in never durchenterSinne
us by in thenever
senses enter (whether
andussoby the senses and so in one’s surroundings
(whether in
or one’s
within surroundings
one’s own body).
or within
This one’s
view own
is common
body). This
to Reid,
view is common to Reid,
Tetens, Roy Wood Sellars, Tetens, Chisholm,
Roy Wood Wilfrid
Sellars,
Sellars
Chisholm,
and (e.g.)Wilfrid
Dretske. Sellars
Birdand rightly
(e.g.)emphasi-
Dretske. Bird rightly emphasi-
uns kommen und kann unsalsokommen
auch nicht
und kann alsoalsoas auch
suchnichtcannotalso be ascontained
such cannot be contained
ses Kant’s espousing this view; cf.espousing
ses Kant’s below, §5. this(Kant’s
view; cf. direct
below,perceptual
§5. (Kant’s realismdirect
holds
perceptual
both realism holds both
in der reinen Form der in dersinnlichen
reinen FormAn- der within
sinnlichen
the pureAn- form within
of sensorythe pure
intu- form of sensory intu-
within his own ‘empirical withinrealism’,
his own and‘empirical
also if hisrealism’,
transcendentaland alsoidealism
if his transcendental
be rejected.) idealism be rejected.)
295 schauung zugleich 130] mit enthalten
295[Bschauung zugleich [B130]ition;mitfor enthalten
it is an actusition;
of spontaneity
for it is an actus of spontaneity
seyn; denn sie ist ein seyn;
Actusdennder Sponta-
sie ist ein Actus
of theder Sponta-
capacity to represent
of the capacity 129 (ll. 283–317):
and, in to Brepresent and, in Kant B129 sharply
(ll. 283–317):
contrastsKantthe passivity
sharply contrasts
and manifold the passivity
characterand or content
manifoldofcharacter or content of
neität der Vorstellungskraft,
neität derundVorstellungskraft,
da man contradistinction sensibility, one tosensory
und da manto contradistinction intuition
sensibility, oneto thesensory
spontaneity
intuition
(activity)
to the and spontaneity
discriminating,
(activity) integrating,
and discriminating,
synthetic con-integrating, synthetic con-
diese zum Unterschiede diesevon zumderUnterschiede
Sinn- mustvon callderthisSinn-
understanding;
must callitthis joining or
thusunderstanding; it thusbinding (Verbinden)
joining or
effected
binding by (Verbinden)
intellect. Hiseffected
remarks by carve
intellect.
throughHis remarks
a host of
carve
intri-through a host of intri-
lichkeit Verstand nennenlichkeit
muß,Verstand
so ist alle nennen muß,that
follows so istallalle
combination
follows that– whe- cate issues –and
all combination optionscate
whe- which
issuesrequire
and options
and receive whichmore requireextensive
and receive
treatment morethroughout
extensive treatment
the throughout the
300 Verbindung, wir 300 mögen
Verbindung,
uns ihrerwirbe-mögen ther uns
we are ihrer be- ther
conscious of itweor are
not,conscious
be Transcendental
of it or not, beAnalytic.
Transcendental
Kant’s key points
Analytic.stand Kant’s
independently
key points ofstand
issues independently
about sensory of at-
issues about sensory at-
wußt werden oder nicht, wußt es werden
mag eine
oder nicht, es mag eineof the
it a combination it a manifold
combination in ofomism, though Kant
the manifold in rightly
omism,raises though issues
Kant aboutrightly
what raises
are issues
now calledaboutthe what ‘binding
are now problems’
called the ‘binding problems’
Verbindung des Mannigfaltigen
Verbindungder desAn- Mannigfaltigen
intuition orderinAn- severalintuition
concepts, or and in perception,
in several concepts, and concerningin perception,
how sensory
concerning
intake canhow be sensory
integrated intake
at anycanone be time
integrated
within atany
any one time within any
schauung oder mancherleyschauungBegriffe,
oder und
mancherley
in theBegriffe,
former case und be init athe
sensory
former orcase one sensory
a be it a sensory or amodality, one
and sensory
again synchronically
modality, and across
again sensory
synchronically
modalities;across and sensory
likewise modalities;
how and likewise how
it can be integrated over it can
timebewithin
integrated
any oneoversensory
time within modality,
any oneand sensory
again diachronically
modality, andac-again diachronically ac-
an der ersteren deran sinnlichen
der ersteren oder dernon-sensory
sinnlichen intuition
oder non-sensory
– is an act intuition
of – is an act of
ross sensory modalities. rossHowever
sensory those
modalities.
issues However
are resolved, thoseKant’s
issueskey arepoint
resolved,
pertains
Kant’sto in-
key point pertains to in-
305 nichtsinnlichen Anschauung
305 nichtsinnlichen
seyn, eine Anschauung seyn, eine to which
the understanding the understanding
we would to which we would
formation extraction, how formation
sensory extraction,
information howcan sensory
be, toinformation
speak with can Dretske,
be, todecoded
speak with so Dretske, decoded so
Verstandeshandlung, Verstandeshandlung,
die wir mit der all- die givewirthemit der all-
general appellation
give theofgeneral
synthe- appellation of synthe-
31
31 31
30
30 30
31 31
30
 gemeinen Benennunggemeinen S y n t h e sBenennung
i s bele- sis, S y nsot hase sto
i s mark
bele- expressly,
sis, so asthat to we that we arethat
mark expressly, ableweto sense
thatour we surroundings
are able to sense (or also our surroundings
our proprioception), (or alsoand ouryet proprioception),
again, how and yet again, how
gen würden, um dadurch gen würden,
zugleichum be-dadurch
cannotzugleich
represent be-anything
cannotasrepresent
bound anything information can be extracted
as bound information fromcan andbeexploited
extractedinfrom express and judgments,
exploited inbeliefs express or judgments,
claims beliefs or claims
merklich zu machen, merklich
daß wir uns zu machen,
nichts daß wir uns
together nichts
within an object,
together whichwithinwe an about
object,what which we perceive
we about
in our whatsurroundings
we perceive(orinalso our within
surroundingsour own (orbodies).
also withinHereour especially
own bodies). Here especially
310 als im Object verbunden310 als imvorstellen
Object verbunden
kön- havevorstellen not firstkön- ourselves
have boundnot first Kant’s bound
to- ourselves discernment to- ofKant’s
these discernment
issues about of processes
these issuesof sensory
about integration
processes of(quid sensory
facti) integration
pose (quid facti) pose
nen, ohne es vorher selbst nen, ohne
verbunden
es vorherzu selbst
gether, verbunden
and among zu all gether,
representations
and among all important issues of how
representations important
our sensory-perceptual
issues of how our systems
sensory-perceptual
function, which systems
pose yet function,
more im- which pose yet more im-
haben, und unter allenhaben, Vorstellungen
und unterdieallencombination
Vorstellungenisdie uniquely
combination
that which portant epistemological
is uniquely that which portant
issues epistemological
(quid iuris) of how
issues our (quid
judgmental
iuris) of capacities
how our judgmental
can accurately capacities can accurately
Verbindung die einzige Verbindung
ist, die die nichteinzige
cannot ist, bedie
givennichtby objects,
cannotbut be rather and justifiedly
given by objects, but rather exploit and
information
justifiedlyextractedexploit information
from sufficiently extracted reliablefrom andsufficiently
accurate sensory reliable and accurate sensory
durch Objecte gegeben, durchsondern
Objecte nur gegeben, sondern
is effected onlynur by theis subject
effecteditself, perception.
only by the subject itself, Most importantly,
perception. Kant Most soonimportantly,
stresses (B 131n.,
Kant ll.
soon 334–49)
stresses that
(B 131n.,
for us ll.to334–49)
think that for us to think
315 vom Subjecte selbst 315 vom
verrichtet
Subjecte werden
selbst because
verrichtetit is werden
an actus because
of its own an actusanything
it isself- of its own whatsoever
self- about
anything anywhatsoever
sensed particular about any at allsensed
requires particular
discerning, at alldifferentiating,
requires discerning, differentiating,
kann, weil sie ein Actus kann,seiner
weil sie Selbst-
ein Actus seiner
activity. HereSelbst-
it is readily
activity.
understood identifying
Here it is readily understood and integrated
identifying
some plurality
and integrated
of its features
some plurality
so as toof form
its features
any, evenso as
candidate
to form any, even candidate
cognitive judgment about cognitivethat particular.
judgmentThis about intellectual,
that particular.
judgmental
This intellectual,
achievement, judgmental
whateverachievement, whatever
thätigkeit ist. Man wird thätigkeit
hier leicht
ist. Mange- wirdthathier thisleicht
actionge-must thatoriginally
this action be must originally be
concepts (classifications) concepts
it invokes, (classifications)
involves both it invokes,
analysis involves
and synthesis; both analysis
it holdsand independ-
synthesis; it holds independ-
wahr, daß diese Handlung wahr, ursprünglich
daß diese Handlung strictlyursprünglich
one and is equally strictlyvalid
oneforand all is equally valid for all
ently of questions about entlywhether
of questionsor howabout such ‘unity’
whether amongst
or howdiverse such ‘unity’ aspects amongst
or features diverse of aspects or features of
einig und für alle Verbindung
einig und gleichgel-
für alle Verbindung
combination, gleichgel-
and thatcombination,
the resolution, and that the resolution,
things may (not) ‘enter’things our cognizance
may (not) ‘enter’ via ourour sensory
cognizance
channels. via our sensory channels.
320 tend seyn müsse, 320 und tend
daß dieseyn Auflösung,
müsse, und daß die Auflösung,
analysis, which seems analysis,
to be itswhich oppo-seems to be its oppo-
A n a l y s i s , die ihr Gegentheil
A n a l y s i s ,zudieseyn
ihr Gegentheil zu seynalways
site, nevertheless site,presupposes
nevertheless always B130 presupposes
(ll. 290–317): Kant B130 stresses
(ll. 290–317):
his key Kantpoint,stressesthat anyhisand keyallpoint,
connectingthat any (Verbindung)
and all connectingas (Verbindung) as
scheint, sie doch jederzeitscheint,voraussetze;
sie doch jederzeit it; for voraussetze;
where understanding it; for wherehas not such is a spontaneous
understanding has not such
act of is our
a spontaneous
capacity to act represent,
of our capacity
an act oftointellection,
represent, an regardless
act of intellection,
of regardless of
denn wo der Verstanddenn vorherwonichts
der Verstand
ver- already
vorher nichts ver- there
conjoined, alreadyit cannot
conjoined, whether
at there it cannot at(i) we are conscious
whether of(i) thewe connecting
are conscious or not,
of the
(ii) connecting
the connected or not,
manifold
(ii) the beconnected
intu- manifold be intu-
bunden hat, da kann er bunden
auch nichts
hat, daauf- kann erallauch nichts
disjoin, auf- as
inasmuch all only
disjoin,
through
inasmuch
it itive (sensory)
as only through oritmay itive
be a (sensory)
plurality of or concepts,
may be a (iii) plurality
whether of concepts,
a form of(iii) intuition
whether is sensory
a form of intuition is sensory
325 lösen, weil es nur325d ulösen,
r c h i weil
h n als es nur
ver- d ucan
r c hanything
i h n als asver- combined
can anything
be offered or non-sensory.
as combined be offered Human or intuiting
non-sensory. is sensory;
Human Kant intuiting
sets aside
is sensory;
the last Kant
option, sets but
aside eachthe oflasttheoption, but each of the
bunden der Vorstellungskraft
bunden der hat Vorstellungskraft
gege- to our power hat gege-
of representing.
to our power of representing. others is central to KdrV, othersand is especially:
central to KdrV, whether andweespecially:
are conscious whether of various
we are factors
conscious re- of various factors re-
ben werden können. ben werden können. quired of, or involved quired
in our of,
cognisance
or involved is IRinrelevant:
our ‘transparency
cognisance is IR relevant:
of consciousness’
‘transparency is a of consciousness’ is a
Aber der Begriff der AberVerbindung
der Begriff der Verbindung
However, the conceptHowever,of combina- Cartesian
the concept of combina- myth, followed
Cartesian
faithfully myth, by Hume,
followed which
faithfully
by-passes
by Hume,
Kant’s which
key issue:
by-passesHow Kant’s
are we key issue: How are we
at all able to achieve self-conscious
at all able to achieve awareness? self-conscious
Kant’s KdrV awareness?
is guidedKant’s by thisKdrV insight:is guided
‘Now by this insight: ‘Now
führt außer dem Begriffe führtdes außer
Mannigfal-
dem Begriffe tiondes Mannigfal-
carries with it, besides
tion carriesthe con-with it, besides the con-
it is indeed very enlightening,it is indeed thatvery whatever
enlightening,
I must presuppose
that whatever in Iorder
mustatpresuppose
all to knowin any order at all to know any
330 tigen und der Synthesis330 tigendesselben
und der noch Synthesis cept desselben
of the noch manifold ceptand of of the itsmanifold and of its
object, cannot itself beobject, knowncannot as object itself
[…]be’ (Aknown
402). as object […]’ (A402).
den der Einheit desselben den derbeyEinheit
sich. Ver- desselben bey sich.
synthesis, alsoVer-the concept
synthesis, of also
their the concept of their
bindung ist Vorstellung bindung
der s yistn tVorstellung
h e t i - unity. der Combination
s y n t h e t i - isunity.
representation
Combination Bis 130representation
(ll. 306–33): KantB130 approaches
(ll. 306–33): moreKant closely approaches
his ultimate more pointclosely
by stressing
his ultimate that point
knowing by stressing that knowing
s c h e n Einheit des Mannigfaltigen.*
s c h e n Einheit[B131] des Mannigfaltigen.*
of the synthetic[Bunity131] ofof the synthetic unity any
a manifold.* of a object
manifold.* requires recognising
any objectthat requires
withinrecognising
it various features
that within or aspects
it various arefeatures
integrated, or aspects
but are integrated, but
* Ob die Vorstellungen * Ob selbst
die Vorstellungen
identisch * Whether selbst identisch
the representations
* Whether are our representing any
the representations are suchourintegration
representing of anya such
plurality integration
of features of awithin
plurality anyofone features
particularwithin re-any one particular re-
335 sind, und also eine335durchsind,dieundandere
also eine
ana- durch die andere ana-
themselves identical, so themselves
that the identical,
one quires that
so that the onewe differentiate
quires those
that we
features
differentiate
and re-integrate
those features
them so
and asre-integrate
to ascribe them so
all as
to to ascribe them all to
lytisch könne gedacht lytischwerden,
könne das gedacht
through werden, das can
the other through be thought that particular
the other can be thought insofar as
that we particular
recognise insofar
these as
features
we recognise
to be integral
these features
to it. Any to particular
be integral is to
an it. Any particular is an
kommt hier nicht inkommt Betrachtung.
hier nicht Das in analytically,
Betrachtung.is Das not pertinent
analytically, actual synthetic
here. isIn-not pertinent here. In- unity of
actual
manifoldsynthetic features;
unity both
of manifoldsensoryfeatures;
perception, both and sensory
also knowing
perception, or re-and also knowing or re-
Bewußtseyn der einenBewußtseynist, so fernder vom einensofar
ist, soas fern vom here
the topic sofaris the
as themani- cognising
topic here is the mani- that particular,
cognising
require that
actually
particular,
integrating require (synthesising)
actually integrating
at least (synthesising)
some of its sev-
at least some of its sev-
Mannigfaltigen die Rede Mannigfaltigen
ist, vom Be- die Redefold, ist, vom Be- offold,
consciousness the consciousness
one is of eral features.
of the one isThat of ‘we’eral
actively
features. integrate
That ‘we’sensory actively
intakeintegrate
does not sensory
entail intake
that wedoes do not so self-
entail that we do so self-
340 wußtseyn der anderen 340 wußtseyn
doch immer der anderen
zu course doch immeralways zu to becoursedistinguished consciously;
always to be distinguished sensory integration
consciously; is sensory
active, yet
integration
entirely sub-personal;
is active, yet entirely
express sub-personal;
cognitive judg- express cognitive judg-
unterscheiden, und aufunterscheiden,
die Synthesis und die- auffrom
die Synthesis
consciousness die- offrom the other,
consciousness
and ment is self-conscious,
of the other, and ment
but may
is self-conscious,
involve or require
but may
many involve
further or implicit
require features
many further
or aspects
implicit features or aspects
of judging. Kant here of stresses
judging. the Kantspontaneous
here stresses act ofthe judgmental
spontaneous synthesis
act ofor judgmental
integrationsynthesisof or integration of
ses (möglichen) Bewußtseynsses (möglichen)
kommt Bewußtseyns
es the sole kommt concerneshere the is thesolesynthesis
concern here is the synthesis
32 32 33 33
32 33
 hier allein an. hier allein an. of this (possible) consciousness. conceived (classified) features
of this (possible) consciousness. conceived of (classified)
any one object features
judgedof any(ll. 299–17).
one object Such
judged
spontaneous
(ll. 299–17).judg-Such spontaneous judg-
Die Vorstellung dieser DieEinheit
Vorstellung
kann dieser TheEinheit kann of The
representation this representation
unity can mental
of thisintegration
unity can holds mental
for any
integration
and all holds
forms for of judging,
any and and all forms
whatever of judging,
conceptsand arewhatever
inte- concepts are inte-
345 also nicht aus der345
Verbindung
also nichtentstehen,
aus der Verbindung
thus notentstehen, thus not arisera-fromgrated
arise from conjunction; within a judgment
conjunction; ra- grated
(ll. 317–20).
within a judgment (ll. 317–20).
sie macht vielmehr dadurch,
sie macht daßvielmehr
sie zur dadurch,
ther, bydaß sie zur
coming to thether,
representation
by coming to the representation
B131n. (ll. 334–43): Kant’s B131n.footnote
(ll. 334–43):
(*) rightly
Kant’sstresses
footnote that(*)therightly
relevant
stresses
syntheses
that the concern
relevant syntheses concern
Vorstellung des Mannigfaltigen
Vorstellung hinzu-des Mannigfaltigen
of the manifold, hinzu- [thisof the unity]manifold,
first [thisown
our unity] first whether
judgments, our ownthese judgments,
concernwhether
specifications,
these concernmarks or specifications,
Merkmale within marksany or Merkmale within any
kommt, den Begriff der kommt,
Verbindung
den Begriffal- dermakesVerbindung
possible al-the concept
makes possible
of com- the one concept of com-
concept (intension), oneorconcept
aspects (intension),
of any one particular,
or aspectsincluding
of any onethose particular,
whichincluding
can only those
be which can only be
lererst möglich. Dieselererst
Einheit,möglich.
die a prio-
Diese bination.
Einheit, die This unity, bination.
a prio- which precedesThis unity,distinguished
which precedes by reason distinguished
because there by is
reason
no realbecause
distinction
there between
is no realthem distinction
(e.g., colour
betweenand them (e.g., colour and
350 ri vor allen Begriffen
350 ri der
vor Verbindung
allen Begriffena priori
der Verbindung
all concepts of acombination,
priori all concepts
is of combination,
extension), is
or various extension),
relations betweenor various anyrelations
plurality between
of particulars.
any plurality
Each ofof the particulars.
relevant Each of the relevant
vorhergeht, ist nicht etwa
vorhergeht,
jene Categorie
ist nicht etwa
not jene
as it Categorie
were that category
not as itofwereunitythat aspects
categorymust of unity
be differentiated,
aspects must identified
be differentiated,
and integrated identified
within and someintegrated
judgment,within so as some
to as-judgment, so as to as-
der Einheit (§ 10); denn
der alle
Einheit
Categorien
(§ 10); denn alle since
(§ 10); Categorien
all categories
(§ 10);
aresince
ground-
all categories are ground-
cribe those characteristics cribeorthoserelations
characteristics
to relevantorconcepts
relations or to torelevant
relevant concepts
particulars.
or toThisrelevant particulars. This
gründen sich auf logische
gründenFunctionen
sich auf inlogische
ed uponFunctionen in ed upon
logical functions of judging,
logical functions
key point of about
judging, judgmental
key pointdifferentiation,
about judgmental integration
differentiation,
and attribution integration
(ascription)
and attribution
is one key (ascription) is one key
Urtheilen, in diesen aber
Urtheilen,
ist schon
in diesen
Ver- aber yet ist schonisVer-
in these alreadyyetthought:
in thesecon- reason
is already why Kant’s
thought: con- transcendental
reason why Kant’s deduction transcendental
can succeed,deduction
independentlycan succeed,
of his transcenden-
independently of his transcenden-
355 bindung, mithin 355
Einheit
bindung,
gegebener
mithinBe- Einheit gegebener
junction, henceBe- unityjunction,
of givenhencecon- unity tal idealism,
of given by justifying
con- tal idealism,
the presuppositional
by justifyingsensethe presuppositional
of ‘constitution of sense
objects’
of ‘constitution
as constitut-of objects’ as constitut-
griffe gedacht. Die Categorie
griffe gedacht.
setzt also
Die Categorie
cepts. Thus setztthealso
category
cepts.already
Thuspre- ing objects
the category already as objects
pre- of ingour
objects
self-conscious
as objectsawareness
of our self-conscious
(above, §2.15). awareness (above, §2.15).
schon Verbindung voraus.
schon Also
Verbindung
müssen voraus.suppose Alsoconjunction.
müssen suppose Thus weconjunction.
must B131Thus we must As BWolff
(ll. 344–64): 131 (ll.(2017)
344–64):
notes,Ascognitive
Wolff (2017)judgmentsnotes,are cognitive
complex; judgments
they integrate
are complex; they integrate
wir diese Einheit (alswirqualitative,
diese Einheit§ 12) (alsseek
qualitative,
this unity § 12)
(as qualitative,
seek this unity§ 12) (as several
qualitative, § 12) and several
judgments several judgments
functions of andjudgment
several functions
in discriminating
of judgment whatever
in discriminating
particular(s) whatever particular(s)
noch höher suchen, nämlich
noch höherin demjeni-
suchen, nämlich in demjeni-
still further up, namely, still
in further
whatever up,isnamely,
we do in whatever is
so as to identify weit do
(or sothem)
as toandidentify
its (orit their)
(or them)features.
and Anyits (orcategory
their) features.
used in aAny judg-
category used in a judg-
360 gen, was selbst den
360 Grund
gen, was derselbst
Einheitden Grund
the groundder Einheit
of the unity
the ground
of diverseof the ment
unityintegrates
of diverse at leastment
thoseintegrates
features indicated
at least those
by (atfeatures
least) two
indicated
concepts,
by (atbut least)
categories
two concepts,
are but categories are
verschiedener Begriffeverschiedener
in Urtheilen, Begriffe
mit- concepts
in Urtheilen, mit- judgments,
within concepts or within
in judgments, or in
used and logical functions used of andjudging
logical are
functions
exercisedof injudging
complex are combinations
exercised in complex which we combinations
do which we do
hin der Möglichkeit deshin Verstandes
der Möglichkeitso- des Verstandes
whatever so- thewhatever
contains possibility contains
of - the possibility
integrate. Thisof most- fundamental
integrate. This integration,
most fundamental
conjunction integration,
or ‘synthesis’conjunction
makes possible
or ‘synthesis’
the makes possible the
gar in seinem logischengar Gebrauche
in seinem logischen
ent- theGebrauche
understanding ent- in its
thelogical
understanding
use. inuse
its of
logical
any oneuse. and of useany ofplurality
any one of and
categories,
of any plurality
and of any of categories,
plurality ofand logical
of anyfunctions
pluralityofof logical functions of
hält. hält. judging. To be effective judging.
at all, these
To becomplex
effectivesyntheses
at all, these mustcomplex
be possible
syntheses
for us,must
butbe they
possible
are for us, but they are
not made by possible not by anymade onebycategory,
possiblenor by any
by several
one category,
categories norseverally
by several (individually).
categories severally (individually).
There must be a moreThere comprehensive,
must be a more fundamental
comprehensive,
form of fundamental
synthesis to effectform of cognitive
synthesis to effect cognitive
judgment at all; this is judgmentKant’s quarry, at all;first
this expressly
is Kant’s identified
quarry, first in expressly
§16. identified in §16.

365 § 16. Von der 365ursprünglich-syntheti-

§ 16. Von der ursprünglich-syntheti-
§ 16. Of the Original-Synthetic
§ 16. Of the Unity 3.4 §16: Unity
Original-Synthetic Of the Original-Synthetic
3.4 §16: Of the Unity
Original-Synthetic
of Apperception.Unity of Apperception.
schen Einheit der Apperception.
schen Einheit der Apperception.
of Apperception. of Apperception.
B131–2 (ll. 367–74): Kant’s
B131–2 key(ll.thesis
367–74):
aboutKant’s
the ‘I key
think’
thesis
is expressly
about themodal;
‘I think’
theisself-reflexive
expressly modal; the self-reflexive
Das: I c h d e n k e , muß
Das: alle
I c hmeine
d e n k e , muß
The I alle
thinkmeine
must be ableThetoI think
accom- must be able to accom-
thought, ‘I think …’, can thought,
accompany‘I think any…’,representations
can accompany ofany
which
representations
any one of usofcan which
be self-
any one of us can be self-
Vorstellungen begleiten [B132] können;
Vorstellungen begleitenpany[B132]
all my können;
representations;
pany allformyoth-
representations; for oth-
aware. Kant again acknowledges
aware. Kantthat again
manyacknowledges
representations
that many
may occur
representations
within one’s may
(sooccur
to within one’s (so to
denn sonst würde etwas denninsonst
mir würde
vorge- etwas in mir
erwise vorge- would
something erwisebesomething
repre- would be repre-
speak) mentality without speak)
evermentality
being connected
without with
ever self-conscious
being connected apperception,
with self-conscious
or withoutapperception, or without
370 stellt werden, was370
gar stellt
nichtwerden,
gedachtwaswer-gar nicht
sentedgedacht
in me wer-
which could
sentednotin me
be atwhichpossibly
could not besoat connected.
being possiblyE.g.,
being Kant
so connected.
follows Tetens E.g., (1777,
Kant follows
1:306, 338,
Tetens
375–6)
(1777,and1:306,
Reid 338, 375–6) and Reid
den könnte, welches den ebenkönnte,
so viel welches
heißt, eben so viel which
all thought; heißt, would
all thought;
mean thatwhich (1765,
would Cmean that20–22;
h. 6, §§8, cf. below,
(1765, Ch. 6, §5) §§8,by20–22;
holdingcf. below,
that typically
§5) by visual
holdingsensations
that typically
themselves
visual sensations themselves
als die Vorstellung würde
als dieentweder
Vorstellung
un- würde entweder un- itself
the representation thewould
representation
either itself would either
are rarely if ever objectsare
of our
rarely
self-conscious
if ever objects (apperceptive)
of our self-conscious
awareness.
(apperceptive)
Rather, typically,
awareness.
sen- Rather, typically, sen-
möglich, oder wenigstensmöglich, fürodermich wenigstens für mich
be impossible or else be
beimpossible
nothing foror else be nothing
sations for
are sub-personal sations
statesare
or sub-personal
events which states
are aspects
or events
of acts
which
of awareness
are aspects ofofsome
acts of
par-awareness of some par-
nichts seyn. Diejenige nichts
Vorstellung,
seyn. Diejenige
die me. Vorstellung, die me.which
That representation That can
representation
be which can be
34 34 35 35

34 35
375 vor allem Denken 375gegeben
vor allem seynDenken kann, gegeben given prior seyn to kann, all thought,
given prioris called ticular, whether
to all thought, is called ticular, inwhether
a particular a particular inorone’s
one’s surroundings surroundings
a particular condition or aofparticular
one’s own condition of one’s own
heißt A n s c h a u u n gheißt
. AlsoA nhat s c h aalles
u u n g .intuition.
Also Thus hat alles all the intuition.
manifoldThus of in-all thebody. This contrast
manifold body. This
of in- between contrast between
sub-personal sensory and sub-personal
perceptualsensory states (andand perceptual
whatever pro- states (and whatever pro-
Mannigfaltige der Mannigfaltige
Anschauung eine der Anschauung
tuition has a necessary eine tuition connection
has a necessary
to cessing such sensory
connection cessingrequires)
to intake such sensory and any intake requires) and
self-conscious any self-conscious
awareness awareness of our surroundings
of our surroundings
nothwendige Beziehung nothwendige
auf das: Beziehung Ich the: auf I thinkdas:of Ich that same think ofin thatorsame
the: Isubject our own
subjectinternal or ourKant
in states ownmarks internal by states Kant marks
distinguishing (as did by distinguishing
Leibniz) between (as did Leibniz) between ‘percep-
‘percep-
denke, in demselben denke, Subject,indarin demselben
die- Subject,
which this darin die- which
manifold is found.this This
manifold tion’
is and
found. ‘apperception’.
This tion’Hence
and ‘apperception’.
Kant’s readiness Hence Kant’s readiness
to acknowledge to acknowledge
that various representa- that various representa-
380 ses Mannigfaltige 380 angetroffen
ses Mannigfaltigewird. Die-angetroffen representationwird. Die- is however
representation tional
an act ofis however an act ofstates may occur tional
within states
‘me’ may
of occur
which within
‘I’ am ‘me’
unaware of which
(ll. ‘I’
367–71). am unaware (ll. 367–71).
se Vorstellung aber se ist Vorstellung
ein Actus der aber ist ein Actusi.e.,der
spontaneity, it cannot
spontaneity,
be regarded i.e., it cannotKantbe uses the ordinaryKant
regarded Germanuses thetermordinary
Gemüt to German
render term Gemüt tothe
into German render
Latininto
term German
ani- the Latin term ani-
Spontaneität, d. i. sie Spontaneität,
kann nicht alsd. zur i. sie kann nicht alstozur
as belonging sensibility.
as belonging
I call this mus, familiar
to sensibility. I call thisfrom the mus,
Latin familiar
title to from the
Aristotle’s Latin
de title
Anima, to Aristotle’s
pertaining to de Anima,
whatever pertaining
makes a to whatever makes a liv-
liv-
Sinnlichkeit gehörig angesehen
Sinnlichkeitwerden. gehörig angesehen werden. to
the pure apperception, thedistinguish
pure apperception,
it ing
to being alive and
distinguish ing being
it active. Englishaliveprovides
and active. English
us only ‘mind’provides us only
and ‘body’, ‘mind’ and
obscuring ‘body’, obscuring utterly
utterly
Ich nenne sie die r e iIch n e nenne
A p p e rsie c z die
e p -r e i nfrom
e A pthe p e rempirical;
c z e p - from it maythealsoempirical;
be Kant’s concern
it may also be with Kant’s
human concern
embodiment with human
and embodiment
whatever animates and us whatever
= our animates
human Gemüt. us = our human Gemüt.
Kant uses this term to Kant avoidusestakingthisa term
standtoonavoid takingdualism
Cartesian a standof onmensCartesian dualism
and corpora – a of mens and corpora – a dual-
dual-
385 t i o n , um sie von 385 der
t i o empirischen
n , um sie von zu der empirischen
called the original zu apperception,
called the inas- original apperception, inas-
ism of mind and bodyism of mindadvocates
Descartes and bodyinDescartes
the Meditations advocates in the Meditations
and Principles, and Principles, though otherwise
though otherwise
unterscheiden, oder unterscheiden,
auch die u roder - much auchas die u r - self-consciousness
it is that much as it is that self-consciousness
advocating a much more advocating
nuanced aview much more nuanced
(Ferrini 2015). view (Ferrini 2015).
s p r ü n g l i c h e A p psepr rcüe np gt iloi cnh, e weil
A p p ewhich,
r c e p tsince
i o n , it weil
produces which,
the represen-
since it produces the represen-
sie dasjenige Selbstbewußtseyn
sie dasjenige ist, Selbstbewußtseyn
was, tation I think, ist, was,
which must able towhichB132
tationbeI think, must(ll.be 376–80):
able toKantB132 states(ll.that
376–80):
any and Kant all intuitive
states thatmanifold(s)
any and allare intuitive
necessarily
manifold(s)
connected are necessarily connected
indem es die Vorstellung indem Ichesdenke die Vorstellung
her- accompany Ich denkeallher- others,accompany
and whichallinothers, to theand‘I which
think’. That
in they to the are‘Iconnected
think’. That necessarily
they aredoes connected
not entail necessarily
they are does
connected
not entail directly
they are connected directly
390 vorbringt, die alle390 andere
vorbringt,
muß begleitendie alle andere muß begleiten is alloneconsciousness
all consciousness and the by
is self-conscious
one and the introspection!by self-consciousKant’s introspection!
statement neither Kant’s invokes
statementnor endorses
neither invokes
Cartesian nor endorses Cartesian
können, und in allem können,
Bewußtseyn und ineinallemsame, Bewußtseyn
cannot beein accompanied
same, cannot by any self-transparency,
be accompanied by any nor any
self-transparency,
form of intellectual
nor any
intuition.
form of intellectual intuition.
und dasselbe ist, vonund keinerdasselbeweiterist,be-von furtherkeiner representation.
weiter be- further I also representation.
call the B132I (ll.
also376–93):
call theHaving B132 stressed
(ll. 376–93):
the spontaneous
Having stressed act ofthe discerning,
spontaneous differentiating
act of discerning,
and inte-differentiating and inte-
gleitet werden kann. Ich gleitetnennewerden auchkann.die Ich unity nenne
within auch it die
the transcendental
unity within unity
it the transcendental
grating various unity
factorsgrating
(‘cognitions’,
various whether
factors (‘cognitions’,
concepts, sensed whetherfeaturesconcepts,
or identified,
sensed features
local- or identified, local-
Einheit derselben dieEinheit t r a n s sderselben
c e n d e n - die of t r aself-consciousness,
n s s c e n d e n - oftoself-consciousness,
indicate the isedtosensed
indicate the
particulars) isedin sensed
(candidate) particulars)
cognitive in judgments
(candidate) (§§15–17),
cognitive judgments
and that this (§§15–17),
most and that this most
395 t a l e Einheit des 395
Selbstbewußtseyns,
t a l e Einheit desum Selbstbewußtseyns,
possibility it affords um possibility
of cognition it affords
a of cognition a
fundamental synthetic fundamental
conjoining issyntheticmore fundamental
conjoining than is more any fundamental
specific combination
than any (syn-specific combination (syn-
die Möglichkeit der Erkenntnis
die Möglichkeit a priori der Erkenntnis
priori. For athe priorimanifold
priori.representa-
For the manifold thesis) representa-
by using any one thesis)
category
by using to classify,
any oneorcategory any onetojudgmentclassify, or to any
integrate,
one judgment
categorialto integrate, categorial
aus ihr zu bezeichnen. ausDenn ihr zudiebezeichnen.
man- tions Denn whichdieare man- given tions
in anywhich
one intu-
are given in any one intu-
classifications in any oneclassifications
instance (§§15–17),
in any one Kantinstance
now contends
(§§15–17),that Kant thisnow
mostcontends
fundamen- that this most fundamen-
nigfaltigen Vorstellungen, nigfaltigendie inVorstellungen,
einer ition die would in einer
not be ition collectively
would my not betal collectively
active, synthetic my integrating
tal active,issynthetic
expressedintegrating
(if incompletely)
is expressedby the(ifapperceptive,
incompletely)self-refer-
by the apperceptive, self-refer-
gewißen Anschauunggewißen gegebenAnschauung werden, representations,
gegeben werden, if theyrepresentations,
did not collec- if they did‘Inot
ential thinkcollec-
…’, which ential
of course
‘I thinkrequires
…’, which its complement
of course requires content(s).
its complement content(s).
400 würden nicht insgesamt400 würden meine nichtVorstel-
insgesamt tivelymeinebelongVorstel-
to one tively
single belong
self-con- to one single self-con-
B132 (ll. 378–411): The B132
‘original’
(ll. 378–411):
apperception The ‘original’
expressedapperception
by the ‘I think expressed
…’ is unitary,
by the ‘Iinso-think …’ is unitary, inso-
lungen seyn, wenn sie lungennicht insgesamt
seyn, wenn zusie nicht insgesamt
sciousness, i.e., as zumy sciousness,
representations i.e., as my representations
far as one and the same far active
as oneself-conscious
and the samesubject active self-conscious
thinks each and subject
every thinks
one ofeachits vari-
and every one of its vari-
einem Selbstbewußtseyn einem gehöreten,
Selbstbewußtseyn d. i. (even gehöreten,
if I am d. noti. presently
(even ifawareI amofnot presently
ous thoughts,awareincluding
of ousthose
thoughts,
thoughts including
about those whatever thoughts
it mayabout apperceptively
whatever itexperience.
may apperceptively experience.
als meine Vorstellungen als (ob
meine ichVorstellungen
mich ih- them (ob as ichsuch),
mich henceih- themnecessarily
as such),
theyhence Thenecessarily
unity of thisthey‘I think’
TheKantunitycalls
of thisthe‘I‘transcendental
think’ Kant calls unity
theof‘transcendental
self-consciousness’ unity of because
self-consciousness’ because
rer gleich nicht als solcher
rer gleich bewußt nichtbin) als solcher
must accordbewußtwith bin)the condition
must accord under
with thefrom condition under
it can be deducedfrom further
it canknowledge
be deduced a priori.
furtherThisknowledge
matches his a priori.
initialThis
glossmatches
on ‘transcen-
his initial gloss on ‘transcen-
405 müssen sie doch der 405 Bedingung
müssen sienotwen- doch der Bedingung
which alone notwen-
they canwhich stand alone
together they can stand(Tr.
dental’ together B40), namely:
Aesth. §3,dental’ (Tr. Aesth. ‘the §3,
explication
B40), namely: of a concept
‘the explication
as a principle
of a concept
which af- as a principle which af-
dig gemäß seyn, unterdig dergemäß
sie allein seyn,in unter
ei- in derone sie allein in ei- self-consciousness,
universal in one universal self-consciousness,
fords the possibility of fords
otherthesynthetic
possibility cognitions
of othera synthetic
priori. This cognitions
aim requires a priori.
(1) This
that such
aim requires (1) that such
nem allgemeinen Selbstbewußtseyn
nem allgemeinen zu-Selbstbewußtseyn
because otherwise zu- they because
would otherwise
not all they would actually
cognitions not all flow cognitions
from theactually
given concept,
flow from (2)thethatgiven
theseconcept,
cognitions (2) are
thatonly
thesepossible
cognitions are only possible
sammenstehen können, [B133] weil können,
sammenstehen sie belong [B133] weil From
to me. sie thisbelongoriginal
to me.
con- Fromunder
this original con-
the presupposition underof athespecific,
presupposition
given explication
of a specific,
of this given
concept’.
explication of this concept’.
sonst nicht durchgängig sonstmirnicht angehören
durchgängig mir angehören
junction much can be junction inferred.much can be inferred.
410 würden. Aus dieser 410 ursprünglichen
würden. Aus dieser Ver- ursprünglichen Ver-

36 36 37 37
36 37
 bindung läßt sich vieles bindung
folgern.läßt sich vieles folgern. This is to say, thisB133
This is to say, this thorough-going (ll. 412–35): KantB133
thorough-going draws (ll.his
412–35):
first majorKantconclusion
draws his first about major
human conclusion
apperception aboutfrom human his apperception from his
Nemlich diese durchgängige NemlichIdentität
diese durchgängige
identity ofIdentität
apperception identity
of that ofmani- explication
apperception of thatof its transcendental
mani- explicationunity: of its Even
transcendental
if we wereunity: to grant Even thatif we
individual
were toperceptions,
grant that individual perceptions,
der Apperception eines derinApperception
der Anschau-einesfold in der
givenAnschau-
in [an] intuition
fold given
contains in [an] as perceptive
a intuition contains states
a orasevents,
perceptive werestates
also self-conscious
or events, were states,
also these
self-conscious
are only states,
individually,
these are only individually,
ung gegebenen Mannigfaltigen, ung gegebenen enthält Mannigfaltigen,
synthesis ofenthält representations
synthesis and distributively
of representations
is perceptive
and is distributively
or also apperceptive
perceptive states.
or alsoAs apperceptive
such and in states.
principle As none
such and
of them,
in principle none of them,
415 eine Synthesis der415 Vorstellungen,
eine Synthesis und deristVorstellungen,
only possible undthrough
ist only the possible
conscious- whether
through single or plural,
the conscious- whether
can orsingle
does or account
plural,for
canany or one
doesconscious
account (or for self-conscious)
any one conscious state (or self-conscious) state
nur durch das Bewußtseyn nur durch dieserdasSyn-Bewußtseyn ness ofdieser Syn- ness
this synthesis. For theof this
empiri- of awareness
synthesis. For the empiri- of any plurality
of awareness
of those ofindividual
any plurality
perceptive
of those states.
individualIf such
perceptive
perceptionsstates. areIf ‘a-
such perceptions are ‘a-
thesis möglich. Denn thesis das empirische
möglich. Denn Be- das empirische Be-which
cal consciousness cal accompanies
consciousness which bout’accompanies
anything, they are bout’
not anything,
about onethey another;
are notnorabout
do they onebundle
another; themselves
nor do they together
bundleinto themselves together into
wußtseyn, welches verschiedene wußtseyn, welches Vorstel- verschiedene Vorstel- various
various representations is as suchrepresentations
dis- any one, more
is as such dis- complex any conscious
one, more state.
complex
Conscious
consciousawareness
state. of
Conscious
any two awareness
or more percep-
of any two or more percep-
lungen begleitet, ist anlungen sich zerstreut
begleitet,und ist anpersedsich zerstreut und connection
and without persed andtowithout the tions is a distinctive,
connection to the higher-order
tions is a distinctive,
form of consciousness
higher-order form which of takes
consciousness
two or more which percep-
takes two or more percep-
420 ohne Beziehung 420 auf ohne die Identität
Beziehungdesauf identity die Identität
of the dessubject.identity
This connec- tual states
of the subject. This connec- of consciousness
tual states
as its
of content
consciousness
or object.as Hume
its content
was or
quiteobject.
right Hume
that nothing
was quitein right that nothing in
his empiricist principles hiscanempiricist
or doesprinciples
account for cansuchor does
unitary,
accountcompoundfor such conscious
unitary, aware-
compound conscious aware-
Subjects. Diese Beziehung Subjects.geschieht
Diese alsoBeziehung tion geschieht also merely
is not effected tion isbynot myeffected
ac- merely by my ac-
ness of any pair or plurality ness ofofany first-order
pair or plurality
perceptions. of first-order
Hume’s official perceptions.
empiricismHume’s cannot
official at empiricism cannot at
dadurch noch nicht, dadurch daß ich noch jede Vor- nicht, daß ich jede each
companying Vor-representation
companyingwith each representation with
all explicate or justify all hisexplicate
own use or of justify
the term his‘judgment’,
own use ofnor theeventermof‘judgment’,
‘word’; neither nor evencan of it ‘word’; neither can it
stellung mit Bewußtseyn stellung begleite,
mit Bewußtseyn
son- consciousness, begleite, son- but rather
consciousness,
that I com-but rather that I com-
account for all the many account
cognisant
for allactivities
the many andcognisant
achievements activities of ‘imagination’
and achievements (Westphalof ‘imagination’ (Westphal
dern daß ich eine zudern der daßandern ich heine
i n - zu bine der oneandern h i nothers
to the - bineand oneamtocon- the others and am con-
2013). For each of us apperceptive2013). For each humanof usbeings,
apperceptive
insofarhuman as ‘I’ can beings,
thinkinsofar
of any as of ‘I’
mycan vari-think of any of my vari-
425 z u s e t z e und mir 425der z uSynthesis
s e t z e und dersel-
mir derscious Synthesis dersel-
of their synthesis.
sciousThus of their
only synthesis. Thus only
ous perceptual episodes, ousI perceptual
can have one episodes,
comprehensive
I can have awareness
one comprehensive
of those many awareness
perceptual of those many perceptual
ben bewußt bin. Alsoben nurbewußt
dadurch, bin.daß Also because
nur dadurch, daß because
I can comprehend theI mani-
can comprehend
episodes,the andmani-be awareepisodes,
of themand all asbemy aware
ownofperceptual
them all as episodes.
my ownHow perceptual
extensive episodes.
or accu- How extensive or accu-
ich ein Mannigfaltiges ichgegebener
ein Mannigfaltiges
Vor- fold gegebener
of givenVor- representations
fold of given in onerepresentations in one
rate such comprehensive rateapperception
such comprehensive may be is apperception
entirely a further may bequestion.
is entirely Alsoa further
a further question. Also a further
stellungen i n e i n e mstellungen B e w u ß si nt s eeyinn e mconsciousness
B e w u ß s tiss eity npossible
consciousness
that I iscanit possible
questionthat I can orquestion
is whether how thisispoint whether can oraidhow
our insight
this point intocan whether
aid ourorinsighthow wellintowe whether
actu- or how well we actu-
verbinden kann, ist esverbinden möglich, kann, daß ich ist esrepresent
möglich, todaß ich this
myself represent
very identity
to myself
of this very identity
ally can or do know of any allyempirical
can or doparticulars.
know any This empirical
latter particulars.
is Kant’s topic This in latter
the isAnalytic
Kant’s of topic in the Analytic of
430 mir die I d e n t i t ä430
t d emir s Bdiee wIudßetns et iytnä st d e consciousness
s B e w u ß t swithin
e y n s theseconsciousness
representations,
within these representations,
Principles; it is not hisPrinciples;
topic in the it is
Transcendental
not his topic inDeduction
the Transcendental
of the PureDeduction Concepts of of the
the Pure Concepts of the
i n d i e s e n V o r s t e l li un ndgieens eselbst
n V o vo- r s t e l l i.e.,
u n gthee n analytic
selbst vo-unity ofi.e.,apperception
the analytic unityUnderstanding!
of apperception Misunderstanding
Understanding! thisMisunderstanding
point is central tothis many pointobjections
is centraltotoKant’s many (pur-objections to Kant’s (pur-
rstelle, d.i. die a n a l y trstelle,
i s c h e d.i.
Einheit
die a der
n a l y t iiss conly
h e Einheit
possiblederon the is onlypresupposi-
possible onported)the presupposi-
Deduction. Instead, ported)Kant’s
Deduction.
Deduction Instead,
aimsKant’s
to show Deduction
that we cannotaims toatshow all think
that orwea-cannot at all think or a-
Apperception ist nur Apperception
unter der Voraus- ist nur tion unterofder someVoraus-
kind of synthetic
tion of unity.
some kind ofchieve synthetic unity.
any apperception chieve
unlessanywe apperception
successfullyunless use categories
we successfully
in someuse candidate
categories cognitive
in some candidate cognitive
setzung irgend einersetzung s y n t h eirgend
t i s c h eeiner
n syntheti schen judgment(s) about anything judgment(s)
presented about us anything
by sensory presented
intuitionus(Bby 134–5,
sensory ll. 436–82).
intuitionOne (B134–5,
key ll. 436–82). One key
435 möglich. 435 möglich. [B134] [B134] point here (ll. 417–35)point is thathereany(ll.analytically
417–35) isunitarythat any ‘I think
analytically
...’ only unitary
occurs‘I asthinkthe ...’
unitary
only occurs as the unitary
Der Gedanke: diese inDer derGedanke:
Anschau-diese The in derthought:
Anschau- all these thought: all (identical)
Therepresenta- these representa-first-person(identical)
self-referential
first-person
thoughtself-referential
of some plurality thought of ofone’s someself-conscious
plurality of one’s self-conscious
ung gegebene Vorstellungen ung gegebenegehörenVorstellungen
mir tions gehören given inmirintuition tions altogether
given in intuitionstates, where this plurality
altogether states,of where
self-conscious
this plurality
statesof is self-conscious
some synthetic unity states of is some
self-consciousness
synthetic unity of self-consciousness
insgesamt zu, heißt demnach insgesamtsozu, viel,heißt
als demnachbelong to so me,
viel,amounts
als belong to this,to that
me, amounts
I (apperception).
to this, thatThis I unitary
(apperception).
synthetic This apperception
unitary synthetic
consists apperception
in self-consciously consistsrepresenting
in self-consciously representing
ich vereinige sie in einem ich vereinige
Selbstbewußt-sie in einem Selbstbewußt-
unify them in one self-consciousness, some
unify them in one self-consciousness, plurality of one’ssome
own plurality
conscious of (perceptive)
one’s own conscious
states. The (perceptive)
analytical unity
states.of The
appercep-
analytical unity of appercep-
440 seyn, oder kann sie 440wenigstens
seyn, oderdarin kann ve- sie wenigstens
or can at darinleast ve-
so unifyor them,
can at and tion (whenever
leastifso unify them, and if it occurs)
tion requires
(whenever some it occurs)
synthetic requires
unity of
some
apperception.
synthetic unity of apperception.
rinigen, und ob er gleich rinigen,selbst und nochob er gleich this isselbst noch at this
not itself onceis the notcon- itself atB134
once (ll. the
436–56): con- KantB134 here(ll.contrasts
436–56):the Kantmereheredistributively
contrasts the perceptive
mere distributively
or (for the perceptive
sake of or (for the sake of
nicht das Bewußtseynnicht der dasS y nBewußtseyn
t h e s i s sciousnessder S y n tofh ethe
s i ssynthesis
sciousness
of represen- of the synthesis of represen-
discussion) apperceptive discussion)
states afforded
apperceptive
by the states
Cartesian afforded
equationby the of Cartesian
sensationsequationwith what- of sensations with what-
der Vorstellungen ist,der so Vorstellungen
setzt er doch ist,tations, so setztit ernevertheless
doch tations, presupposes
it neverthelessever onepresupposes
takes oneself ever to sense
one (Med.
takes oneself
2, AT 7:29)
to sense and(Med.
its progeny
2, AT within
7:29) and the its
empiricist
progeny(sen- within the empiricist (sen-
die Möglichkeit der letzteren die Möglichkeit
voraus, d.i. der letzteren voraus, of
the possibility d.i.thisthelatter,
possibility
i.e. onlyof thissorylatter,
atomist) i.e. traditions
only sory
to the
atomist)
unitary traditions
collectivetoself-consciousness
the unitary collective required
self-consciousness
to recognise any required to recognise any
445 nur dadurch, daß445 ichnur dasdadurch,
Mannigfaltigedaß ich because das Mannigfaltige
I can comprehend because theirI can
man- comprehend
plurality their
of such man- states as
plurality
one’s own.
of suchSuchstates
recognition
as one’s requires
own. Sucha singlerecognitioncomprehensive
requires a grasping
single comprehensive grasping
derselben in einem Bewußtseyn derselben inbegrei- einem Bewußtseynifold in onebegrei-consciousness
ifold indoone I call
consciousness do I call

38 38 39 39
38 39
 fen kann, nenne ich dieselbe
fen kann, insgesammt
nenne ich dieselbe
them insgesammt
all my representations;
them all my of some multitude
sincerepresentations; since of perceptive
of some multitude states togetherof perceptive
in one unitary states thought
together inofone those unitary
statesthought
as one’sof those states as one’s
meine Vorstellungen; meine denn sonst
Vorstellungen;
würde otherwise
denn sonstI würde would have otherwise
as many-col-
I would have own. as Even granting (generously)
many-col- own. Even that granting individual
(generously)
perceptive that states
individualmay perceptive
also be apperceptive
states may also be apperceptive
ich ein so vielfärbiges, ich einverschiedenes
so vielfärbiges, oured,verschiedenes
diverse a self as oured,
I have repre-a selfstates
diverse as I only
have suffices
repre- forstates distributive
only sufficesapperception
for distributive
of each such apperception
state; in principle
of each such it does state;
notin principle it does not
450 Selbst haben, als ich
450 Vorstellungen
Selbst haben, habe, als ich Vorstellungen
sentations ofhabe, which Isentations
am conscious- and cannot
of which I am conscious- suffice for and
unitarycannot awareness
suffice for
of any
unitaryplurality
awareness
of such ofstates
any plurality
as one’s ofown.
such In states
ex- as one’s own. In ex-
deren ich mir bewußtderen bin. Synthetische
ich mir bewußtness. bin. Synthetic
Synthetische unity of
ness. manifoldunityactly
theSynthetic this manifold
of the regard Kant actly stresses thisthe regard
synthetic
Kant unity
stresses of any
the manifold
synthetic sensory
unity of intuition(s)
any manifold as sensory
the intuition(s) as the
Einheit des MannigfaltigenEinheit derdes Anschau-
Mannigfaltigen der Anschau-
of intuition, as given of a priori,
intuition,
is thus ground for
as given a priori, is thusthe possibility
ground of any
for identical
the possibility
apperception of any by
identical
which apperception
one can identify
by which
that plural-
one can identify that plural-
ungen, als a priori gegeben,
ungen, ist als also der gegeben,
a priori the groundist also der of the ground ofof ity
the identity theof sensory
identity intuition(s)
of ity of (perceptions)
sensory intuition(s) as one’s own (perceptions)
perceptions as one’s
(ll. 436–56).
own perceptions (ll. 436–56).
Grund der Identität Grund der Apperception
der Identität apperception
der Apperception itself, which
apperception
a priori pre- itself, which
B134 (ll. a priori
451–6), pre-B135 B (ll.134469–76):
(ll. 451–6),Kant’s B135 thesis
(ll. 469–76):
is that theKant’s
syntheticthesis unity
is thatof the
the manifold
synthetic of unity of the manifold of
455 selbst, die a priori455allem
selbst,m ediei n eampriori
be- allem
cedesmany e i n and
e m allbe-of mycedes
specific
any think-
and all of sensory
my specific think-is thesensory
intuition groundintuition
of the identity
is the groundof apperception
of the identity holdsofdistributively
apperceptionforholds any distributively for any
stimmten Denken vorhergeht.
stimmten Denken Verbin- vorhergeht.
ing. However, Verbin-
conjunction
ing. However,
never liesconjunctionhumanlynever possible liesinstance
humanly of ‘I possible
think …’.instance This thesis of ‘Idoes
thinknot…’.address
This thesishow does extensive
not address
or per- how extensive or per-
dung liegt aber nicht dungin denliegt Gegenstän-
aber nicht in in den Gegenstän-
the objects and cannot
in thepossibly
objectsbe and cannot
sisting possibly
anyone’sbe personal
sistingidentity
anyone’s may be. personal
It explicates
identitya may prioribe.
conditions
It explicates required
a priorito conditions
think (ll. required to think (ll.
den und kann von den ihnenundnicht kannetwa von borrowed
ihnen nichtfrom etwathemborrowed
through from per- them 472–6)through
any such per- apperceptive
472–6) any identity.
such apperceptive identity.
durch Wahrnehmungdurch entlehntWahrnehmung
und in ception entlehntandund onlyinthusception
taken up andinto only thus taken up into
B134–5 (ll. 456–68): Kant B134–5 again (ll. claims
456–68): thatKant
combining
again claimsor Verbindung
that combiningis not due or Verbindung
to objects is not due to objects
460 den Verstand dadurch460 denallererst
Verstand aufge-
dadurch theallererst aufge- instead
understanding; the understanding;
it is en- instead it is en-
and cannot be absorbed andfrom cannot them. be absorbed
Certainly conjoining
from them.orCertainlybinding as conjoining
activitiesorarebinding not ef-as activities are not ef-
nommen werden, sondern nommen ist allein
werden,[B135]sondern
tirelyistanallein
achievement
[B135] tirely
of understand-
an achievement of understand-
fected within or by anyfected objects;withinobjectsor byhave anywhatever
objects; plurality
objects have of features
whateverthey plurality
do. The of features
key they do. The key
eine Verrichtung deseine Verstandes,
Verrichtung der desing,
Verstandes,
which itselfder is nothing
ing, which
other itself
than is nothing other than
point is indeed intellective: point that is indeed
recognising
intellective:
any object thattorecognising
have anyany features
objectrequires
to haverecognis-
any features requires recognis-
selbst nichts weiter istselbst
als dasnichts
Vermögen,
weiter ist the
als das Vermögen,
capacity to conjoin thea priori
capacity andtotoconjoin ing ita and
prioriascribing
and to to ing it some it andplurality
ascribing of features.
to it someThis plurality
requires
of features.
(i) discriminating,
This requires recognis-
(i) discriminating, recognis-
a priori zu verbinden und daszu
a priori Mannigfal-
verbinden und bringdasthe Mannigfal-
manifold of bringgiven the
represen-
manifold of given represen-
ing and integrating those ing features
and integrating into thethose sensory features
perception
into the of sensory
that particular
perceptionand (ii) of that
ex- particular and (ii) ex-
465 tige gegebener Vorstellungen
465 tige gegebener unter Ein- Vorstellungen unter Ein-
tations under the unitytations
of appercep-
under the unity of discriminating,
plicitly appercep- plicitly
identifying discriminating,
(classifying)identifying
and integrating (classifying)
those and (classified)
integratingfeaturesthosein (classified) features in
heit der Apperceptionheit zu der
bringen,
Apperception
wel- tion;zu bringen, wel- is
this principle tion;thethisultimate
principleany is judgment
the ultimate by which any one judgment
ascribes thoseby which featuresone to ascribes
that particular.
those features Those to are
thattwo
particular.
different Those are two different
cher Grundsatz der oberstecher Grundsatz
im ganzen der oberste
principleimin ganzen
all human principle
cognition.in all human cognition.
sets of achievements;sets laterof (§§24,
achievements;
26n.) Kant laterascribes
(§§24, 26n.)the former,
Kant ascribes sensory-perceptual
the former, sensory-perceptual
menschlichen Erkenntniß menschlichen
ist. Erkenntniß ist. achievements to the transcendental
achievements power to the of transcendental
(productive) power imagination
of (productive)
(functioning imagination
sub-per- (functioning sub-per-
Dieser Grundsatz derDieser nothwendigen
Grundsatz derNow nothwendigen
this principle of Now the necessary
this principlesonally),
of the necessary
and the lattersonally),
to the understanding
and the latter as to ourthe capacity
understanding to make as our
express,
capacity
explicit
to makejudg- express, explicit judg-
470 Einheit der Apperception
470 Einheit ist dernunApperception
zwar unity istofnun zwar unityis of
apperception itselfapperception
of mentsisabout itselfanything
of we
ments canabout
or do anything
perceive.we can or do perceive.
selbst identisch, mithin selbst
ein identisch,
analytischer mithin ein analytischer
course identical, thuscourse an analytical
identical, thus an analytical
B135 (ll. 461–8): The most B135 fundamental
(ll. 461–8): The characteristic
most fundamental of our capacity
characteristic
to judge of atourall,capacity
i.e., ourto judge at all, i.e., our
Satz, erklärt aber dochSatz,eine erklärt
Synthesis aberdesdoch proposition,
eine Synthesis yetdesit explains
proposition,
the neces- yet it explains the neces-
understanding, is its capacity understanding,
to combine is itsaccording
capacity to combineits own aaccording
priori functions to its pluralities
own a priorioffunctions pluralities of
in einer Anschauung gegebenen
in einer Anschauung
Mannig- gegebenen
sary synthesis Mannig-of the sary
manifold
synthesisgivenof the manifold given
representations so thatrepresentations
they can be brought so thatunder they can the beunity
brought
of apperception.
under the unity This of is, apperception.
Kant This is, Kant
faltigen als nothwendig, faltigenohne als welche
nothwendig,in anohne welchewithout
intuition, in anwhichintuition,
that without which
states, the thatprinciple
highest states,ofthe human
highest cognition.
principle of human cognition.
475 jene durchgängige475Identität
jene durchgängige
des Selbst- Identität des Selbst-
thorough-going identity
thorough-going
of self-con- identity of self-con-
bewußtseyns nicht gedacht bewußtseyns
werden nicht kann.gedacht werdencannot
sciousness kann. besciousness
thought. cannot For 135thought.
Bbe (ll. 470–82): ForKantB135 expressly
(ll. 470–82):
contrasts Kant theexpressly
conceptual contrasts
simplicity theof conceptual
the thought, simplicity
‘I think’,of the thought, ‘I think’,
Denn durch das Ich Denn als einfache
durch das Vor-Ich through
als einfache the ‘I’Vor-
as simple
throughrepresenta- which is
the ‘I’ as simple ‘identical’ by which
representa- default:is it‘identical’
neither expresses,
by default:integrates
it neithernor expresses,
differentiatesintegrates
any nor plurality
differentiates any plurality
stellung ist nichts Mannigfaltiges
stellung ist nichts gege- Mannigfaltiges
tion nothing gege- manifoldtion is given;
nothingonly whatsoever;
manifold is given; only hence it is
whatsoever;
‘analytic’ byhence
default:it isit ‘analytic’
has no internal
by default:semantic
it has (intensional)
no internal semantic
com- (intensional) com-
ben; in der Anschauung, ben; die
in derdavon Anschauung,
un- in the die davon
intuition, un-whichin theis different
intuition, which plexityiswhich could beplexity
different explicated,whichexplicitated
could be explicated,
or otherwise explicitated
articulated. or This
otherwisevery simplicity
articulated. This very simplicity
480 terschieden ist, kann
480 esterschieden
nur gegeben ist, und
kann esfrom
nur gegeben
that, can und it be given
fromand that,bycan highlights that
con-it be given and by con- any use highlights
of this thought,
that any or use
any ofoccasion
this thought,
for thinking
or any this
occasionthought,for thinking
must havethis thought, must have
durch V e r b i n d u n g durch
in einemV e rBewußt-
b i n d u n g junction
in einem Bewußt-
in one consciousness
junction can
in one it be its judgmental,
consciousness can it be intensional
its judgmental,
or sentential intensional
complement: or sentential
some thought
complement: thunk by
some any thought
‘I’. No thunk by any ‘I’. No
such complement can such be provided
complement by thecan ‘I think’
be provideditself; itbymust
the ‘Ibethink’
otherwise itself;provided.
it must beThe otherwise provided. The
seyn gedacht werden. seyn […] gedacht werden. [B136] […]thought. […] [B136] thought. […]

40 40 41 41
40 41
 most general answer can mostonly
general
be that
answer
somecan sensory
only intuition(s)
be that some presents
sensorysome
intuition(s)
comprehensi-
presents some comprehensi-
ble content which can beblethought
content(conceived,
which can bejudged),
thoughtand(conceived,
conceivedjudged),
as one’sandownconceived
thought of as one’s own thought of
___ (whatever is sensorily
___ presented).
(whatever isThought
sensorilywithout
presented).
contentThought
is empty;
without
merecontent
sensoryiscon-
empty; mere sensory con-
tent(s) are ‘blind’ (B75), sinceare
tent(s) they do not
‘blind’ (B75),andsince
cannottheyprovide
do notorand afford
cannot
anyprovide
apperceptive
or afford any apperceptive
thought of or throughthought
them aboutof or anything
through whatever.
them about In anything
these regards
whatever.
KantIn examines
these regards
the Kant examines the
most basic logical functions
most basic
of thought
logical and
functions
judgment
of thought
to highlight
and judgment
that the Cartesian
to highlightcogito
that the Cartesian cogito
can only be a result, indeed
can only
an abstraction
be a result, from
indeed a result;
an abstraction
it is not the
fromautomatic,
a result; itfixed
is not
starting
the automatic, fixed starting
point it is so widely presumed
point it istosobe.widely
Any presumed
occasion to to think
be. Any
‘I think
occasion
…’ istoparasitic
think ‘I upon
think …’ is parasitic upon
some actual occasion(s) somein which
actual one
occasion(s)
at least in presumptively
which one atperceives
least presumptively
something of perceives
one’s something of one’s
surroundings. The Deduction
surroundings.
underscores
The Deduction
that no thought
underscores
and nothatthinking
no thought
is at all
andhumanly
no thinking is at all humanly
possible without exercising
possible
(if wittingly,
without exercising
sub-personally(if wittingly,
or implicitly)
sub-personally
some of or ourimplicitly)
most basicsome of our most basic
judgmental capacities tojudgmental
discriminate,
capacities
differentiate,
to discriminate,
and integrate
differentiate,
various features
and integrate
of anyvarious
one features of any one
perceived particular in perceived
order to perceive
particularthatinindividual.
order to perceive that individual.

§ 17. Der Grundsatz§ 17. der synthetischen

Der Grundsatz§ der 17. synthetischen
The Principle of theThe
§ 17. Principle3.5
Synthetic of the§17: The Principle
Synthetic 3.5 of§17:
3.5 the Synthetic
The Principle
Unityofofthe Apperception
Synthetic Unity is theofHighest
Apperception
Principle is the Highest Principle
Einheit der Apperception Einheit ist der
das ApperceptionUnity istof das
Apperception Unityis of the Apperception isofthe the Use of the Understanding.of the Use of the Understanding.
485 oberste Princip
485 alles obersteVerstandes-Princip allesHighest
Verstandes-
Principle of Highest
all Use of Principle of all Use of
B136–7 (ll. 487–508, cf.B136–7 ll. 477–82):
(ll. 487–508,
Kant begins
cf. ll. 477–82):
by notingKant a parallel
beginsbetween
by noting theatranscen-
parallel between the transcen-
gebrauchs. gebrauchs. the Understanding. the Understanding. dental deduction of the dental
concepts
deduction ‘space’of and
the ‘time’
concepts in the
‘space’
Transcendental
and ‘time’ inAesthetic
the Transcendental
(§13, Aesthetic (§13,
Der oberste Grundsatz Derderoberste
Möglich-Grundsatz Theder Möglich-
ultimate principleThe of the
ultimate
possi-principle of the possi-
B121, cf. Tr. Aesth. §§3, B121,
5, Bcf.
40,Tr. 48,Aesth.
63–4),§§3,
that5,anything
B40, 48,which
63–4),appears
that anything
to us by which
sensibility
appears to us by sensibility
keit aller Anschauungkeit in Beziehung
aller Anschauungauf bility
in Beziehung auf inbility
of all intuition connection
of all intuition
to in connection
must be temporal, to andmust
muchbeoftemporal,
it must also andbe much
spatial;
of ithence
must the
alsoconcepts
be spatial; ‘time’
henceandthe‘space’
concepts ‘time’ and ‘space’
die Sinnlichkeit war laut
die Sinnlichkeit
der transscen- war laut der transscen-
sensibility was, according
sensibility to was,
the according
must pertain to tothethese must
domains pertain
(respectively).
to these domains
(Kant’s (respectively).
Transcendental(Kant’s Idealism, Transcendental
his hallmark Idealism, his hallmark
490 dentalen Ästhetik:490daßdentalen
alles Mannigfalti-
Ästhetik: daßTranscendental
alles Mannigfalti- Aesthetic,
Transcendental
this: that Aesthetic,
thesis that this: thatitselfthesis
space = nothing
that space
but aitself
human = nothing
form of butsensory
a humanreceptivity
form of + time
sensoryitself
receptivity
= + time itself =
ge derselben unter den ge formalen
derselbenBedin- unter denallformalen
its manifold Bedin-
must stand
all its manifold
under the mustnothing
stand under the
but a human nothing
form of but sensory
a humanreceptivity
form of (Tr.sensory
Aesth. receptivity
§§6, 8, esp.(Tr. B59–60),
Aesth. may§§6, be8, esp. B59–60), may be
gungen des Raums und gungen der Zeit
des Raums
stehe. und der Zeit
formal stehe. of formal
conditions space and conditions
time. ofelidedspacehere andandtime.throughout
elidedmuchhere and of Kant’s
throughout
Deduction
much by of substituting
Kant’s Deduction a weaker by thesis,
substituting
that a weaker thesis, that
Der oberste Grundsatz Dereben oberste
derselben
Grundsatz Theeben derselben
ultimate principle The of ultimate
that same principle of that form
our human same of sensory
our human receptivity
form ofis sensory
only receptive
receptivity
(sensitive,
is onlyresponsive)
receptive (sensitive,
to spatio-responsive) to spatio-
in Beziehung auf deninVerstand
Beziehung ist:auf
daßden possibility
Verstand ist: in daß
connectionpossibility
to under-
in connection
temporaltoparticulars;
under- cf.temporal
above, §2.15.)
particulars; cf. above, §2.15.)
495 alles Mannigfaltige495deralles
Anschauung
Mannigfaltige un- derstanding
Anschauung is: thatun-all manifold
standingofis:intu-
that all manifold of intu-
B136–7 (ll. 487–508): Kant’s B136–7parallel
(ll. 487–508):
claim about
Kant’sapperception
parallel claimis about
expressly apperception
modal: Whatever
is expressly modal: Whatever
ter Bedingungen derterursprünglich-syn-
Bedingungen der ition ursprünglich-syn-
(would) stand under ition conditions
(would) stand under conditions
can at all be thought can must at inall principle
be thought be must
integratable
in principle
with and be integratable
by the original withunity
and by of the original unity of
thetischen Einheit thetischen
der Apperception Einheit der of the Apperception
original synthetic
of theunity original
of synthetic
apperception unitysoof as to apperception
be at all a candidate so as toforbe myat all
express,
a candidate
self-conscious
for my express,
thoughtself-conscious
that such- thought that such-
stehe. Unter dem ersteren
stehe. Unter stehen dem alle ersteren stehen All
apperception. allemanifold
apperception.
represen- All manifold
and-so. represen- and-so.
mannigfaltige Vorstellungen
mannigfaltige der An- Vorstellungen
tations ofderintuition
An- stand tationsunder
of intuition
the stand under the
500 schauung, so fern500sie uns
schauung,
g e g e bso
e nfern
wer-sie uns g e g eso
former, b efar
n wer-
as theyformer, B137
are givensotofarus;as they are(ll.given
510–26):
to us;Speaking
B137 (ll.generally,
510–26): Kant
Speaking
glossesgenerally,
understanding
Kant glosses
as the capacity
understanding
for cogni- as the capacity for cogni-
den, unter dem zweiten, den, so unter
ferndem sie in
zweiten,
and so fernthe
under sie latter,
in and so far
under as they tions, and
the latter, so far as they any cognitiontions,as and
the determinate
any cognition connection
as the determinate
of given representations
connection of to
givenan ob-
representations to an ob-
einem Bewußtseyn müssen einem Bewußtseyn
verbunden müssen must beverbunden
able to be conjoined
must be able within to be ject. This determinate
conjoined within ject.
connection
This determinate
is ascriptive:connection
ascribing features
is ascriptive:
to some
ascribingsensed,
features
localised
to some sensed, localised
[B137] werden können; denn
[B137] werden
ohne können;
das one denn
singleohne das one single
consciousness; for without particular
consciousness; for without as its features.
particular
This is a
as key
its features.
point at which
This isKant’s
a key point
concern at which
with process
Kant’s highlights
concern with process highlights
kann nichts dadurchkann gedachtnichtsoder dadurch
er- suchgedacht oder er- nothing
conjunction such conjunction
can be a key epistemological
nothing can be issue
a key about
epistemological
cognitive semantics,
issue about which
cognitive
requires
semantics,
at least which
putativerequires
deictic at least putative deictic
reference and putativereference ascription andof putative
features ascription
to some particular(s).
of features to These
someepistemological
particular(s). These epistemological
505 kannt werden, weil505diekannt
gegebenewerden,Vorstel-
weil die thought
gegebeneor Vorstel-
cognised,thought
becauseor the cognised, because the
42 42 43 43
42 43
 lungen den Actus der lungenApperception:
den Actus der givenApperception:
representations given wouldrepresentations
have no- issues
would musthaveawait
no- the issues
Analytic must of await
Principles;the Analytic
here Kant of Principles;
anticipates here that Kant
whatever anticipates
we maythat whatever we may
I c h d e n k e , nicht gemeinI c h d ehaben
n k e , nicht
und gemeinthing inhaben common und with thing theinactus
common of putatively
with the know, actus ofand however
putatively(and know, however
and however
well) we(and mayhowever
putativelywell) know we it,may requires
putativelyof usknow it, requires of us
dadurch nicht in einem dadurchSelbstbewußt-
nicht in einem Selbstbewußt-
apperception, I think,apperception,
and so wouldI think, actively
and discerning,
so would differentiating,
actively discerning, identifying differentiating,
and integrating identifying
some plurality
and integrating
of information
some plurality of information
seyn zusammengefaßtseyn seynzusammengefaßt
würden. seynbe
not würden.
brought together notinto be brought
one sin-together by which into onealonesin-
we canby(even
whichputatively)
alone we localise can (even anyputatively)
candidate localiseparticular anyobject
candidate of knowl-
particular object of knowl-
gle self-consciousness.gle self-consciousness. edge and ascribe (evenedge putatively)
and ascribe any features
(even putatively)
to it. Allany of features
this requires to it.that All weof can
this ex-requires that we can ex-
510 Verstand ist, allgemein
510 Verstand
zu reden, ist,das
allgemein zu reden,
Generally das
speaking, understanding pressly
Generally speaking, understanding and explicitly pressly
make such
and cognitive
explicitly judgments,
make such which
cognitive requires
judgments,
that wewhich
can indeed
requires that we can indeed
Vermögen der E r k eVermögen n n t n i s s e .derDiese
E r k e is
n nthet n i scapacity
s e . Diese for cognitions.
is the capacity These forthink ‘I think’
cognitions. in connection
These think ‘Iwiththink’ whatever
in connection
judgments withwe whatever
considerjudgments
making about we consider
this or thesemaking about this or these
bestehen in der bestimmten bestehenBeziehung
in der bestimmten consist in Beziehung
determinateconsist
connection in determinate
of particular(s).
connection of Only by particular(s).
such intellectual, Only judgmental
by such intellectual,
integration judgmental
of some plurality
integration of sensory
of some plurality of sensory
gegebener Vorstellungen gegebener
auf einVorstellungen
Object. given auf representations
ein Object. given to anrepresentations
object. and to classificatory
an object.information
and classificatory
can our proto-cognitive
information canstates our proto-cognitive
have any ‘objective statesvalidity’
have any as ‘objective validity’ as
O b j e c t aber ist das,Oinb jdessen
e c t aber Begriff
ist das, However,
in dessen object Begriff
is thatHowever,
in the concept (re)presenting
object is that in the concept this apperceived
(re)presenting
state of
this
affairs.
apperceived
Only insofar
state ofasaffairs.
we can Only
engage insofar
actively as we
in scru-
can engage actively in scru-
tinising whatever we experience tinising whateverand identifying
we experienceat leastand some identifying
of it, do at weleast
havesome and of exercise
it, do we have and exercise
515 das Mannigfaltige515einer das gegebenen
Mannigfaltige An- einer of gegebenen An- ofofwhich
which the manifold a given thein-manifold of a given in-
any understanding whatsoever. any understanding whatsoever.
schauung v e r e i n i g t schauung
ist. Nun erfordert
v e r e i n i g t tuition
ist. Nunis erfordert
united. Nowtuitionall unification
is united. Now all unification
aber alle Vereinigung aber der Vorstellungen
alle Vereinigung of der representations
Vorstellungen requires of representations
unitary B137–8
requires(ll. unitary
527–76): Kant B137–8 further
(ll. 527–76):
explicatesKant his thesis
furtherconcerning
explicates the his principle
thesis concerning
of the origi- the principle of the origi-
Einheit des Bewußtseyns Einheit
in derdesSynthe-
Bewußtseyns in der Synthe-
consciousness in their synthesis. in nal
consciousness theirsynthetic unity of apperception,
synthesis. nal synthetic unity by highlighting
of apperception, that, merely
by highlighting
because our that, sensibility
merely because
pre- our sensibility pre-
sis derselben. Folglichsis istderselben.
die EinheitFolglichdes Consequently
ist die Einheitthe desunity Consequently
of conscious- sentsoftoconscious-
the unity us whatever itsentsmay within
to us whatever
space andit time may within
and in spacesome and regard timeor and
other in assome
spatialregard
andor other as spatial and
520 Bewußtseyns dasjenige, 520 Bewußtseyns
was alleindasjenige,
die nesswas alleinwhich
is that die alone is that which temporal,
ness constitutes does not at temporal,
alone constitutes all specify,does individuate
not at all or specify,
discriminate
individuate
any particular(s)
or discriminate within any
space particular(s)
or within space or
Beziehung der Vorstellungen Beziehungaufdereinen Vorstellungen
the connection auf einen of representations
the connection time. That
to of representations to the concept time.
‘time’Thatas such
the concept
cannot ‘time’
serve as
to such
delimit cannot
any periods
serve toof delimit
time, and
any so
periods of time, and so
Gegenstand, mithin ihre Gegenstand,
objective mithinGül- ihre objective
an object Gül- ),anand
(Gegenstand object
thus(Gegenstand
their cannot
), and serve to delimit
thus their cannot
any appearance(s)
serve to delimit within
any any
appearance(s)
period of within time, isany underscored
period of by time, is underscored by
tigkeit, folglich daß tigkeit, sie Erkenntnisse
folglich daß objective sie Erkenntnisse
validity, soobjective
that theyvalidity, Kant’s
be- so that they be- reason why the
Kant’s
Tr. Aesth.
reason cannot
why the
include
Tr. Aesth.
even the
cannot
mere include
concept even‘alteration’
the mere (Ver-
concept ‘alteration’ (Ver-
werden, ausmacht, und werden,
worauf ausmacht,
folglich und come worauf folglich and
cognitions, come thuscognitions,
is that and änderung)thusamongis that its a priori
änderung)
data,among
because itsanya priori
alteration
data, because
must instead any alteration
be some must alteringinstead
withinbe some altering within
525 selbst die Möglichkeit 525 selbst des die Verstandes
Möglichkeitupon des which
Verstandes
rests theupon possibility
which of time at some
rests the possibility of time or time
during at some period
time or ofduring
time, some
and would
period require
of time,someand perception
would require
of some perception of
something existing which
something
exhibits existing
successive which features
exhibits (A41/ B58); mutatis
successive featuresmutandis,
(A41/B the
58); same
mutatis mutandis, the same
beruht. beruht. the understanding itself. the understanding itself.
would hold of the concept would‘space’
hold of(cf.the B195).
conceptHence these(cf.concepts
‘space’ B195). Hencedo notthese suffice concepts
for cog-do not suffice for cog-
Das erste reine Verstandeserkenntnis
Das erste reine Verstandeserkenntnis
Thus the first pure cognition Thus theoffirst the pure cognition of the
nition (of particulars; l.nition 513, cf.(ofll.particulars;
539–40), though l. 513,they
cf. ll.are
539–40),
required though
for the they
possibility
are required of their
for the possibility of their
also, worauf sein ganzer also, worauf
übriger sein Ge- ganzer übriger Ge- upon
understanding, understanding,
which is upon which is
cognition (ll. 534–38). cognitionKant appeals (ll. 534–38).
to his earlier Kantpoint
appealsabout to his
theearlier
concepts point‘space’
aboutand the‘time’,
concepts ‘space’ and ‘time’,
brauch sich gründet, brauch welchessich auch gründet,
zu- grounded
welches auch zu- further
its entire grounded use, which
its entire further use, which
that they indicate unbounded that theycontinuous
indicate unbounded manifolds,continuous
one successive, manifolds,
the other one concurrent
successive, the other concurrent
530 gleich von allen Bedingungen
530 gleich von derallen
sinnli-
Bedingungen der sinnli- independent
also is altogether also is altogetherof all independent of all
though extended (spatially), thoughyetextended
these concepts
(spatially), canyetbethese
arbitrarily
concepts delimited
can besoarbitrarily
as to circum- delimited so as to circum-
chen Anschauung ganz chenunabhängig
Anschauung ist, ganz unabhängig
conditions ist, conditions
of sensible intuition, isofthe sensible intuition, is the
scribe periods of time scribe or regions
periods of space,
of timeororboth regions
together (B39–40,
of space, or both47–8). Here Kant
together (B39–40, adds47–8). Here Kant adds
ist nun der Grundsatz ist der
nun ursprüngli-
der Grundsatz der ursprüngli-
principle of the original principle
syntheticofunity
the original
that any synthetic unity usethat
cognitive of such
any cognitive
specifications use of of such
spatio-temporal
specifications scopeof spatio-temporal
requires that one scope
can requires that one can
chen s y n t h e t i s c h e nchenEinheit
s y n t der
h e t iAp-
s c h e nofEinheit der Ap-Thusofthe
apperception. apperception.
mere form Thus the mere form
be aware of the unity of be each
awareorofany thesuchunitybounded
of each region,
or any such so as bounded
to be ableregion,to know so asthattore-be able to know that re-
perception. So ist dieperception.bloße Form So der
ist dieofbloßeour outerFormsensory
der intuition,
of our outer space,
sensorygion intuition,
as one space,
specific particular
gion as one region specific
(ll. 534–48),
particularandregion
(prospectively)
(ll. 534–48), to and
be able(prospectively)
to know anyto be able to know any
535 äußeren sinnlichen 535 äußeren
Anschauung, sinnlichen
der is Anschauung,
not yet a cognition;der isitnot onlyyetaffords
a cognition; it onlyoccupying
particular affords that particular
region (§26).
occupying that region (§26).
Raum, noch gar keine Raum, Erkenntnis;
noch gar er gibt
keine Erkenntnis; er gibt of
a priori the manifold a priori
intuition
the manifold
to a of intuition to a
nur das Mannigfaltigenur der das
Anschauung
Mannigfaltige a der Anschauung
possible cognition. a Yet
possible actually
cognition.
to B138
Yet (ll.actually
539–57): toTheBsynthetic
138 (ll. 539–57):
unity ofThe consciousness
synthetic unity requiredof consciousness
to delimit andrequired to designate
to delimit and to designate
priori zu einem möglichen priori zu Erkenntnis.
einem möglichen Erkenntnis.
know anything whateverknow in space,
anything any such spatio-temporal
e.g.,whatever in space, e.g., any region
such spatio-temporal
is thus ‘an objective
region condition
is thus ‘anof objective
all cognitions’,
condition insofarof all
as cognitions’, insofar as
Um aber irgend etwasUm im aber
Raume irgendzu er-etwasaim Raume
line, I must zu draw
er- ita and line, soI must it is required
effectdraw it and so effect to have any,
it is even
requiredputativeto haveparticular
any, even
objectputative
of awareness
particular or object
prospective
of awareness
ascrip- or prospective ascrip-
tion within some indicated tion within
region,some as anindicated
object one region,
presumes as anto object
be aware
one presumes
of, becausetowhat- be aware of, because what-
540 kennen, z.B. eine540 Linie,kennen,
muß ich z.B.sieeine
zie-Linie, muß ich siea zie-
synthetically determinate
synthetically connec- a determinate connec-
44 44 45 45
44 45
 hen und also [B138] eine henbestimmte
und also [Ver- B138] eine tion bestimmte
of the given Ver- manifold,
tion of so the that ever particular(s)
given manifold, so thatwe can everknow
particular(s)
occupy such we can regions,
know and occupybecause
such any regions,
possibleand thought
because one any possible thought one
bindung des gegebenen bindungMannigfaltigen
des gegebenen the Mannigfaltigen
unity of this act is the equally
unityalso the act can
of this have ofalso
is equally anytheone suchcan have
particularof anyrequires
one such thatparticular
one can (and requires often thatdoes)
one self-consciously
can (and often does) self-consciously
synthetisch zu Standesynthetisch
bringen, so zu daßStandeunity bringen, so daß unity
of consciousness (in oftheconsciousness
con- integrate suchcon-
(in the cognitively
integrate
crucialsuch information
cognitively socrucial
that any information
of us can think: so that‘I anythink of …’ us can
in re-
think: ‘I think …’ in re-
die Einheit dieser Handlungdie Einheitzugleichdieser dieHandlung
cept ofzugleich
a line), so diethatcept
thereby
of a an line), gard to this
ob-so that thereby an ob- designated, gard
circumscribed,
to this designated,
localised, circumscribed,
sensorily presented
localised, particular.
sensorily The
presented
sense of
particular. The sense of
545 Einheit des Bewußtseyns
545 Einheit(imdesBegriffe Bewußtseyns ject (a(imdeterminate
Begriffe space) ject (a isdeterminate
at all ‘objective’
space) iscondition
at all is‘objective’
that such condition
thoughts can is thathave such objective
thoughts validity
can have by actually
objective being validity
aboutby actually being about
einer Linie) ist, und dadurch
einer Linie)allererst
ist, und
ein dadurch
known.allererst ein known.
The synthetic unity of Thecon- particulars
synthetic unity of con- one judges particulars
– or mis-judges
one judges
as the– case
or mis-judges
may be, though
as the case
Kant’s may transcendental
be, though Kant’s transcendental
Object (ein bestimmter ObjectRaum) (einerkannt
bestimmter Raum) erkannt
sciousness is thus an objective
sciousnesscondi- is thus anproof of (Critical
objective condi-commonsense,
proof of (Criticaldirect perceptual)
commonsense, realismdirect
rulesperceptual)
out the sceptical
realism rulesgeneralisa-
out the sceptical generalisa-
wird. Die synthetische wird.Einheit
Die synthetische
des Be- tion Einheit
of all des Be- tion
cognition, not only
of alltocognition,
en- tion from the
not only to en- occasional,
tion yet
from ubiquitous
the occasional,
possibility yet ubiquitous
of perceptual possibility
errors orof illusions
perceptual to the
errors or illusions to the
wußtseyns ist also eine wußtseyns
objectiveistBedin- also eineable objective
me to Bedin-
know an able object,mebut one ansceptical
to know object, hypothesis
but one ofsceptical global perceptual
hypothesisscepticism.
of global perceptual(This is thescepticism.
key point (This of hisisRefutation
the key point of his Refutation
550 gung aller Erkenntniß,
550 gung nichtallerderen
Erkenntniß,
ich under nichtwhichderen must ich stand
under any which of Idealism,
intu-must stand any intu- B275–87.)of Idealism, B275–87.)

bloß selbst bedarf, um bloßeinselbst Object bedarf,

zu um ition,einif Object zu ition,
it is to become an object
if itforis me,
to become
B138 an (ll.
object for me,MostB138
539–57): directly,
(ll. 539–57):
for any Most objectdirectly,
to be anfor object
any forobject
me requires
to be anthat objectI can forthink
me requires that I can think
erkennen, sondern unter erkennen,der jede sondernAn- unter because der injedeanyAn-other waybecause
and without
in any otherinway andtowithout
regard it ‘I think …’.
in regard
This analytically
to it ‘I thinksimple …’. This apperceptive
analyticallythoughtsimple isapperceptive
a necessary thought aspect is a necessary aspect
schauung stehen muß, schauung
um f ü rstehen m i c hmuß,thisumsynthesis,
f ü r m i cthe h manifold
this synthesis,would the ofmanifold
any suchwould thought aboutof any anysuch particular
thoughtofabout which anyany particular
human being of which can be
anyself-aware.
human being And can be self-aware. And
O b j e c t z u w e r d e nO, bweil
j e c taufz uandere
w e r d e nnot
, weil be auf
unitedandere
within not
one be single
united con-withinthis oneanalytically
single con- simple,thisself-referential
analytically simple, apperceptive self-referential
thought only apperceptive
occurs, and thoughtonly onlypertains
occurs, and only pertains
555 Art und ohne diese 555 Synthesis
Art und ohne das Man- diese Synthesis
sciousness. das Man- sciousness. to knowledge, insofar to as knowledge,
one thinks ‘Iinsofar think …’ as one in connection
thinks ‘I think to some…’ insynthetic
connection unity,tosome some synthetic unity, some
nigfaltige sich nicht nigfaltige
in einem sich Bewußt- nicht in einem Bewußt- judgmentally integratedjudgmentally classifications integrated
of the spatialclassifications
region occupied
of the spatial by some regionparticular
occupied ex-by some particular ex-
seyn vereinigen würde.seyn vereinigen würde. hibiting such-and-so (identified,
hibiting such-and-so
classified, ascribed)
(identified, features
classified,
(howeverascribed) approximately).
features (however approximately).
Dieser letzte Satz ist, Dieser
wie letzte
gesagt,Satz This ist, wie last gesagt,
propositionThis itselflastis, proposition
as B138 (ll. itself is, as Kant
558–70): B138again(ll. contrasts
558–70): the Kantconceptual
again contrasts simplicitythe of conceptual
the thought, simplicity
‘I think’,
of the thought, ‘I think’,
selbst analytisch, ob erselbstzwar analytisch,
die syntheti- ob ermentioned,
zwar die syntheti-
analytic, though
mentioned, it makesanalytic,which
though it makes
is ‘identical’ (cf.whichB135, is ll. ‘identical’
469–82) or(cf.‘analytic’,
B135, ll. which 469–82) is or
decisive
‘analytic’,
precisely
whichbecauseis decisiveits precisely because its
560 sche Einheit zur 560 Bedingung
sche Einheit alles Den-
zur Bedingung
the syntheticalles Den-
unity intothe a condition
synthetic unity of into a condition
possibility requiresof some possibility
(one orrequires
another,some however (oneepisodic
or another, or extensive)
however episodicsynthetic unity,
or extensive)
and synthetic unity, and
kens macht; denn er kens sagt nichts
macht; weiter,
denn er sagt nichts weiter,
all thinking; for it saysallno thinking;
more than for it says no more than
it makes possible any self-conscious
it makes possible thought
any self-conscious
about any particulars thoughtwe aboutcan think
any particulars
of or about. we can think of or about.
als, daß alle meine Vorstellungen
als, daß alle meine in ir- Vorstellungen
that all of inmyir- representations
that all of my in representations in
gend einer gegebenen gend Anschauung
einer gegebenen
unter whatever
Anschauung givenunterintuition
whatever
must given
stand intuition must stand
der Bedingung stehender müssen,
Bedingung unter stehen
der under müssen,the unter der under
condition underthewhich condition under which
565 ich sie allein als 565
m e ich
i n e sie
Vorstellungen
allein als m e ialone n e Vorstellungen
I can ascribe them aloneas Imycan repre-
ascribe them as my repre-
zu diesem identitschen zu Selbst
diesemrechnen,
identitschen Selbst rechnen,
sentations to this identical
sentationsself, toand B138 (571–6):
this identical self, Kant
and underscores
B138 (571–6): that his Kant explication
underscores of any thathumanly
his explication
possible of‘Ianythinkhumanly
…’, under possible ‘I think …’, under
und also, als in einer und Apperception
also, als insyn- einer Apperception
thus, as conjoined syn- synthetically
thus, as conjoined what necessary
within synthetically conditions
within whata necessary
priori it is possible,
conditions and a priori
what itcognitive
is possible, achievements
and what cognitive
its occurrence achievements its occurrence
thetisch verbunden, durch thetisch denverbunden,
allgemei- durch den allgemei- [I one
one apperception, summarily [Irepresents,
can] apperception, can] summarilyare not conceptual
represents, truthsare asnotsuch;
conceptual
they cannot truthsand as such;
do not theybelong
cannot to and
any ‘analytic
do not belong to any ‘analytic
nen Ausdruck I c h d enen n k eAusdruck
zusammenfa- I c h d e ngrasp
k e zusammenfa-
them all together grasp
withthem
the gen- transcendental
all together with the gen- argument’;transcendental
they are conceptual
argument’; explications
they are (per B 755–8)
conceptual and pertain
explications (pertoB a
755–8)
specific and pertain to a specific
570 ßen kann. 570 ßen kann. eral expression: I think.eral expression: I think. kind of understanding kind
qua capacity
of understanding
to judge, namely
qua capacity
any kind
to judge,
whose namely
apperceptive
any kind thought,
whose ‘Iapperceptive thought, ‘I
Aber dieser GrundsatzAber ist doch
diesernicht
Grundsatz Yetistthis
doch nicht is ofYet
principle course
this notprinciple
a think
is of …’,course does notnota automatically
think …’, does contain not or automatically
provide anything containmanifold.
or provide Its anything
very simplicitymanifold. is Its very simplicity is
ein Prinzip für jedenein überhaupt
Prinzip für mögli-jeden principle
überhauptformögli- any possible
principle
understan- Kant’s key
for any possible understan- to demonstrating
Kant’s that
key thinking
to demonstrating
this thought that isthinking
parasitic this
(dependent)
thought isupon
parasitic
other (dependent)
cog- upon other cog-
chen Verstand, sondern chen nur Verstand,
für den, sondernding nur für but
as such, den,ratherdingonlyas such,
for that nitiveonly
but rather achievements,
for that asnitive conditions
achievements,
necessaryasfor conditions
the possibilitynecessaryof humanfor theapperception.
possibility of Only human apperception. Only
durch dessen reine Apperzeption
durch desseninreine der Apperzeption
kind, through in whose
der kind, pure through very few
appercep-whose pure appercep- of these conditions
very few
are of
identified
these conditions
within the are
Deduction;
identified most
within are
the
identified
Deduction; in the
mostAn-are identified in the An-
575 Vorstellung: I c h 575b i nVorstellung:
, noch gar nichts I c h b i ntion
, noch in thegarrepresentation:
nichts tion in I am,
thenoth- alytic of Principles;
representation: I am, noth- cf. 122–3
Balytic of (ll. 88–145),
Principles; B164–5
cf. B122–3 (ll.
(ll.
1128–70)
88–145), re:B164–5
transcendental
(ll. 1128–70)affinity,
re: transcendental
and affinity, and
B162 (ll. 1084–99) re: seeing B162 a(ll.house
1084–99) (and re: KCE seeing
, Pt 2).a house (and KCE, Pt 2).
Mannigfaltiges gegeben Mannigfaltiges
ist. […] [Bgegeben
139] ingist.at[…]
all manifold
[B139] is yet
inggiven.
at all manifold
[…] is yet given. […]

46 46 47 47
46 47
 § 18. Was objective §Einheit 18. Was
bewußtseyns sei.
Die t r a n s s c e n d e n Die
580 der Apperception580istderdiejenige,
welche alles in einer welcheAnschauung alles ingege-
bene Mannigfaltige inbene
einenMannigfaltige
Object vereinigt wird.Object Sie heißt
o b j e c t i v und muß vono b jder
585 v e n E i n h e i t des
585 Bewußtseyns
v e n E i n h e unter-
schieden werden, […] schieden
. [B140] werden,
steht die reine Form der stehtAnschauung
der Zeit, bloß als Anschauung
der Zeit, bloß
haupt, die ein gegebenes haupt, Mannigfaltiges
590 enthält, unter der 590ursprünglichen
enthält, unter
des Bewußtseyns lediglich des Bewußtseyns
nothwendige Beziehung nothwendige
gen der Anschauunggen
denke, also durch die denke,
reine Synthesis
595 Verstandes, welche priori der empiri-
595 aVerstandes,
schen zum Grunde liegt. schenJene zum Einheit
allein objectiv gültig; […]allein objectiv gültig; […]
des objective § 18. What
Selbst- Einheit des isSelbst-
Objective Unity
§ 18. What of Self-
is Objective
3.6 Unity §18:of What
Self- is 3.6
Objective §18:Unity Whatof Self-Consciousness.
is Objective Unity of Self-Consciousness.
bewußtseyns sei. Consciousness. Consciousness.
B139 (ll. 579–84): TheB139 transcendental
(ll. 579–84):unity The of transcendental
apperceptionunity is thatof unitary
apperception
consciousness
is that unitary consciousness
t a l e t rEainnshseciet n d e nThe
t a l etranscendental
E i n h e i t unityThe
of appercep-
transcendental unity of appercep-
which integrates whatever which manifold
integratesof sensed
whatever features
manifold mayofbesensed
presented
features
in sensory
may beintuition
presented in sensory intuition
Apperception durch isttion is that durch
diejenige, unity through
tion iswhich
that unity
all through which of
into a concept allthe object
into a concept
so presented.
of theKant’s
objectphrase,
so presented.
‘vom ObjectKant’s
’, mayphrase,
be more‘vom concise
Object ’, may be more concise
the manifoldgege-
einer Anschauung within thean intuition
manifold iswithin than anweintuition is
would wish, than
but itwe clearly
would contrasts
wish, butto hisit clearly
previous contrasts
locutionsto hiswhich
previous
expressly
locutions
con- which expressly con-
Begriff vom in united
within vom
einen Begriff a conceptunited
of anwithin
object.a concept of an object.
cern concepts of an ‘object cernasconcepts
such’, ofto an
which
‘object
no presented
as such’, tomanifold
which no ofpresented
sensory intuition
manifoldper-of sensory intuition per-
darumwird.This
vereinigt Sie unity
heißt isdarumthus called
Thisobjective,
unity isandthus called
tains. objective, and
The conclusion tains.
of §17 Theexpressly
conclusion concerns
of §17constraints
expressly upon concerns intuition
constraints
and sensory
upon intuition and sensory
e c t si vu bund
j e cmuß must
t i - von derbes udistinguished
b j e c t i - must
frombethedistinguished
subjec- from therequired
manifolds subjec- formanifolds
anything ‘to required
become forananything
object for ‘to me’.
become Thean ‘objectivity’
object for of me’.
this
Theunity
‘objectivity’ of this unity
tive unity ofunter-
i t des Bewußtseyns consciousness.
tive unity[…] of Inconsciousness.
of apperceptionIn
[…] is thatofit apperception
is required foris objective
that it is required
referencefor or objective
for objectivereference
realityor (possible
for objective reality (possible
Dagegen […]contrast,
. [B140] the pure form
Dagegen contrast,
of intuition
the pure
in form of intuitionofin particulars)
representation representationor for ofobjective
particulars)
validity or for
(possibly
objectivejustified
validityrepresentation
(possibly justified
of representation of
die reine Form in dertime, merely asin intuition
Anschauung time, merely
as such,as intuition
particulars);as itsuch,
is necessary,
particulars);
thoughit notis necessary,
sufficient, though
for truth, notaccuracy
sufficient, or for
justifiedness.
truth, accuracyIt is or justifiedness. It is
über- which contains
als Anschauung über-a given
which manifold,
contains a necessary
given manifold,
so that any humanly
necessarypossible
so that thought
any humanly can bepossible
object-directed
thought or canpertain
be object-directed
to objects. or pertain to objects.
die ein gegebenes stands under the original
Mannigfaltiges stands unity
under ofthe original unity of
B140 (ll. 586–97): KantB140 here(ll.remarks,
586–97): notKant
uponheretime, remarks,
but upon nottheuponformtime,
of any
but sensory
upon theintu-
form of any sensory intu-
Einheit consciousness
der ursprünglichen solely consciousness
Einheit in consequencesolely in consequence
ition within time which itioncontains
within sometime which
specific,contains
de facto,some‘given’specific,
sensoryde manifold,
facto, ‘given’though
sensory manifold, though
durch die lediglich of the durch necessary die connection
of the necessary
of the connection of the
considering these ‘merely considering
as intuitiontheseas ‘merely
such’, and as intuition
regardless as of
such’,
any and
particular
regardless
manifold
of anyofparticular manifold of
des Mannigfalti- Beziehung manifold of intuition manifold
des Mannigfalti- to one: I of think;
intuition to one: I think;
sensation. This temporal sensation.
form ofThis an intuition
temporalonly form pertains
of an intuition
to the original
only pertains
unity oftoappercep-
the original unity of appercep-
zumderEinen: AnschauungIch that zumis, Einen:
it so stands
Ich solely
that is,initconse-
so standstionsolely in conse-
insofar as the manifold
tion insofarit contains
as thecanmanifold
be integrally
it contains
comprehended
can be integrally
by someonecomprehended
(syn- by someone (syn-
also durch quence
desdie reine of the des
Synthesis pure synthesis
quence ofofthe un-purethesised)
synthesiswho of un-
can think,thesised)
‘I think who…’can in connecting
think, ‘I think that …’
sensory
in connecting
manifold that to some
sensoryputative
manifold to some putative
welche a derstanding,
priori der empiri- which synthesis
derstanding,is pre-
which object
synthesis is pre- (intuited),
so presented object sothought
presentedand(intuited),
(hence) conceived.
thought and (hence) conceived.
Grunde supposed
ist liegt. Jene Einheita prioriist bysupposed
any empirical
a priori by Noteany empirical
that the genitiveNote preposition
that the‘of genitive
’ – as always
prepositionin epistemology!
‘of ’ – as always – must in epistemology!
be under- – must be under-
synthesis. The formersynthesis. unity alone Theisformer unity alone is
stood carefully to avoidstood a host carefully
of errors.
to avoid
A ‘manifold
a host of of errors.
sensation’ A ‘manifold
is not some of sensation’
batch of sen-is not some batch of sen-
objectively valid; […]. objectively valid; […]sations; . it is some plurality
sations;ofitsensed
is somequalities,
pluralitycharacteristics,
of sensed qualities, featurescharacteristics,
or aspects; it features
con- or aspects; it con-
cerns contents conveyed cerns in,contents
through conveyed
or by sensory in, through
processes or and
by sensory
channels. processes
Sensations and as
channels. Sensations as
occurrences may be modifications
occurrences of maya subject’s
be modifications
sensory receptivity,
of a subject’s butsensory
the character
receptivity,
or ‘con-
but the character or ‘con-
tent’ of such sensory tent’ modifications
of such sensory
may be modifications
and often is indicative
may be and of often
somethingis indicative
real as aof something real as a
(typical) occasioning cause (typical)
or source
occasioning
of suchcause
typeor sensations;
source ofcf.such B207 type
andsensations;
below, §5.cf. B207 and below, §5.

§ 19. Die logische Form

§ 19. aller
Die Urtheile The Urtheile
§ 19. aller
logische Form Logical Form§ 19.ofThe
all Judg- 3.7 of
Logical Form §19:all Judg-
The Logical
3.7
3.7 Form §19:of allThe
Judgments
Logical Form
consistsof all
in Judgments
the Objectiveconsists
Unityin ofthe
theObjective
Con- Unity of the Con-
besteht in der objectiven
besteht
Einheit
in der objectiven
mentsEinheit
consists in thements
Objective
consists in the Objectivecepts they Contain. cepts they Contain.
600 der Apperception
600 derderdarin
Apperception
ent- der darinofent-
Unity the Concepts
Unity they
of theB141–2
Concepts they InB141–2
(ll. 602–21): contrast (ll.to602–21):
the logician’s
In contrast
accountto the
of judgment,
logician’s account
and apartoffrom
judgment,
any and apart from any
haltenen Begriffe. haltenen Begriffe. Contain. Contain. consideration of reproductive
consideration
imagination
of reproductive
(required to imagination
continue considering
(required toany
continue
sensedconsidering
par- any sensed par-
[…] Wenn ich aber die[…]Beziehung
Wenn ichgege-
aber die[…]
Beziehung
However,gege-
if I examine
[…] However,
the con-if I examine the con-
ticular through any period ticularof through
time), simply
any period
regarding
of time),
the connection
simply regarding
of any the
givenconnection
cognitionsof any given cognitions
bener Erkenntnisse inbener
jedemErkenntnisse
Urtheile ge- in nection
jedem Urtheile
of givenge- cognitions
nection of in given
any cognitions in any as
within any judgment, within
belonging
any judgment,
to understanding,
as belonging Kanttofinds
understanding,
that judgment
Kantis finds
how those
that judgment is how those
nauer untersuche, undnauer
sie, als
untersuche,
dem Ver-undjudgment
sie, als dem
more
Ver-exactly,
judgment
and distin-
more exactly, and distin-
cognitions are broughtcognitions
to the objective
are brought
unity of
to the
apperception.
objective unity
This of
connection
apperception.
is expressed
This connection is expressed
605 stand angehörige,605
vonstand
dem angehörige,
Verhältnissevonguish
dem Verhältnisse
these as belonging
guish these
to theas belonging to the copula
by the affirmative by the‘IS’,affirmative
constitutivecopula
of any‘ISjudgment
’, constitutive
one can
of any
makejudgment
that anyoneparticular
can make that any particular
nach Gesetzen der reproductiven
nach Gesetzen Einbil-
der reproductiven Einbil-
understanding from understanding
those relationsfromis asthose relations
one now judges itistoasbe.
oneThat
nowis judges
the ‘objective’
it to be. unity
That isofthe
apperception,
‘objective’ unity
in contrast
of apperception,
to the in contrast to the

48 48 49 49
48 49
 dungskraft (welches nur dungskraft
subjective (welches
Gül- nur subjective
according to Gül-
laws of according
reproductive to laws subjective
of reproductive unity, whichsubjective
concerns unity, merelywhich how concerns
somethingmerely seemshow to one something
to be: objective
seems tounity one to be: objective unity
tigkeit hat) unterscheide,
tigkeitsohat) finde unterscheide,
ich, imaginationso finde(whichich, onlyimagination
have subjec- (which isonly directed to and concerns
have subjec- is directedthat object,
to and notconcerns
merely how that object,
it maynot seem merely
or appear
how ittomay oneseem
to be. or appear to one to be.
daß ein Urtheil nichtsdaß andresein Urtheil
sey, als nichts
die tive andres sey, alsI die
validity), then find
tive that
validity),
a judg- I thenThe findobjectivity
that a judg- here atThe issueobjectivity
is two-fold: hereThat at issuethe is cognitions
two-fold:(sensoryThat theorcognitions
conceptual) (sensory
inte- or conceptual) inte-
610 Art, gegebene Erkenntnisse
610 Art, gegebenezur objecti-
Erkenntnisse
ment iszur objecti-
nothing other ment
than theis nothing
way to other grated
than within
the wayantoaffirmativegrated within judgment an affirmative
have objective judgment
reality, have
in that objective
they represent
reality, inorthat can they represent or can
ven Einheit der Apperception
ven Einheit zu der
brin-Apperception
bring givenzucognition
brin- bring to thegiven
objective cognition pertain
to thetoobjective
objects, andpertain that in to thisobjects,
judgment and these
that incognitions
this judgment have these
this objective
cognitions reality,
havethat this objective reality, that
gen. Darauf zielt das gen.Verhältnißwört-
Darauf zielt dasunity Verhältnißwört-
of apperception. unityThat’sof apperception.
the they pertain
That’s theto this presented,
they pertaindiscriminated,
to this presented,
identified discriminated,
particular oneidentified
now judges.
particular
This (cog-
one now judges. This (cog-
chen i s t in [B142] denselben,
chen i s tum in die ob-denselben,
[B142] point ofumthe diecopula
ob- ‘point
IS’ withinof the judg- copulanitively)
‘IS’ within necessary
judg- unity nitively)
of apperception
necessary unity is entirely
of apperception
consistent with is entirely
the logical
consistentcontingency
with the logical contingency
jective Einheit gegebenerjectiveVorstellungen
Einheit gegebener ments, Vorstellungen
to distinguishments, the objective of any
to distinguish the objective empirical judgmentof any
one empirical
makes (e.g.,
judgment
that bodies
one makes
are heavy,
(e.g., or
that that
bodies
this body
are heavy,
is heavy).
or that this body is heavy).
615 von der subjectiven 615 vonzu unterscheiden.
der subjectiven unity zu unterscheiden.
of given representations
unity of given from representations
B142 (ll. 621–35): fromKantBcarefully
142 (ll. 621–35):
distinguishes Kant his carefully
intended distinguishes
modal claim his from
intendedany modal claim from any modal claim
Denn dieses bezeichnet Denndiedieses Beziehung
bezeichnet the die Beziehung
subjective unity. For
the that
subjective
[copula] unity.about
For that [copula]
the representation about of theconstituent
representation
aspects of within
constituent
any empirical
aspects (sensory)
within any intuition
empirical (its (sensory) intuition (its
derselben auf die ursprüngliche
derselben auf Apper-
die ursprüngliche
indicates their Apper-
connection
indicates
to thetheir orig-connection
‘manifold’) to the orig- together
belonging ‘manifold’) necessarily.
belonging Kant’s
together modal necessarily.
claim concerns Kant’s the modalpossibility
claim concerns
of mak- the possibility of mak-
ception und die nothwendige
ception undEinheit die nothwendige Einheit and
inal apperception inalitsapperception
necessary and ing any its judgment
necessary about ing any any
sensed judgment
particular
about(ll. any634–5).
sensedKant’sparticularclaim (ll.is634–5).
that these Kant’s representa-
claim is that these representa-
derselben, wenn gleichderselben,
das Urtheil wennselbst
gleichunity,
das Urtheil
even ifselbstthe judgment
unity, even tions belong
itselfif isthe judgment together
itself is necessarily
tions belong as together
aspects (cognitions)
necessarily as integrated
aspects (cognitions)
within a (prospective)
integrated judg- within a (prospective) judg-
620 empirisch, mithin620zufällig
empirisch, ist, z.B.
mithin die zufällig ist, z.B.
empirical, and die so is empirical,
contingent,and e.g.,so isment formed bye.g.,
contingent, someone mentthinking
formed‘Ibythink someone
…’ about thinkingthis sensed,
‘I thinkintuited
…’ about particular.
this sensed, Whatever
intuited particular. Whatever
Körper sind schwer.Körper Damit sind ich zwar
schwer. bodies
Damit are ichheavy.
zwar Bybodiesthis I are do heavy.
not By contingencies
this I do (or notde rescontingencies
necessities) may (or pertain
de res necessities)
to the existence may pertain
or characteristics
to the existence of some or characteristics
per- of some per-
nicht sagen will, diesenicht
Vorstellungen
sagen will,ge- diese mean
Vorstellungen
to say that ge- these to say that ceived
meanrepresenta- particular, thoseceived
these representa- modalparticular,
issues arethose distinct modalto the issues
cognitive
are distinct
modalities
to thewhich cognitive
pertain modalities
to which pertain to
hören in der empirischen hören Anschauung
in der empirischen tions Anschauung
belong in that tions empirical
belong intu- in thatapperceptively
empirical intu- ascribingapperceptively
to that perceived ascribing
particular to thatsome perceived
feature(s) particular
or other(s).
some feature(s) or other(s).
nothwendig zu einander, nothwendig sondernzu sie einander,
ition tosondern
each other sie necessarily;
ition to each rather,other necessarily;
B142 (ll. 636–40): rather,KantB142 expressly
(ll. 636–40):
indicates Kant thatexpressly
the sameindicatespluralitythat(‘manifold’)
the sameofplurality representa-(‘manifold’) of representa-
625 gehören vermöge 625 der
gehören nothwendigen
vermöge der due nothwendigen
to the necessary due unitytoofthe apper-
necessary tions withinapper-
unity of one and the tions
same within
cognisant
one and eventtheor sameactivity
cognisant
can have event distinctive
or activity roles,
candepending
have distinctive roles, depending
Einheit der Apperception Einheitin der der Apperception
Syn- ceptionin inder theSyn-
synthesis
ception
of intuitions
in the synthesis upon of theintuitions
connections upon in which the theyconnections
are regarded, in which here:theywhether
are regarded,
subjectively,here:aswhether
indicative subjectively,
of as indicative of
thesis der Anschauungen thesis zu dereinander,
Anschauungen zu einander,
they belong to one another,
they belong i.e., ac-
to oneany another, i.e., ac-
subject’s state of mind any subject’s
and whatever state ofmay mind appearand to whatever
it via sensory
may appear perception,
to it via or sensory
instead perception, or instead
d.i. nach Principien der d.i. objectiven
nach Principien Be- der objectiven
cording Be- of
to principles cording
the objective
to principlesobjectively,
of the objectiveas indicative objectively,
of what that as indicative
same subject of what thinksthatand samejudges
subjectabout thinks
that andparticular,
judgesasabout that particular, as
stimmung aller Vorstellungen,
stimmung so allerfern
Vorstellungen,
determination so fern
of all representations,
determination of - all having
representations, -
objective reference having andobjective
as purportingreference to ascribe
and as identified
purportingfeatures to ascribe to thatidentified
particular.features to that particular.
630 daraus Erkenntniß630werden
darauskann, Erkenntniß
welche werden so farkann,
as theywelchecan afford
so farcognition,
as they can This afford cognition,
is Kant’s ‘objective This validity’
is Kant’s (ll. 633–5),
‘objective thatvalidity’
a thought (ll. 633–5),
or judgment that acan thought
(i) be or directed
judgment to can (i) be directed to
Principien alle aus dem Principien
Grundsatzealle ausder dem Grundsatze
which principles derall derive
which from principlesthe allany derive fromobject
particular the atany all, particular
and that itobject can (ii)atbe all,accurate,
and thatjustified
it can (ii)orbe justifiable.
accurate,Kant’sjustifiedDeduc-
or justifiable. Kant’s Deduc-
transscendentalen Einheittransscendentalen
der Appercep-Einheit der Appercep-
principle of the transcendental
principle ofunity tion aims to demonstrate
the transcendental unity tionthataims ourtoproper
demonstrateuse of that the categories
our properisuse necessary
of the categories
to any suchis objec- necessary to any such objec-
tion abgeleitet sind. Dadurch
tion abgeleitet
allein wird
sind. Dadurch allein wird
of apperception. Onlyofinapperception.
this way can Only tiveinvalidity.
this wayThis cannecessary
tive validity.
unity ofThis apperception
necessary unity by which of apperception
in judgment by onewhichrefersintojudgment
what one refers to what
aus diesem Verhältniße aus ein diesemU r tVerhältniße
h e i l , this ein U r t hafford
relation e i l , athis
judgment,
relation i.e.,afford
a some sensed,i.e.,
a judgment, perceived
a some
particular
sensed, IS, perceived
is distinctive even inISregard
particular , is distinctive
to the very evensame in regard
component
to the very same component
635 d.i. ein Verhältniß,635dasd.i.objectiv
ein Verhältniß,
gültig ist dasrelation
objectiv which
gültig ist is objectively
relation which representations
valid, is objectively valid, used in representations
that same judgment,
used in
so that
far as
same these
judgment,
merely represent
so far as these
also how
merelythat represent
per- also how that per-
und sich von dem Verhältniße
und sich von ebendem der-Verhältniße
and which ebenis der-
sufficiently
and which ceived item
distinctis tosufficiently distinct to seems or appears
ceived item
to one.
seems This or isappears
how closely
to one.issues
This ofis objective
how closely
validity
issues canof (and
objective validity can (and
selben Vorstellungen, selben
worin bloß Vorstellungen,
subjec- worin relationsbloßofsubjec-
even these relations
same of repre- do) intersect
even these same repre- issues of cognitive
do) intersect process,
issueswhilst
of cognitive
nevertheless process, beingwhilst
distinctive
nevertheless
in character.
being distinctive
This in character. This
tive Gültigkeit [B143] wäre, z. B. nach [Ge-
tive Gültigkeit B143] wäre, z. B. nachwhich
sentations Ge- wouldsentations contain also indicates
which would contain Kant’s reiterated
also indicatesconcern Kant’sto highlight
reiterated how,
concernin principle,
to highlightempiricist
how, in
accounts
principle, of empiricist accounts of
setzen der Association, setzenhinreichend
der Association,
un- merely hinreichend
subjective un-validity,
merely e.g.,subjective
accord- validity, psychological association
e.g., accord- psychological
cannot address association
issues of cannot
cognitive
address validity,
issuesbecause
of cognitivetheir modalities
validity, because their modalities
640 terscheidet. Nach640den terscheidet.
letzteren Nachwürde deningletzteren
to laws of würde
association.
ing toAccording differ
laws of association. According in kind, not in degree;
differ inissues
kind, ofnot cognitive
in degree; validity
issues haveof cognitive
an irreducible
validitystatus,
have aan‘dignity’
irreducible status, a ‘dignity’
ich nur sagen können: ichWennnur sagen
ich einen
können:toWenn these ich einen
latter I couldto only
thesesay: latter (B124, l. 171, cf. B126, ll.
If II could only say: If I (B124,
240–7). l. 171,
In the
cf. BAnalytic
126, ll. 240–7).
of Principles
In the Kant
Analyticarguesof Principles
that we can
Kantand argues
do that we can and do
(insofar as any of us achieves (insofar apperception)
as any of us achieves competently apperception)
identify atcompetently
least some particulars
identify at we least some particulars we
Körper trage, so fühle Körper
ich einen
trage,Druck
so fühlecarry ich aeinen
body,Druck
then I feelcarrya pressure
a body, then of I feel a pressure of
50 50 51 51
50 51
 der Schwere; aber nicht:
der er,
Schwere;
der Körper,
aber nicht: er, der
weight; butKörper,
not: it, theweight;
body, isbut
heavy; sense,
not: it, the body,andisdistinguish
heavy; them sense,from
and our
distinguish
perceiving
themthem,
fromasour
we perceiving
perceive them.
them, as we perceive them.
i s t schwer; welches iso
s t viel
schwer;
sagenwelches
will, so viel purports
which sagen will,
to express
which that
purports
both to express that both
B142 (ll. 633–50): KantB142 expressly
(ll. 633–50):
distinguishes
Kant expressly
the cognitive
distinguishes
relationsthe
required
cognitive
for objective
relations required for objective
645 als, diese beide Vorstellungen
645 als, diese beide
sind im
Vorstellungen sind im of these
of these representations are bound
representations are bound
validity from merely psychological
validity from laws merelyof psychological
association, which
laws of
in association,
principle canwhich
only afford
in principle can only afford
Object, d. i. ohne Unterschied
Object, d. desi. ohne
Zu- Unterschied
together indestheZu-object,together
i.e. regardless
in the object, i.e. regardless
subjective validity, i.e.,subjective
reports ofvalidity,
how anything
i.e., reports
appears
of how
to one
anything
to be, appears
which canto one
nevertosuf-
be, which can never suf-
standes des Subjects,standes
verbunden,
des Subjects,
und ofverbunden,
the state ofund the subject,
of the state
and are
of theficesubject, and are
for any affirmationfice thatforany
anysensed
affirmation
particular as sensed
thatISany one perceives andISjudges
particular as oneitperceives
to be. and judges it to be.
nicht bloß in der Wahrnehmung
nicht bloß in(soderoftWahrnehmung
not merely (so oft together
present not merelyin per-
present together in per-
sie auch wiederholt seyn
sie auch
mag)wiederholt
beysam- seyn mag)(however
ception beysam-often ception
it may(however
be re- often it may be re-
650 men. 650 men. peated). peated).

§ 20. Alle sinnliche Anschauungen

§ 20. Alle sinnliche § 20. All Sensory
stehenAnschauungen stehenIntuitions
§ 20. All stand
Sensory
un- Intuitions
3.8 §20: standAllun- 3.8
sensory
3.8 Intuitions
§20: All standsensory
underIntuitions
the Categories stand as under
Conditions
the Categories
under which
as Conditions under which
unter den Categorien als unter
Bedingun-
den Categorien der als Bedingun-
the Categories as Conditions
der the Categories as Conditions alone their Manifold can alonecoalesce
their Manifold
in one Consciousness.
can coalesce in one Consciousness.
gen, unter denen alleingen, das Mannig-
unter denen alleinunder das Mannig-
which alone their underMani- which alone their Mani-
B143 (ll. 656–80): Kant B143expressly
(ll. 656–80):
links together
Kant expressly
the implications
links together of §§13,
the 17,implications
19. §17 con- of §§13, 17, 19. §17 con-
faltige derselben in einfaltige
Bewußtseyn
derselben in einfold Bewußtseyn
can coalesce in fold one canCon-coalesce in one Con-
cerns unity of, i.e., within, cernssensory
unity intuitions.
of, i.e., within,
Kant’s
sensoryconciseintuitions.
discussion
Kant’sincludes
concise points
discussion
about includes points about
655 zusammenkommen
655 kann.
zusammenkommen kann. sciousness. sciousness.
process – unity withinprocess sensory– intuitions
unity within – andsensory
disregards
intuitionshis key
– andpointdisregards
that apperception
his key point that apperception
Das mannigfaltige in einer Das mannigfaltige
sinnlichen in The einermanifold
sinnlichen in anything
The given
manifold in a in anything given in a govern
and its constraints and its anyconstraints
representationsgovernwhich any representations
can be something whichfor oneself,
can be something
by con- for oneself, by con-
Anschauung Gegebene Anschauung
gehört nothwen- Gegebenesensory gehört intuition
nothwen-necessarily
sensory belongs
intuition necessarily belongs
tributing to any of one’s tributing
apperceptive
to any episodes.
of one’s apperceptive
(Kant’s concern episodes.
with what
(Kant’s oneconcern
can consider,
with what one can consider,
dig unter die ursprüngliche dig unter synthetische
die ursprünglicheunder synthetische
the original synthetic
under the unityoriginal
of synthetic
judge or be unity
awareof of is
judge
reiterated
or be at aware
the start
of is ofreiterated
§21.) The at the
key start
points of Kant
§21.) highlights
The key pointscon- Kant highlights con-
Einheit der Apperception, Einheit weil der durch
Apperception, weil durch
apperception, becauseapperception,
only throughbecause only through
cern validity, specifically: cernconditions
validity, specifically:
under which conditions
integrated under
cognitions
which integrated
can have objective
cognitions can have objective
660 diese die E i n h e 660i t der
dieseAnschauung
die E i n h eal-i t derthatAnschauung
[unity] is theal-unitythat
of the
[unity]
intuition
is the unity of the
reality (in intuition
the sense of reality
being (in directed
the sensetowardsof being
objects directed
one can towards
experience)
objectsand onecancanbeexperience)
objec- and can be objec-
lein möglich ist (§ 17).lein Diejenige
möglich Hand-
ist (§ 17).possible
Diejenige Hand-
(§ 17). However,
possible
that (§act17). of However, that insofar
tively valid act of as these
tively integrated
valid insofar cognitions
as theseare integrated
now realisedcognitions
(in Tetens’
are now sense)
realised
in and
(inby Tetens’ sense) in and by
lung des Verstandes aber, lung desdurchVerstandes
die das aber, durch die das by the
the understanding whichunderstanding
the man- by thiswhich the man-
particular one nowthis judges
particular
to be onesuch-and-so.
now judges Kant to recalls
be such-and-so.
from §17 Kant that any recalls
sensory
fromin- §17 that any sensory in-
Mannigfaltige gegebener Mannigfaltige
Vorstellungen gegebener ifoldVorstellungen
of given representations
ifold of given (whe-representations
tuition which(whe- can be ‘given’
tuition or which
presented
can beto‘given’
any humanlyor presentedpossible to any
apperceptive
humanly ‘I possible
think’ re-apperceptive ‘I think’ re-
(sie mögen Anschauungen (sie mögen
oder Begriffe
Anschauungen ther oder Begriffe or ther
intuitions concepts)
intuitions is orquires concepts)
necessarilyis the quires
synthetic necessarily
unity which the synthetic
makes possible unity whichsuch apperception
makes possible of such
any sen-apperception of any sen-
665 seyn) unter eine Apperception
665 seyn) unter überhaupt
eine Apperception
brought überhaupt
under an apperception
brought under as an sorily
apperception
presented as manifold.
sorilySuchpresented
unification
manifold.
and identification
Such unification requires
and identification
exercise of our requires
basic exercise of our basic
gebracht wird, ist diegebracht
logische wird,
Functionist die such,
logische Function
is the logical function
such, isofthejudg- logical logical
function of judg-of judging
functions logical(§19).
functions
Exercising
of judging
these(§19).logical Exercising
functionstheseof judging
logicalrequires
functions thatof judging requires that
der Urtheile (§ 19). Also derist
Urtheile
alles Mannig-
(§ 19). Also ist alles
ments Mannig-
(§ 19). Therefore,
mentseverything
(§ 19). Therefore,whatever is judged canwhatever
everything be properly is judged
(if approximately)
can be properly classified
(if approximately)
under at leastclassified
some ofunder our at least some of our
faltige, so fern es in faltige,
Einer empirischen
so fern es in Einer manifold,empirischen
so far as it manifold,
is given insoone far as most basic in
it is given categories
one most
(§13).basic
Thuscategories
Kant’s conclusion
(§13). Thus follows:
Kant’sAny conclusion
(sensoryfollows:
or conceptual)
Any (sensory or conceptual)
Anschauung gegebenAnschauung ist, in Ansehung gegeben empirical
ist, in Ansehung
intuition, isempirical
determined intuition,
by manifold
is determinedof whichby anyone
manifold (of ofus which
humananyone beings)(of canusbehumanapperceptively
beings) can aware be apperceptively
necessarily aware necessarily
670 einer der logischen 670 Functionen
einer der logischen
zu ur- Functionen zu ur-
one of the logical functions one of of thejudg- conforms
logical functions of judg-to (or accords
conforms
with) the
to (or
categories.
accords This
with) isthe
a conditional
categories. This
necessity,
is a conditional
and states anecessity, and states a
theilen bestimmt, durch theilen
die bestimmt,
es nämlichdurch ment, die by
es which
nämlich function
ment, it can
by which transcendental
at all function it can at all constraint
transcendental
upon the integratability
constraint uponof any
the sensory
integratability
intuitionsof any
and sensory
of any con-
intuitions and of any con-
zu einem Bewußtseyn zu überhaupt
einem Bewußtseyn ge- be brought überhauptto ge- be brought toasone ceptual
one consciousness classifications
consciousness as ceptual
which can classifications
be judged to whichindicatecan be features
judgedoftoany indicate
particular
features
regarding
of any particular regarding
bracht wird. Nun sind bracht
aber wird.
die CNuna t e - sindsuch.
aberHowever,
die C a t ethe- categories
such. However, which one
are noth- the categories are noth- can judge that
whichit is one
such-and-so
can judge –
that
however
it is such-and-so
approximate – however
or inaccurateapproximate
one’s judg-or inaccurate one’s judg-
g o r i e n nichts andres g o rals
i e neben
nichtsdieseandres ingals ebenthan
other diese
precisely
ing other
these func- ment may
than precisely thesebe,func-and however
ment may logically
be, andor causally
howevercontingent
logically ormay causally
be thecontingent
relation ofmay the befea-the relation of the fea-
675 Functionen zu urtheilen,
675 Functionen so fernzu das urtheilen,
tions so of fern das tions
judgments, so farof asjudgments,
the ture(s) ascribed
so far as the to the ture(s)
particular ascribed
which to
exhibits
the particular
them. which exhibits them.
Mannigfaltige einer gegebenen
Mannigfaltige Anschau-
einer gegebenen
manifold Anschau-
of a given manifold
intuition of is be a given intuition is be
ung in Ansehung ihrer ung in bestimmt
Ansehung ist ihrer bestimmtin ist
determined their determined
regard (§ 13). in their regard (§ 13).
52 52 53 53
52 53
 (§ 13). Also steht auch(§das
13).Mannigfaltige
Also steht auchHence
das Mannigfaltige
also the manifold
Hencein also
a given
the manifold in a given
in einer gegebenen Anschauung
in einer gegebenen
noth- Anschauung noth- intuition
intuition necessarily stands under
necessarily stands under
680 wendig unter Categorien.
680 wendig unter Categorien.
[B144] categories. [B144] categories.

§ 21. Anmerkung. § 21. Anmerkung. § 21. Remark. § 21. Remark. 3.9 §21: Remark.3.9 §21: Remark.
Ein Mannigfaltiges, das EininMannigfaltiges,
einer An- das in einer An-
A manifold which is Acontained
manifold inwhichB144 is contained
(682–8): Kant in states
B144concisely
(682–8):his Kant conclusion
states concisely
to §20, his though
conclusion
indicating to §20,
herethough
that it per-
indicating here that it per-
schauung, die ich die meinige
schauung, nenne,
die ich
ent-
die meinige nenne,which
an intuition ent- I call
an intuition
my own,which is Itains
call tomythose
own,cognitions
is tainswhich
to thoseone cognitions
can call one’s whichown, one and canmorecall clearly
one’s own, indicating
and morethat the
clearly indicating that the
halten ist, wird durchhalten die Synthesis
ist, wird des durch represented
die Synthesis des the
through represented
synthesisthrough
of the synthesis
relevant synthesis of of the
relevant
understanding
synthesis–ofthe theconjoining
understanding effected – theor conjoining
identified ineffected
any judgingor identified in any judging
685 Verstandes als zur685 nothwendigen
Verstandes als Einheit
zur nothwendigen
the understandingEinheit as belonging
the understanding
to the asofbelonging
any manifold to thecognitions
of any(whether
manifoldconceptscognitions or (whether
sensory intuitions,
concepts or including
sensorysensory
intuitions,pre-including sensory pre-
des Selbstbewußtseyns des gehörig
Selbstbewußtseyns
vorge- necessary gehörigunity vorge-of self-consciousness,
necessary unity of self-consciousness,
sentations) – is required sentations)
for including – is required
this complex for including
cognitionthis within
complex
the necessary
cognitionunity within of the necessary unity of
stellt, und dieses geschieht
stellt, und durchdieses
die geschieht
and thisdurch die through
transpires and thisthetranspires
cate- through the cate- Kant’s
self-consciousness. self-consciousness.
claims here include Kant’sboth claimsthe here
synthetic
includeandboth the the
analytic
synthetic
unity and
of the analytic unity of
Categorie.* Categorie.* gory.* gory.* apperception by adroitly apperception
not mentioning by adroitly
expresslynotthis mentioning
pair of unities.
expressly this pair of unities.
* Der Beweisgrund beruht * Der auf Beweisgrund
der vor- beruht * The auf groundder ofvor-proof* rests
The ground
upon the of proof rests upon the
B144 (ll. 689–96): Kant’s B144(footnoted
(ll. 689–96): *) ground
Kant’s of (footnoted
proof for*)this ground
conclusion
of proof stresses
for thisbothconclusion
the stresses both the
690 gestellten E i n h e i690
t der
gestellten
Anschauung, E i n h da-
e i t derrepresented
Anschauung,unity da- ofrepresented
the intuition unity of the intuition
unitary representationunitary of some representation
unified, hence of some
integrated,
unified, sensory-intuitive
hence integrated, manifold
sensory-intuitive
by manifold by
durch ein Gegenstand durch gegeben
ein Gegenstand
wird, through gegeben whichwird, an object
throughis which
given, an object is given,
which any object can which be presented
any object (in sensation
can be presented or sensory (in sensation
intuition), or wheresensory
this intuition),
unitary where this unitary
welche jederzeit eine Synthesis
welche jederzeitdes Man- eine Synthesis
which always des Man-
containswhich
a synthesis
always of contains a synthesis of
representation of thatrepresentation
integral, complex of thatobject-presentation,
integral, complexasobject-presentation,
presented, is connected as presented,
to is connected to
nigfaltigen zu einer Anschauung
nigfaltigen zuGege- einer Anschauung
the manifoldGege- of something
the manifold
given by of something given by –unitary
unitary apperception where apperception
this unitary apperception
– where thismust unitary be apperception
synthetic, andmust can (also)
be synthetic,
be and can (also) be
benen in sich schließt, benen undinschon sich schließt,
die an und schonand
intuition, die thusan already
intuition,con- and thus already
analytic, con- by the
expressed analytic,
‘I think expressed
…’. by the ‘I think …’.
695 Beziehung dieses695lezterenBeziehung auf Einheit
dieses lezteren
tains the auf connection
Einheit tains of thisthelatter
connection
to of this latter to
der Apperception enthält. der Apperception enthält. the unity of apperception. the unity of apperception.B144 (ll. 697–703): Kant’s B144conclusion
(ll. 697–703): thusKant’s
showsconclusion
that any (humanlythus shows possible)
that any empirical
(humanly con-possible) empirical con-
Diese zeigt also an: daß Diese daszeigt
empiri-
also an: Thusdaß das thisempiri-
indicates that Thusthe this
empiri- sciousness
indicates that the empiri- of any manifold
sciousness
presentedof any within
manifolda sensory
presented
intuition
within is subject
a sensory both
intuition
to sensible
is subject both to sensible
sche Bewußtseyn eines schegegebenen
Bewußtseyn Man-einescalgegebenen
consciousness Man-of acal given manifold ofand
consciousness to intellectual
a given manifold conditions
and to intellectual
a priori, thus conditions
achievinga the priori,intended
thus achieving
parallelism the of intended
the twoparallelism of the two
nigfaltigen einer Anschauung
nigfaltigeneben einerso-Anschauung
of an intuitioneben so-stands of equally
an intuition Deductions,
well stands equally well one of the
Deductions,
concepts ‘space’
one of
andthe‘time’,
concepts the other
‘space’ of and
the ‘time’,
categories.
the other of the categories.
700 wohl unter einem700reinen wohlSelbstbewußt-
unter einem reinen under Selbstbewußt-
one pure self-consciousness
under one purea self-consciousness
B144 (ll. 703–6): aThis Bresult 144 (ll.marks
703–6):the This
‘beginning’
result marks
of Kant’s the ‘beginning’
Deduction of the Kant’s categories,
Deduction of the categories,
seyn a priori, wie empirische
seyn a priori
Anschauung
, wie empirische
priori, Anschauung
as empirical intuition empirical which
priori, as stands is expressly
intuition stands assigned
whichtois§26 expressly
(l. 714–25),
assignedas istoalso
§26reflected
(l. 714–25), in the
as title
is also to reflected
§26, by appeal
in the title to §26, by appeal
unter einer reinen sinnlichen,
unter einer die reinen
gleich-sinnlichen,
under one die pure
gleich-sensible
under[conscious-
one pure sensibleto the result restated here
[conscious- to the
fromresult
§20restated
(l. 719). here from §20 (l. 719).
falls a priori Statt hat, falls
stehe.a priori
– Im obigen
Statt hat, stehe.
ness], –which
Im obigen
likewise ness],
holds which
a priori.likewise
– holds a priori.
B144 (ll. 703–12): Kant’s
– B144 start
(ll. on
703–12):
his Deduction
Kant’s start indicates
on hishisDeduction
key interest indicates
in this his
Deduction,
key interest in this Deduction,
Satze ist also der Anfang Satzeeiner
ist also
D e dder
u cAnfang
- In this einerproposition
D e d u c - thusIn this
begins
proposition
a de- thususe
that begins a de-
of categories that
is tousebe shown
of categories
necessary
is tofor beany
shown unitynecessary
contributed for anyby understanding
unity contributed by understanding
705 t i o n der reinen 705Verstandesbegriffe
t i o n der reinenge-Verstandesbegriffe
duction of the pure ge- concepts
duction ofofthethepurewithin concepts of the
intuition. This may
withinsound
intuition.
merelyThis likemay
commentsoundabout merelyalleged
like comment
process, aboutbut hisalleged
express process, but his express
macht, in welcher ich,macht, da dieinCategorien
welcher ich,understanding,
da die Categorien in which,
understanding,
because thein which, because the
contrast between the mere contrastsubjective
betweenvalidity
the mere of psychological
subjective validity laws ofof psychological
association, and lawstheof association, and the
unabhängig von S i n nunabhängig
l i c h k e i t bloß
von imS i n n categories
l i c h k e i t bloß im independently
originate categories originate
of independently
conceptual, of
judgmental conceptual,
conditionsjudgmental
which alone conditions
can provide which for alone
the possibility
can provide of objective
for the possibility of objective
Verstande entspringen, Verstande
noch von entspringen,
der sensibility,
noch von merely derin the
sensibility,
understand-
merely invalidity
the understand-
(at the end of §19;
validity
B142,(at ll.
the634–50),
end of §19; suggestB142, instead
ll. 634–50),
his concern
suggest with
instead
the conditions
his concern with the conditions
Art, wie das Mannigfaltige Art, wie zu daseinerMannigfaltige
em- ing, Izumust einer still
em- abstract
ing, I from
must the still abstract
required from for anythe (putative)
required
experiential
for any judging
(putative) which
experiential
can be objectively
judging which valid.can be objectively valid.
710 pirischen Anschauung 710 pirischen
gegebenAnschauung
werde, manner gegeben werde,the manner
in which manifoldin towhich
an the manifold to an
abstrahiren muß, um nur abstrahiren
auf die Einheit,
muß, um nur auf die intuition
empirical Einheit, beempirical
given, in intuition
order be given, in order
die in die Anschauung die vermittelst
in die Anschauungder to attend vermittelst
solelyderto thetounity
attend
provided
solely to the unity provided

54 54 55 55
54 55
 Categorie durch denCategorie
Verstanddurch hinzu-den toVerstand hinzu-
the intuition by the tocategory B145
via theby the
the intuition (ll. 714–25):
category via theIf theB145
unity(ll.required
714–25):forIf objectively
the unity required
valid (humanly
for objectively
possible)
valid
judgments
(humanlycan possible) judgments can
kommt, zu sehen. Inkommt, der Folge
zu sehen.
(§ 26) Inunderstanding.
der Folge (§ 26) sequel (§ 26) In be
In theunderstanding. theshown
sequelto(§be26) exactlybethat
shownformtoofbeunity
exactly
afforded
that form
by use
of unity
of theafforded
categoriesby (per
use §20)
of the in categories
re- (per §20) in re-
715 wird aus der Art,715wie wird
in der
ausSinnlichkeit
der Art, wie shall
in derbe Sinnlichkeit
shown, by shall the manner
be shown, in bygard thetomanner
sensory intuitions
in gardoftoparticulars
sensory intuitions
presentedoftoparticulars
us within presented
sensation,tosousthat
within
suchsensation,
use of so that such use of
die empirische Anschauung
die empirischegegebenAnschauung
which the gegeben
empirical intuition
which the empiricalthe
is given categories
intuition holds valid
is given the of
categories
any andholdsall objects
valid we
of any
can and
senseall(and
objects
identify
we canourselves
sense (and as sens-
identify ourselves as sens-
wird, gezeigt [B145] werden, daß die[BEin-
wird, gezeigt 145] werden,
withindaß die Ein- that
sensibility, its unity
within is
sensibility, ing),
that then the Deduction
its unity is ing), succeeds.
then the Kant’s
Deduction remark
succeeds.
here about
Kant’sthe remark
categories
here prescribing
about the categories prescribing
heit derselben keine andere
heit derselben
sei, als wel-
keine andere sei, alsthan
none other wel-that none
whichother
the cate- forms of unity
than that which the cate- to any forms
given intuitions
of unity toasany
suchgiven
suggests
intuitions
the generative
as such suggests
sense ofthe
‘constitution
generative sense of ‘constitution
che die Categorie nachche demdievorigen
Categorie § 20nachgory
dem(according
vorigen § 20 to the preceding,
gory (according § to of theobjects’ (above,
preceding, § §2.15),
of objects’
but this(above,
may merely
§2.15),bebut
a suggestive
this may merely
connotation
be a suggestive
of Kant’s connotation
concise of Kant’s concise
720 dem Mannigfaltigen720 dem einerMannigfaltigen
gegebenen 20) einer gegebenen
prescribes to the20) manifold expression.
of ato the manifold of a
prescribes Kant’s Deduction
expression. may Kant’s
succeed Deduction
by demonstrating
may succeedconditions
by demonstrating
which must conditions
be sat- which must be sat-
Anschauung überhaupt Anschauung
vorschreibt,überhaupt
und given vorschreibt,
intuitionund as such, andintuition
given isfiedand
thus, in-as such, by any
thus,particulars
in- isfied
we bycanany be particulars
aware of via wesensation;
can be aware i.e., Kant’s
of via locution
sensation;concerning
i.e., Kant’s locution concerning
dadurch also, daß ihredadurch
Gültigkeit
also,a priori
daß ihresofar
Gültigkeit
as their a priori validity
a priori sofar asintheir
regard ‘prescription’
a priori validity in regardmay only
‘prescription’
indicate thatmay
his Deduction
only indicatedoes
thatentail
his Deduction
constraints does
upon entail
those constraints
par- upon those par-
ticulars of which we can ticulars
be aware of which
in sensory
we canperception,
be aware in though
sensory which
perception,
constraints
thoughthesewhich
are, constraints these are,
in Ansehung aller Gegenstände
in Ansehung unserer
aller Gegenstände
to all objects unserer
of ourtosenses is thusof our senses is thus
all objects
and whether anything and we do whether
sense satisfies
anythingthem,
we docan sense
remain
satisfies
issues
them,
for the
can Analytic
remain issuesof Prin-
for the Analytic of Prin-
Sinne erklärt wird, dieSinne
Absicht
erklärt
derwird,
De- dieexplicated,
Absicht der thatDe-
the aim of the deduc-
explicated, that the aim of the deduc-
ciples. ciples.
725 duction allererst 725
völlig
duction
erreichtallererst
werden. völligtion
erreicht
is firstwerden.
fully achieved.
tion is first fully
(…) achieved. (…)
[…] […]
[…] die Categorien […]
[…]sind
die nur
Categorien
Regeln […](…) sind
thenur Regeln are(…)
categories only
therules
categories
for are B145–6only (ll. 727–48):
rules for Kant
B145–6 reiterates
(ll. 727–48):
and elaborates
Kant reiterates
his dual andcapacity
elaborates
account
his dualof human
capacity account of human
für einen Verstand, dessen
für einenganzes
Verstand,
Ver- dessen ganzes Ver- theanentire
an understanding, understanding,
capacity the cognisance: understanding
entire capacity cognisance:
and sensibility,
understanding
which andeachsensibility,
make theirwhichdistinctive
each make
provisions,
their distinctive
but provisions, but
mögen im Denken besteht,
mögen im d.i. Denken
in der besteht,
of which d.i.consists
in der in of thinking,
which i.e.,
consists which can only
in in thinking, i.e., in work together
which can
foronly
any work
humanly together
possiblefor apperceptive
any humanly thought
possible or
apperceptive
experience. thought or experience.
730 Handlung, die Synthesis
730 Handlung,
des Mannigfalti-
die Synthesisthedes Mannigfalti-
action of bringing thetheaction
synthesis Kant’s
of bringing theremarks
synthesisall concern
Kant’sprocess
remarks(subjective
all concern deduction),
process (subjective
and highlightdeduction),
that his Deduction
and highlight that his Deduction
gen, welches ihm anderweitig
gen, welches
in derihmAn-anderweitig in der An-which
of the manifold, of the
is otherwise appeals
manifold, which is otherwise to some logically
appealscontingent
to some premises.
logically This
contingent
entails premises.
that he must
This provide
entails that
credible
he must provide credible
schauung gegeben worden,
schauung zurgegeben
Einheit worden,
provided zurinEinheit
intuition, provided
to the unityin intuition,
of reasons
to thetounity
thinkofthese reasons
premisestohold thinktrue
theseof premises
us homo sapiens
hold true
sapientes.
of usKant
homodoes
sapiens provide
sapientes.
rea-Kant does provide rea-
der Apperception zuder bringen,
Apperception
der also zu apperception,
bringen, der also which apperception, sons
as such thuswhich as such thus for his premises, sons
though for not
his premises,
in this paragraph.
though not
By focussing
in this paragraph.
on necessary
By focussing
a priori for-
on necessary a priori for-
für sich gar nichts erkennt,
für sichsondern
gar nichts
nur erkennt,
knowssondern
nothing,nur but rather
knowsonly nothing, mal conditions
com- but rather only com- for themal
possibility
conditions of human
for the apperception,
possibility of Kant
human avoids
apperception,
one hopelessKant conun-
avoids one hopeless conun-
drum of infallibilist global drumperceptual
of infallibilist
scepticism,
global perceptual
which purportsscepticism,
to require
whichdemonstrating
purports to require demonstrating
735 den Stoff zum Erkenntniß,
735 den Stoff
die Anschau-
zum Erkenntniß,bines dieandAnschau-
orders the matter
bines and of cogni-
orders the matter of cogni-
our cognitive fitness for ouranycognitive
logicallyfitness
possiblefor environment,
any logically possible
to proveenvironment,
we are cognitivelyto provefit we are cognitively fit
ung, die ihm durchsung, Object
die ihm
gegebendurchstion,
Object gegeben
intuition, whichtion,mustintuition,
be givenwhich must be given
for our actual spatio-temporal,
for our actual perceptible
spatio-temporal,
natural environs.
perceptible Kant’s
natural
justification
environs.for Kant’s
his justification for his
werden muß, verbindet werden
und ordnet.
muß, verbindet
Von tound it byordnet. Von However,
the object. to it by theno fur-
object. However, no fur-
claims about our forms claims
of judging
about our and forms
categories
of judging
is in theand first
categories
chapter is ofinthetheAnalytic
first chapter
of of the Analytic of
der Eigenthümlichkeitder
unsers
Eigenthümlichkeit
Verstandes ther unsers Verstandes
reason can be provided
ther reason for canthe be provided for the
Concepts; see Wolff (2017) Concepts;regarding
see Wolff
formal (2017)
aspectsregarding
of judging.
formalAs aspects
for Kant’s
of judging.
claim that Aswe for Kant’s claim that we
aber, nur vermittelst der
aber,Categorien
nur vermittelst
und der Categorien
peculiarity undunderstanding,
of our peculiarity ofthat our understanding, that
can only think and judge can only
in connection
think and with judgesomein connection
manifold presented
with somebymanifold
sensibility presented
(not by sensibility (not
740 [B146] nur gerade740
durch
[B146]diese
nur Art
geradeunddurchonlydiese
by theArt categories
und onlyandbyonly the by categories and only by
understanding), Schelling
understanding),
tried to workSchelling
out a purportedly
tried to work human out account
a purportedly
of a productively
human account of a productively
Zahl derselben EinheitZahl
der derselben
Apperception Einheitthis
der kind
Apperception
and numberthis of kind
them and it ef-number of them
intuitive it ef-
understanding, intuitive
i.e., an understanding,
understanding i.e., which an creates
understanding
its own which
(manifoldly
createscharacter-
its own (manifoldly character-
a priori zu Stande zua bringen,
priori zuläßt
Stande
sich zu fects
bringen,unityläßtof sich
apperception
fects unity a priori,
of apperception
ised) objecta of priori,
knowledge.
ised) His
objectattempt
of knowledge.
utterly fails Histoattempt
respondutterly
to Pyrrhonian
fails to respond
scepticism,to Pyrrhonian
as scepticism, as
eben so wenig fernerebenein Grund
so wenig ange-
ferner than
ein Grund
for whyange- we havethan justfor
these
whyand we have just these and
Schulze (1803) made evident Schulze by (1803)
strictly
made internal
evident
critique
by strictly
of Schelling’s
internal critique
proclaimed of Schelling’s
‘intellec- proclaimed ‘intellec-
ben, als warum wir gerade
ben, als
diese
warum
und kei-
wir gerade diesefunctions
no other und kei- of no judging,
other orfunctions
why of tualjudging, or why
intuition’. tual intuition’.
745 ne andere Functionen
745 nezuandere
Urtheilen
Functionen
ha- time zu Urtheilen
and space ha- are thetime
soleand
forms
space of are the sole forms of
ben, oder warum Zeitben,
und oder
Raumwarumdie ein-
Zeit und Raum dieintuition.
our possible ein- our possible intuition.
zigen Formen unserer zigen
möglichen
Formen An- unserer möglichen An-
schauung sind. schauung sind.

56 56 57 57
56 57
 § 22. Die Categorie §hat22.keinen
Die Categorie
andern 750hat §keinen
22. Theandern
Category
750 has no The
§ 22. Use 3.10
otherCategory has no§22: otherThe 3.10 has
3.10
UseCategory §22: The Category
no other has no other
Use for Cognition Use forthan
of Things Cognition of Things than their Application
their Application
Gebrauch zum ErkenntnisseGebrauchderzum Erkenntnissefor Cognition der of Things forthan
Cognition
its of Things than to its
Objects of Experience. to Objects of Experience.
Dinge, als ihre Anwendung
Dinge, als aufihre Anwendung
Application aufto Objects Application
of Ex- toB146 Objects of Ex-
(ll. 753–68): KantB146 contrasts
(ll. 753–68):
thoughtKant or thinking
contrasts asthought
such to or cognition,
thinkinghere as such
as successful
to cognition, here as successful
Gegenstände der Erfahrung.
Gegenstände der Erfahrung. perience. perience. knowing of some particular knowing object
of some
(Gegenstand),
particular by object
stressing (Gegenstand),
that any such by stressing
knowingthat requires
any such knowing requires
Sich einen Gegenstand Sichdenken
einen undGegenstand denken
To think und and
an object, Totothink
know anan object, and to know an
both using some (perhaps both more using than someone) (perhaps
category moreand thanalsoone)some category
sensoryand intuition(s)
also somebysensory intuition(s) by
einen Gegenstand erkennen,
einen Gegenstandist also erkennen,
object, areist thus also notobject,
one and are thethus not which onethatand thebe ‘given’
object whichor that
presented
object be to‘given’
us. Note or how
presented
Kant to stresses
us. Note thathowthought
Kantasstresses
such that thought as such
755 nicht einerlei. Zum
755 Erkenntnisse
nicht einerlei.gehö- Zum Erkenntnisse
same. Namely, gehö-to cognition
same. Namely,belong to cannotcognitionspecifybelong
whethercannot
any such specifyobjectwhether
exists.any This such
showsobjectthatexists.
Kant Thisdistinguishes
shows that between
Kant distinguishes between
ren nämlich zwei Stücke:
ren nämlich
erstlichzwei der Stücke: erstlich first,
two factors: der the two concept
factors: byfirst, conceptual
the concept by and
intension conceptual
any indicativeintension(deictic)
and any reference
indicativewhich (deictic)
can contribute
reference to which
knowing;
can contribute to knowing;
Begriff, dadurch überhaupt
Begriff,ein dadurch
Gegen-überhaupt
which an ein object
Gegen- is at which
all thought
an object
(the is at all thought
both are required (thefor any,
botheven are required
putative for knowing
any, even (i.e., putative
both areknowing
necessary(i.e., alsoboth
to misattribu-
are necessary also to misattribu-
stand gedacht wird (diestandCategorie),
gedacht wird und (die Categorie),
category), andund second,category),
the intuition
and second, tion).the
Once intuition
both factors
tion).areOnce acknowledged
both factors requirements
are acknowledged for any requirements
successful knowing, for anythe successful knowing, the
zweitens die Anschauung,
zweitensdadurchdie Anschauung,
er throughdadurch which that er object
throughis which
given; thatprospect
object isof given;
‘ambiguous prospect
descriptions’
of ‘ambiguous
which may descriptions’
hold of indefinitely
which maymany hold particulars
of indefinitely is many particulars is
760 gegeben wird; denn760könnte
gegeben dem wird;
Begriffe
denn könnte
for if dem
to theBegriffe
concept forno correspond-
if to the concept no correspond-
shown to be irrelevantshown to epistemology,
to be irrelevant becauseto epistemology,
only indicated particulars
because only areindicated
candidates particulars
for are candidates for
eine correspondirendeeine Anschauung
correspondirende
gar ing Anschauung
intuition could gar be ing
given,
intuition
that con-could be human
given,(perceptual)
that con- knowing.
human (perceptual)
Issues of (logically,
knowing.i.e.,Issues numerically)
of (logically,
‘ambiguous
i.e., numerically)
descriptions’ ‘ambiguous descriptions’
nicht gegeben werden, nicht
so gegeben
wäre er werden,
ein cept so would
wäre erbe ein a thought
cept would
only for- arise by presuming
be a thought only for- meaning arise byorpresuming
intension meaning
can fill a or roleintension
it does not can andfill acannot.
role it does
That not is the and cannot. That is the
Gedanke der Form nach, Gedanke
aber ohne
der Form
allen nach, aberthough
mally, ohne allenwithoutmally,
any object,
thoughsowithout defect,
any inobject,
principle,
so of defect,
‘descriptions
in principle,
theories of of
‘descriptions
reference’ and theories
of Russell’s
of reference’‘knowledge
and of[sole-Russell’s ‘knowledge [sole-
Gegenstand und durchGegenstand
ihn gar keine undEr-durchthat
ihn through
gar keineitEr- altogether
that through
no cogni- ly] by description’,
it altogether no cogni- which ly] bypersists
description’,
through which
Quine’s persistsattempts
through to banish
Quine’ssingularattemptsreferring
to banish singular referring
765 kenntniß von irgend
765 einem
kenntniß Dinge
von mög-
irgend einem
tion ofDinge mög-whatever
any thing tion ofwouldany thing phrases. would be
be whatever phrases.
lich, weil es, so viel lich,
ich wüßte,
weil es,nichts
so viel possible,
ich wüßte, nichts so possible,
because far as I would
because so far as I would
gäbe, noch geben könnte,
gäbe, worauf
noch geben mein könnte,
know,worauf
nothing mein
wouldknow,be given,
nothing nor would be given, nor
Gedanke angewandt werden
Gedanke könne.
angewandt
Nun werdencould bekönne.
given,Nunto which
could mybethought B146 (ll.
given, to which my768–75):
thoughtKantB146 appeals(ll. 768–75):
to his finding
Kant appeals
in the Tr. to Aesth.,
his finding that inhuman
the Tr. beings
Aesth.,
canthatonlyhuman beings can only
ist alle uns mögliche ist
Anschauung
alle uns mögliche
sinn- could
Anschauung sinn- Now,
be applied. could all be
intuition have sensory
applied. Now, all intuition intuition;
havei.e., sensory
particulars intuition;
can onlyi.e., be
particulars
presented canor only
‘given’ be to
presented
us by sensory
or ‘given’ to us by sensory
770 lich (Ästhetik), also
770 lich
kann(Ästhetik),
das Denken also kann
possibledasforDenken
us is sensible
possible
(Aesthetic); channels. Consequently
for us is sensible (Aesthetic); channels.
any thoughtConsequently
of any object
any thought
as such can
of any
only object
contribute
as suchtocan
knowledge
only contribute to knowledge
insofar as this thoughtinsofar is connectedas thisto thought
(i.e., used
is connected
in connection to (i.e.,
with)used some
in connection
object we sense.
with) some object we sense.
eines Gegenstandes eines überhaupt
Gegenstandes
durch therefore
überhauptthedurch thinkingtherefore
of an objectthe thinking
as of an object as
einen reinen Verstandesbegriff
einen reinen beyVerstandesbegriff
uns such by a pure bey unsconcept suchof the
by aunder-
pure concept of the under-
nur Erkenntniß werden, nur so Erkenntniß
fern dieser werden, so fern
standing candieser
for us standing
only become can for a us only become a
auf Gegenstände der auf Sinne
Gegenstände
bezogen dercognition
Sinne bezogen
in so far as cognition
this category in sois far as this category is
775 wird. Sinnliche 775 Anschauung
[B147]wird. Sinnliche ist Anschauung
[B147]connected ist connected
to objects of the senses. to objects B146–7
of the (ll. senses.
775–97): Kant
B146–7 remarks
(ll. 775–97):
on his Kant
account remarks
of mathematics,
on his account whichofconcerns
mathematics, con- which concerns con-
entweder reine Anschauung
entweder (Raum
reine und
Anschauung
Sensible(Raum undis either
intuition Sensible intu- isstructing
pureintuition either pure formsintu-
(arithmetical
structing or geometrical
forms (arithmetical
forms) or within
geometrical
our pureforms) a prioriwithin
formal ourintuitions
pure a priori formal intuitions
Zeit) oder empirische Zeit)
Anschauung
oder empirische
desje- Anschauung desje-
ition (space and time) itionor (space
empirical of space
and time) or empiricaland of time.ofSuch
space mathematical
and of time. constructions
Such mathematical
do not constructions
suffice to provedo that
not they
suffice to prove that they
nigen, was im Raum nigen,und der wasZeit im un-
Raum intuition
und der of Zeitwhatever
un- intuition
is represented have any
of whatever is represented actual instances
have amongst
any actual
spatio-temporal
instances amongst
particulars.
spatio-temporal particulars.
mittelbar als wirklich,mittelbar
durch Empfin-
als wirklich,immediately
durch Empfin- by sensation
immediately withinby sensation
B147 (ll. 777–80):withinImportant
B147 (ll. to777–80):
Kant’s account
Important of empirical
to Kant’sknowledge
account ofisempiricalthe second knowledge
kind of is the second kind of
780 dung, vorgestellt 780
wird.
dung,Durchvorgestellt
Bestim-wird. Durch
space and Bestim-
time as actual.
space By anddeter-
time as sensory
actual. intuition(s),
By deter- namely: sensoryempirical
intuition(s),intuition(s)
namely:of empirical
whateverintuition(s)
is presented of whatever
within space is presented
and within space and
mung der ersteren können
mung wir der Erkennt-
ersteren könnenmining wirtheErkennt-
former, we mining
can obtain
the former,
a we can
time obtain aas actual.
by sensation time This
by sensation
point Kant as actual.
picks Thisup directly
point Kant
followingpickshis upremarks
directly onfollowing
space, his remarks on space,
nisse a priori von Gegenständen
nisse a priori(invon derGegenständen (in der
priori cognitions of objects
priori (in
cognitions
mathe- of objects
time and(inmathematics.
mathe- time and mathematics.
Mathematik) bekommen, Mathematik)
aber nur bekommen,
ihrer matics), aber but
nur only
ihrer according
matics), tobuttheir only according to their
Form nach als Erscheinungen;
Form nach ob als es
Erscheinungen; ob es form
form as appearances; whether as appearances;
things whether things

58 58 59 59
58 59
785 Dinge geben könne, 785 die Dinge in dieser
geben Form könne, die could in dieser
be given Form whichcould
mustbe begiven
intu- whichB147 (ll. 793–7):
must be intu-Kant Bremarks
147 (ll. 793–7):
that things
Kant(here:remarks
Dinge)thatwithinthings
space(here:
and time
Dinge)are within
only given
space and
(pre-time are only given (pre-
angeschaut werden müssen, angeschaut bleibtwerden
doch müssen, ited in bleibt
such adoch ited in
form, thus such aofform,sented)
remains to us insofar
thus remains of as sented)
they are to usperceived,
insofar ashence they insofar
are perceived,
as they henceare (re)presented
insofar as theyin con- are (re)presented in con-
dabey noch unausgemacht. dabey Folglich
noch unausgemacht.
sind courseFolglich sind course still
still undetermined. Conse- junction with
undetermined. sensation(s)
Conse- junction
by specifically
with sensation(s)
empiricalby representations
specifically empirical
(in contrast
representations
to pure a priori
(in contrast to pure a priori
alle mathematische alle Begriffemathematische
für sich Begriffe quently allfürmathematical
sich quently representations,
all mathematical
concepts as concepts as whether
representations,
thoughts or formal whether intuitions
thoughts = orspace,
formal timeintuitions
as such).= space, time as such).
nicht Erkenntnisse, außer nicht so Erkenntnisse,
fern man außer such so are fern man suchexcept
not cognitions, are not inso-cognitions, except inso-
790 voraussetzt, daß es 790Dingevoraussetzt,
giebt, die daßsich es Dinge
far asgiebt,
one die sich farthat
presupposes as onethere presupposes
be that there be
nur der Form jener nur reinen der sinnlichen
Form jener such reinenthings sinnlichen
which can such only things
be pre- which can only be pre-
Anschauung gemäß uns Anschauung
darstellen gemäß laßen. uns darstellen
sented to uslaßen.in accordsented withto those
us in accord with thoseKantBcompletes
B147 (797–805): 147 (797–805): his remark
Kant completes
on the usehisofremark mathematical
on the constructions
use of mathematical in constructions in
D i n g e i m R a u m und D i ndge er Z i me i R
t awer-
u m und forms.der Z e i t wer- things
However, forms. However,
in space and things
actualinempirical
space and knowledge
actual as empirical
expected,knowledge
that any categories
as expected, usedthatinany
connection
categorieswithused those
in connection with those
den aber nur gegeben,den so fern
aber sienurWahr-
gegeben, time so fern sie Wahr-
are only time are
given insofar only are
as they given insofar as they and
constructions, are alsoconstructions,
these constructions and also themselves,
these constructions
only affordthemselves,
empirical knowledge
only afford inso-
empirical knowledge inso-
795 nehmungen (mit 795 Empfindung
nehmungen begleitete
(mit Empfindungperceptions begleitete perceptions
(representations accom- (representations
far as they accom-
can be applied
far asto they
empirical
can beintuitions
applied to of empirical
actual, localised,
intuitions deictically
of actual,demonstrated
localised, deictically demonstrated
Vorstellungen) sind,Vorstellungen) mithin durch sind,panied mithin durch panied
by sensation), hence by sensation),
through hence through
(indicated) spatio-temporal
(indicated)
particulars
spatio-temporal
(ll. 801–4). particulars (ll. 801–4).
empirische Vorstellung. empirische
FolglichVorstellung.
ver- empirical Folglichrepresentation.
ver- empiricalConse- representation. Conse-
B147 (ll. 805–11): KantB147 now(ll.expressly
805–11):draws
Kant the nowconclusion
expressly that draws thethecategories
conclusioncanthatprovide
the categories can provide
schaffen die reinen Verstandesbegriffe,
schaffen die reinen Verstandesbegriffe,
quently, the pure concepts quently, of the the pure concepts of the
knowledge only by theirknowledge
possible only application(s)
by their possible
to empiricalapplication(s)
intuition; to so empirical
that they intuition;
only serveso that they only serve
selbst wenn sie auf Anschauungen
selbst wenn sie auf Anschauungen
a prio- understanding, even understanding,
a prio- if they are ap- eventheif possibility
they are of ap-empirical
the knowing
possibility – whether
of empiricalmathematicised
knowing – whether or (merely)
mathematicised
classificatory,
or (merely)
which classificatory, which
800 ri (wie in der Mathematik)
800 ri (wie in angewandt
der Mathematik) plied to angewandt
a priori intuitionsplied(astoina math-
priori intuitions (as in math-
may include classifyingmay relations,
includesuch classifying
as causal relations,
relationssuchor natural
as causal kinds.
relations
If Modern
or natural
readerskinds. If Modern readers
werden, nur so fern Erkenntniß,
werden, nurals so die-
fern Erkenntniß,
ematics), only als die-
afford ematics),
cognitiononly inso-afford findcognition inso-
Kant’s argument needlessly
find Kant’sexplicit,
argument it isneedlessly
because we explicit,
have longit is because
ago given weuphave
on alongprioriago given up on a priori
se, mithin auch die se, Verstandesbegriffe
mithin auch die Verstandesbegriffe
far as these [mathematical far as these applica-[mathematical applica-
metaphysics. Or have we? metaphysics.
Contemporary Or have ‘modal
we? Contemporary
metaphysics’ such ‘modal
as David
metaphysics’
Lewis’ possible
such as David Lewis’ possible
vermittelst ihrer aufvermittelst empirischeihrer An- auf tions],
empirische
hence by An-that tions],
mediation hencealso by that mediation
worlds also explications
are at most worlds areofatvariousmost explications
intensions, that of is,
various
explications
intensions, ofthat
the is,
contents
explications
and of the contents and
schauungen angewandt schauungen
werden können. angewandtthewerden conceptskönnen.
of the the concepts of the
understanding, understanding,
logical implications oflogicalconcepts.implications
These do of notconcepts.
automatically
These do provide
not automatically
any ontology,provide no any ontology, no
805 Folglich liefern uns 805 die Folglich
Categorien
liefernver- uns die canCategorien
be applied ver- can beintuitions.
to empirical applied to empirical intuitions.
metaphysics, no models;metaphysics,
only partial no descriptions
models; only without
partialreference
descriptions to anywithout
identifiable
reference partic-
to any identifiable partic-
mittelst der Anschauung mittelst
auchder keineAnschauung
Er- Consequentlyauch keine also Er- theConsequently
categories pro- also the categories
ulars pro-them;
instantiating ulars
all these
instantiating
possiblethem;
instances
all these
are mere
possible suppositions.
instances are mere suppositions.
kenntniß von Dingen,kenntniß als nur durch von Dingen,
ihre vide als nur durch
us no ihre of
cognition vide us noexcept
things, cognition of things, except
B147 (ll. 805–14): KantB147 (here) (ll.equates
805–14): empirical
Kant (here) knowledge
equateswith empirical
experience.
knowledgeOne maywithdemur
experience. One may demur
mögliche Anwendung mögliche
auf empirischeAnwendungsolely auf through
empirische solely through
their possible applica-their possible applica-
at this equation, as much at thisof equation,
human experience
as much of may human
involve experience
partial ignorance,
may involve conjecture,
partial ignorance, conjecture,
A n s c h a u u n g , d.i. sieA ndienen
s c h a u unurn g ,zurd.i. sie
tiondienen nur zur intuition,
to empirical tion toi.e.,empirical
they intuition, i.e., they
expectation, action, inquiry expectation,
and even action,
discovery.
inquiryHowever,
and evenKant’s discovery.
pointHowever,
here concern
Kant’s catego-
point here concern catego-
810 Möglichkeit e m p810 i r i sMöglichkeit
c h e r E r k eenmn pt -i r i s only
c h e rserveE r k the
e n npossibility
t - only of serve the possibility of empirical
empirical
ries and their possible legitimate
ries and their (valid)
possible
roles legitimate
in human (valid)
knowledge.roles in Forhuman
this purpose,
knowledge. Kant’sFor this purpose, Kant’s
n i ß . Diese aber heißtn iErfahrung.
ß . Diese aber Folg- heißtcognition.
Erfahrung. Folg- thiscognition.
However, is calledHowever,
expe- this is called expe-
equation of human experience equation of with
human
knowledge
experience is harmless;
with knowledge
his key point is harmless;
stands: hisWe keycan point stands: We can
lich haben die Categorien lich habenkeinendieande- Categorien
rience.keinen
Henceande- rience. Hence
the categories have nothe categories
only use the have no
categories only
in genuine,
use the legitimate,
categories in valid
genuine,
(accurate,
legitimate,
justified)validknowledge
(accurate,insofar
justified) as knowledge insofar as
ren Gebrauch zum ren Erkenntnisse
Gebrauch der zum otherErkenntnisse
use for der other ofusethings,
cognition for cognition of things,
this (prospective, possible) this (prospective,
knowledge ispossible)
experiential, knowledge
or empirical is experiential,
knowledge. or empirical knowledge.
Dinge, als nur [B148]Dinge, so fernalsdiese nur als so ferninsofar
[B148] except diese as als these
except insofar as these are assumed
are assumed
815 G e g e n s t ä n d e 815
m öG g lei cghe enrs t äEnrdf ea h -m ö gtol i be
c h objects
e r Eofr fpossible 147–8 (ll. 811–6): Kant
to be objects of possibleBexperience.
a h - experience. B147–8
provisionally
(ll. 811–6):
drawsKant hisprovisionally
key conclusion: draws Ourhissole
keyhumanly
conclusion:possible
Our sole humanly possible
r u n g angenommen werden. r u n g angenommen werden. use of the categories for
use knowing
of the categories
things (Dinge)
for knowing
is in ascriptive
things (Dinge)
reference is in
to ascriptive
things as objects
reference to things as objects
(Gegenstände) of possible (Gegenstände)
experience.ofKant’spossible conclusion
experience. is provisional
Kant’s conclusion insofar is as provisional
this §22 is insofar as this §22 is
preliminary, preparing preliminary,
for §26, andpreparing
insofar asfor his§26,
nextanduntitled
insofar§ explicates
as his nexttheuntitled
philosophical
§ explicates the philosophical
importance of this preliminary
importance conclusion.
of this preliminary conclusion.

60 60
61 61
60 61
 § 23. [Ohne Überschrift]§ 23. [Ohne Überschrift]§ 23. [untitled] § 23. [untitled] 3.11 §23: [untitled] 3.11 §23: [untitled]
Der obige Satz ist Der von obige
der größten
Satz ist The
von above
der größten
propositionTheis above
of utmost B148 is(ll.of818–25):
proposition utmost Kant’s B148provisional
(ll. 818–25): conclusion
Kant’s provisional
is ‘of the highest
conclusion importance’,
is ‘of the because
highest itimportance’, because it
Wichtigkeit; denn er Wichtigkeit;
bestimmt ebenso
denn er importance;
bestimmt ebenso
for it equally
importance;
well deter- specifieswell
for it equally (bestimmt)
deter- thespecifies
limits of(bestimmt)
our possible the valid
limitsuseof our
of categories
possible validin regard
use oftocategories
objects, ex- in regard to objects, ex-
820 wohl die Grenzen 820 des
wohlGebrauchs
die Grenzen
der des mines
Gebrauchs
the limits
der of mines
the usetheof limits actly as the
the of the use of the Tr. Aesth. actly
specifies
as the
the Tr.limits
Aesth. of specifies
the use of
the
thelimits
pure of
form
the of
use our
of the
sensory
pure intu-
form of our sensory intu-
reinen Verstandesbegriffe
reineninVerstandesbegriffe
Ansehung pure in Ansehung
concepts of thepure
understanding
concepts of the itionunderstanding
(receptivity). Hereition is an(receptivity).
instance of Here Kant’s is chronic
an instance
fluidity
of Kant’s
regardingchronic
human fluidity
sensibility.
regarding human sensibility.
der Gegenstände, als die
der transscendenta-
Gegenstände, als diein transscendenta-
regard to objects, in as regard
[in their
to re- He has the resources
objects, as [in their re- to
He make
has the
important,
resources specific
to make
distinctions,
important, and
specific
often distinctions,
does so, yet and
he also
often does so, yet he also
le Ästhetik die Grenzen
le Ästhetik
des Gebrauchs
die Grenzen desthe
gard] Gebrauchs
Aesthetic determined
gard] the Aesthetic
the often conflatesthe
determined the following.
often conflates
Taking the ‘FORMfollowing.
’ as any Taking
condition ‘FORM
which’ asallows
any condition
items to which
be or- allows items to be or-
der reinen Form unserer
der reinen
sinnlichen
FormAn-unserer sinnlichen
limits An-of the
of the use limits
pureofform
the use dered, and
of of the pure form of‘MATTER ’ dered,
as and
whatever ‘ is conditioned
MATTER ’ as whatever
by a form,
is conditioned
so that it can
by a
beform,
ordered,
so that
Kantit can be ordered, Kant
825 schauung bestimmte.
825 schauung
Raum und bestimmte.
Zeit our Raum undintuition.
sensible Zeit our Spacesensible
and time distinguishes
intuition. Space and time two senses
distinguishes
of ‘form of
two intuition’,
senses of
also
‘form
‘formal
of intuition’,
intuition’ also
and ‘formal
two senses
intuition’
of and two senses of
gelten als Bedingungengelten
der Möglichkeit,
als Bedingungencount
der Möglichkeit,
as conditions ofcount as conditions‘form
the possibility of theofpossibility
sensibility’: ‘form of sensibility’:
wie uns Gegenständewiegegeben uns Gegenstände
werden ofgegeben how objectswerden can beof given us, no can beForm
how objects givenofus, Intuition:
no (a) Form
a ‘form of of
Intuition:
intuiting’:
(a) aa formal
‘form of feature
intuiting’:
of somea formal
modefeature
of intuiting;
of some mode of intuiting;
können, nicht weiter als können,
für Gegenstände
nicht weiter alsfurther
für Gegenstände
than as objectsfurtherof thethan
senses, (b) a
as objects of the senses, ‘form of an intuited’:
(b) aa‘form
formal offeature
an intuited’:
of something
a formal sofeature
intuited.of something so intuited.
der Sinne, mithin nur der derSinne,Erfahrung.
mithin nur der of
hence Erfahrung.
experience.hence Beyond experience. Formal
of these Beyond Intuition:
these a sensible Formalintuition,
Intuition:the a sensible
characterintuition,
of whichthedepends character solely
of which
upon the depends solely upon the
830 Über diese Grenzen 830 Über
hinausdiesestellen
Grenzen
sie limits
hinausthey stellen sie limits
represent nothingtheyat represent
all; form at
nothing of the
all; mode of intuiting,
form of the andmode
not uponof intuiting,
particular andobjects
not upongivenparticular
within that objects
formgiven within that form
gar nichts vor; denn sie gar sind
nichts nurvor;
in den
denn sieforsind
theynur areinonly
den in for the they
senses areandonly in the of intuiting.
senses and of intuiting.
Sinnen und haben außer Sinnenihnen und haben
keine außer
otherwiseihnen havekeine
no actuality.
otherwiseThehavepureno actuality.
FormThe pure
of Sensibility: (i)Form
a ‘formof Sensibility:
of receptivity’,
(i) aor‘form
a form of receptivity’,
of sensibly intuiting;
or a form(ii) of asensibly
form intuiting; (ii) a form
Wirklichkeit. Die reinen Wirklichkeit.
Verstandesbe-
Die reinen Verstandesbe-
concepts of the understanding
concepts of are the understanding are qua sensibly
of particulars of particulars
intuited. (Allison
qua sensibly
1983,intuited.
6–7, 96–7; (Allison
Paton1983,1936,6–7,
1:101ff.)
96–7; Paton 1936, 1:101ff.)
griffe sind von dieser griffe
Einschränkung
sind von dieser
frei Einschränkung frei free
free of this restriction, andofextend
this restriction,
to Theand extend
parallel Kanttorequires
The between
parallel Kant
the Deduction
requires between
of the Categories
the Deduction and that
of theregarding
Categories spaceand that regarding space
835 und erstrecken sich 835auf
undGegenstände
erstrecken sichder aufobjects
Gegenstände der as
of intuition objects
such, ofregard-
intuitionandas time
such,concerns
regard- theand a priori
timeconcepts
concerns‘space’
theand
a priori
‘time’,
concepts
which ‘space’
likewiseandcan‘time’,
onlywhich
be usedlikewise
by uscan only be used by us
Anschauung überhaupt, Anschauung
sie mag derüberhaupt,
uns- less sieofmag der uns-
whether it be like
less ours,
of whether
if only it belegitimately
like ours, in if only
connectionlegitimately
with localising
in connection
sensed particulars
with localising by delimiting
sensed particulars
(if approximately)
by delimitingthe (if approximately) the
rigen ähnlich seyn oder rigennicht,
ähnlich
wennseynsie oder
it nicht, wenn sie
be sensible and notit beintellectual.
sensible andregions not intellectual.
they occupy during regions those
they periods
occupyofduring
time inthosewhich periods
we perceive
of time(or in measure)
which wethem. perceive (or measure) them.
nur sinnlich und nicht nur intellectuell
sinnlich und ist.nicht
This intellectuell ist. Thisof further
further extension concepts extensionKant of concepts
here states that space Kant hereand time
states(asthat
such)
space onlyandpertain
time (as to objects
such) only we can
pertain
sense,to objects
be- we can sense, be-
Diese weitere Ausdehnung Diese der weitere
Begriffe,
Ausdehnung
beyond derour
Begriffe,
sensible beyond
intuition,ourhow-sensiblecause
intuition,
they arehow- (nothingcause
but) they
conditions
are (nothing
of ourbut)
possibly
conditions
being of presented
our possiblywith particulars
being presented we with particulars we
840 über u n s e r e sinnliche
840 überAnschauung
u n s e r e sinnliche
hin- ever, Anschauung
helps us hin-
not at all.
ever,Forhelps
theyusarenot atcanall.sense.
For they Thatare is Kant’s
can sense.
transcendental
That is Kant’s
idealism. transcendental
Even settingidealism.that aside, Even
Kant’ssetting
subordi-
that aside, Kant’s subordi-
aus, hilft uns aber zuaus, nichts.
hilft Denn
uns aber es zuthennichts.
empty Denn es then
concepts of objects,
empty concepts
re- nateofclaims
objects, re-We can
hold: nateonly claimssense
hold:spatio-temporal
We can only sense particulars,
spatio-temporal
and we canparticulars,
only use the anda we can only use the a
sind alsdann leere Begriffe
sind alsdann
von Objec-
leere Begriffe
gardingvon whichObjec-
[objects],garding
whetherwhich priori whether
they[objects], conceptsthey ‘space’ priori
and ‘time’
concepts in (referential)
‘space’ and connection
‘time’ in (referential)
to sensed connection
particulars. to Onlysensed
in particulars. Only in
ten, von denen, ob sieten, nurvon einmal
denen,mög-ob sieeven
nur be einmal mög-or not,
possible even webecannot
possibleat or connection
not, we cannot withatparticulars
connection sensedwith within
particulars
space and sensed
timewithin
can we space
specifyandanytimeactuality
can we(ll. specify any actuality (ll.
lich sind oder nicht, wirlich durch
sind oderjene nicht,
gar wir durchbyjene
all judge garconcepts,
those all judgewhich
by those 832–3), whether
are concepts, which are of particulars
832–3), whether
themselves, of particulars
or of spatial themselves,
or temporal or features
of spatial ororstructures.
temporal features or structures.
845 nicht urtheilen können,
845 nichtbloße urtheilen
Gedan- können, bloße
[in this Gedan-
case] mere forms [in this
of thought
case] mere forms of thought
B148 (ll. 833–8): Kant B contrasts
148 (ll. 833–8):
the categories
Kant contrasts
to (the concepts
the categoriesof) spaceto (the
andconcepts
time, indicating
of) space and time, indicating
kenformen ohne objective kenformenRealität,
ohne weilobjective
lacking Realität, weilreality,
objective lacking
because
objective
we reality, because we
that, at least in principle, that,our at least
categories
in principle,
can hold ourforcategories
any kind can of form
hold of forsensory
any kind intuiting,
of form of sensory intuiting,
wir keine Anschauungwir zurkeine
Hand Anschauung
haben, have zur Hand
at hand haben,
no intuition
have atto handwhichno intuition
i.e., for anyto way which in which
i.e., for
particulars
any waymay in which
be made particulars
availablemay by sensing
be madetoavailable
a judgingbyintellect
sensing to a judging intellect
auf welche die synthetische
auf welche Einheit
die der
synthetische Einheit unity
the synthetic der oftheapperception,
synthetic unity (understanding).
of apperception, This expansive
(understanding).scope (erstecken,
This expansive
l. 835) scope
is a function
(erstecken,ofl.their
835)conceptual
is a function con-of their conceptual con-
Apperception, die jene Apperception,
allein enthalten,die jenewhich
alleincontains
enthalten, only those
which concepts,
contains onlytent those concepts,(only).tent or intension (only).
or intension
850 angewandt werden, 850und
angewandt
sie so einen werden,
Ge- und cansiebeso applied,
einen Ge-so that can be theyapplied,
could so that they could
B148–9 (ll. 839–54): Kant B148–9 underscores
(ll. 839–54):his anti-rationalist
Kant underscores pointhisthat,
anti-rationalist
although the point
(semantic)
that, although the (semantic)
genstand bestimmengenstand [B149] könnten.
bestimmen determine
[B149] könnten.
(specify) any determine
object. Only
(specify) any object. Only
scope or intension of the scope categories
or intensionis muchof the
greater
categories
than the is much
domain greater
of possible
than the objects
domain of of possible objects of
U n s e r e sinnliche undU nempirische
s e r e sinnliche
An- und ourempirische
sensible and An- empirical
our sensible
intuitionand empirical intuition
63 63
62 62
62 63
 schauung kann ihnenschauung allein Sinn kannund ihnencan allein
provideSinn [those und concepts]
can provide sense [thosesensory
concepts] intuition
sense(sensory sensory presentation)
intuition (sensory of particulars,
presentation)
this extra of scope
particulars,
is to this
us cognitively
extra scope is to us cognitively
Bedeutung verschaffen. Bedeutung verschaffen.and significance. and significance. useless, precisely because useless,
we cannot
preciselyidentifybecause anywenon-spatio-temporal
cannot identify anyparticulars non-spatio-temporal
to which particulars to which
855 Nimmt man 855 also einNimmt Objectman eineralso ein Thus Object
if oneeiner assumes an Thus objectif one of assumes
a this an
extra
objectscopeof or
a intension
this extra canscopepossibly or intension
pertain, in cananypossibly
specifiable,
pertain, cognitively
in any specifiable,
valid way. cognitively valid way.
nicht-sinnlichen Anschauung nicht-sinnlichen
als gegeben Anschauung
non-sensible als gegeben intuitionnon-sensible
to be given, We can
intuition to be onlygiven,
use categories
We canin only knowledge
use categories
by subsuming in knowledge
particulars by subsuming
under concepts particularswithinunder concepts within
an, so kann man es freilich an, sodurchkann man alle diees freilich
one can durchadmittedly
alle die represent
one can admittedly
by all (prospective,
represent bycandidate)all (prospective,
cognitive judgments.
candidate) Subsumable
cognitive judgments.particularsSubsumable
can only beparticularspresentedcan only be presented
Prädicate vorstellen, Prädicate die schonvorstellen,
in der those die schon predicatesin deralready thoseinvolved
predicates to us in and
in already involved in through sensory
to us in intuition;
and through we can
sensory
only intuition;
localise andwe identify
can only particulars
localise and
as candi-
identify particulars as candi-
Voraussetzung liegen,Voraussetzungdaß ihm n i c hliegen, t s the daßassumption,
ihm n i c h ti.e. s that
thenothing belong- i.e. date
assumption, that subjects of our cognitive
nothing belong- date subjects judgment(s)
of our cognitive
within sensory judgment(s)
experience,withinwhich sensory is spatio-tem-
experience, which is spatio-tem-
860 z u r s i n n l i c h e n860A nz sucr hsaiununnl igc hGeen- A nings c htoa usensible
u n g Gintuition
e - ingpertains
to sensibleto it: poral. This
intuition pertains to it:is fundamentalporal. toThisthe is
cognitive
fundamental structure
to theof cognitive
the human structure
condition. of the
(This humanpointcondition. (This point
h ö r i g e s zukomme: halso, ö r i gdaß
e s zukomme:
es nicht also, hencedaß it isesnotnicht extendedhence or located
it is notinextended holdsor independently
located in ofholds transcendental
independently idealism,
of transcendental
and of (non-)Euclidean
idealism, and spaces;
of (non-)Euclidean
see §4.) spaces; see §4.)
ausgedehnt, oder im Raume ausgedehnt, sei, daß
oderdieim Raume
space, that sei, daß die space,
its duration would thatnotitsbedurationB149would not beOur categories
(ll. 852–4): B149 (ll. 852–4): can only Our becategories
provided can senseonly andbesignificance
provided sense by ourand sensory
significance by our sensory
Dauer desselben keine DauerZeit desselben
sei, daß inkeineanyZeit time, sei,that
daßwithinin any it notime,alteration
that within andit empirical
no alteration intuition(s).
and empirical
These keyintuition(s).
terms were These made key famous terms (towereAnglophones)
made famous by Frege:
(to Anglophones) by Frege:
ihm keine Veränderung ihm(Folge
keine der Veränderung
Be- (succession
(Folge derofBe-determinations(succession of in determinations
sense and meaning in or sense
reference.
and meaning
Kant’s explication
or reference. of our
Kant’s
concepts
explicationand theirof our possibly
concepts valid and their possibly valid
865 stimmungen in 865 der stimmungen
Zeit) angetroffen in der time)Zeit) isangetroffen
to be found,time) etc. However,
is to be found, cognitive use does make
etc. However, cognitive
Frege’suse points
does(so makefar Frege’s
as thesepointspertain(so to farempirical
as theseknowledge),
pertain to empirical yet knowledge), yet
werde, usw. Allein das werde,
ist doch usw.keinAlleinei- dasthat
ist isdoch kein ei-cognition,
no proper that is ifnoI proper more emphatically
mere- cognition, if I mere- in more the Schematism:
emphaticallyOnly in the as connected
Schematism: or Only
referred as connected
to sensed objects or referred do to sensed objects do
gentliches Erkenntnis,gentliches wenn ich Erkenntnis,
bloß an- lywenn ich bloß
indicate howan-the intuition
ly indicateof how the theconcepts
intuitionhave of theBedeutung (B185–7).
concepts have The specific(B‘sense
Bedeutung 185–7). andThesignificance’
specific ‘sense whichand must significance’
be sup- which must be sup-
zeige, wie die Anschauung zeige, wie des die Objects
Anschauung
object des Objects
is not, without being
objectable is not,
to without
say plied
beingtoablethe tocategories
say plied
is theirto more
the categories
specific intension
is their moreby which specific
alone intension
they can bypertain
which alone to fea-they can pertain to fea-
n i c h t s e i , ohne sagen n i czu
h t können,
s e i , ohne wassagen zu können,
anything aboutwas what anything
then thatabout tures of
intu- what then that intu- particulars localised
tures ofandparticulars
discriminated localisedwithin and space
discriminated
and time. within
(This space
is the and
topic time.
of (This is the topic of
870 in ihr denn enthalten 870 insei; ihrdenn
dennalsdenn
enthalten ition
sei; denn alsdenn forition
may contain; in this
maycase contain;I the Schematism.)
for in this case IThe the specific,
Schematism.)
fully-fledged The cognitive
specific,‘sense
fully-fledged
and significance’
cognitive ‘sense
of theand categories
significance’ of the categories
habe ich gar nicht die habe Möglichkeit
ich gar enichti n e sdie Möglichkeit
have not ateall i n erepresented
s have not theatpos- required
all represented the pos-for empirical required
knowledge for is
empirical
supplied knowledge
to the (schematised)
is supplied categories
to the (schematised)
by referring categories by referring
O b j e c t s zu meinem O reinen
b j e cVerstandes-
t s zu meinem reinen sibility Verstandes-
of an object forsibility my pure of an con- them
object for mytopure spatio-temporally
con- themlocalised
to spatio-temporally
particulars welocalised discriminate
particulars
and identify
we discriminate
within (spatio- and identify within (spatio-
begriff vorgestellt, weil begriffich vorgestellt,
keine An- weil ceptichof keine An- cept ofbecause
the understanding, temporal)
the understanding,
I experience;
because I this
temporal)
is the topic
experience;
of Kant’s this ‘System
is the topic
of Principles’,
of Kant’s ‘System
both topics
of Principles’,
belong to both topics belong to
schauung habe gebenschauung können, habe die ihm geben have
können,not been die ihm able to have
assignnot anybeen Kant’s ‘Analytic
intu-able to assign any intu- of Principles’.
Kant’s ‘Analytic
My disambiguation
of Principles’. of My
Kant’s
disambiguation
distinctions of
regarding
Kant’s distinctions
space, regarding space,
time and forms of intuiting time and mayforms suggest of intuiting
that the concepts
may suggest
‘space’that andthe ‘time’
concepts
might ‘space’
then and also‘time’ might then also
875 korrespondierte, 875 sondern
korrespondierte,
nur sagensondern ition which nur would sagen correspond
ition which to would
it; I correspond to it; I
have a broader scope (or havea less
a broader
specific scope
intension)
(or a less thanspecific
required intension)
for usingthan theserequired
a priorifor con- using these a priori con-
konnte, daß die unsrige konnte, nichtdaßfürdieihnunsrige couldnicht onlyfür say ihn that incould
its regard
only say ourthat in its regard our
cepts (only) in connection ceptswith (only) ourinhuman
connection formswith of sensory
our human receptivity.
forms of Thissensory
is correct,
receptivity.
yet This is correct, yet
gelte. Aber das Vornehmste gelte. Aber ist hier,
das daßVornehmste
intuition ist hier, daß Above
is invalid. intuitionall ishow- invalid. Above all how-
cognitively useless to cognitivelyus (with regard useless to to particulars)
us (with regardfor thetosame particulars)
reasons for as the the broader
same reasons as the broader
auf ein solches Etwasauf auch einnicht
solcheseinmalEtwas ever
auch the nichtkey einmalpoint here
ever isthethat, key topoint here is that, to
scope, i.e. less specific scope, intension, i.e. less
of any
specific
of theintension,
categoriesof(see any§4).of theKant categories
suggests(see (just§4).below)Kant suggests (just below)
eine einzige Categorie eine angewandt
einzige werden
Categorie angewandt
such a something werden notsuch a single
a something
cate- not a single cate-
he agrees, at least regarding he agrees,the concept
at least regarding
‘time’: If we theassume
concept(for ‘time’:
the Ifsake weofassume
discussion) (for the an sake of discussion) an
880 könnte: z.B. der 880 Begriff
könnte:
einerz.B. Substanz,
der Begriff gory einer
could Substanz,
be applied: gory e.g.,could
the con-be applied:objecte.g.,of the con-
non-sensory object
intuition, of non-sensory
it may perhaps intuition,
have ‘ait duration
may perhaps whichhave would‘a duration
not be time’ which would not be time’
d. i. von Etwas, das als d. i.Subject,
von Etwas, niemals das als
ceptSubject, niemals i.e.,
of a substance, cept of of
something
a substance,(Bi.e., ofll.something
149, 862–3). (B149, ll. 862–3).
aber als bloßes Prädicat aberexistieren
als bloßes könne,
Prädicatwhich
existierencouldkönne,exist onlywhich
as subject,
could but exist only as subject, but
wovon ich gar nicht wovon weiß, obichesgar irgend
nicht weiß,
never ob as aesmere irgend predicate;
neverofaswhich B149–50of(ll.
a mereI predicate; 855–88):
which I Kant B149–50 expressly
(ll. 855–88):
indicates Kanthis proscription
expressly indicates of the his cognitive
proscription
use ofof indirect
the cognitive use of indirect
ein Ding geben könne, ein dasDingdiesergebenGe- könne, das dieser
cannot at all know, Ge- whether
cannot any at allsuch proof (disjunctive
know, whether any such syllogism
proof plus
(disjunctive
negation syllogism
elimination) plus in
negation
any caseselimination)
in which we
in any
cannot cases indi-
in which we cannot indi-
885 dankenbestimmung 885 dankenbestimmung
korrespondierete, thing korrespondierete,
could be giventhing corresponding
could be given catecorresponding
– localise, ostend,cate demonstrate
– localise,indexically
ostend, demonstrate
– the relevant indexically
particular(s),
– the because
relevant inparticular(s),
such because in such
wenn nicht empirische wennAnschauung
nicht empirischemir toAnschauung
this merely mir conceptual
to thisspecifica- cases we
merely conceptual specifica- cannot realise cases
the concepts
we cannot involved
realise the
in our
concepts
putativeinvolved
cognition in our
(in Teten’s
putative sense)
cognition by (in Teten’s sense) by
den Fall der Anwendung den Fall gäbe. derDoch Anwendungtion, ifgäbe. Doch intuition
empirical tion, ifgives empirical indicating
me intuition gives me demonstratively, indicating
deictically,
demonstratively,
that there is deictically,
any such object.
that there
Though is any this
such proscription
object. Though
is this proscription is
central to Kant’s Transcendental central to Kant’s Dialectic, Transcendental
it is not restrictedDialectic,to such
it is nottranscendent
restricted or to meta-
such transcendent or meta-
mehr hievon in der Folge. mehr hievon in[B150] der Folge.
no case to which [B150]to apply
no case [these to which
con- to apply [these con-

64 64 65 65
64 65
 cepts]. More on this of
cepts].
course
More on thisphysical
in the contexts,
of course in theas hisphysical
principal
contexts,
discussion
as his
of principal
this pointdiscussion
in the Doctrine
of thisofpoint
Method
in the
(BDoctrine
817–22) of Method (B817–22)
sequel. sequel. makes plain. This, too,makes
apparently
plain.belongs
This, too,
to Kant’s
apparently
shrewd
belongs
explication
to Kant’s
of the
shrewd
epistemological
explication of the epistemological
significance of the existential
significance
presuppositions
of the existential
of Aristotelian
presuppositions
syllogistic.
of Aristotelian syllogistic.

§ 24. Von der Anwendung § 24. Von der Catego-

der Anwendung
890
rien auf Gegenständerien derauf Sinne
Gegenstände
überhaupt. überhaupt.
Die reinen Verstandesbegriffe
Die reinenbezie- Verstandesbegriffe
hen sich durch den bloßen hen sich Verstand
durch den auf bloßen
Gegenstände der Anschauung Gegenstände über- der Anschauung
895 haupt, unbestimmt 895 ob
haupt,
sie die
unbestimmt
unsrige ob
oder irgend eine andere, oderdochirgendsinnliche
eine andere,
sei, sind aber eben darum sei, sindbloße
aber Gebene - darum
d a n k e n f o r m e n , wodurch
d a n k e nnoch
f o r mkein
e n , wodurch
bestimmter Gegenstand bestimmter
erkannt Gegenstand
wird. which
900 Die Synthesis oder 900 Die Verbindung
Synthesis des oder cognised.
Mannigfaltigen in denselben Mannigfaltigen
bezog sich in denselben
bloß auf die Einheit bloß der Apperception
auf die Einheit forms] der Apperception
und war dadurch derund Grundwar der
dadurch
Mög-der unity
lichkeit der Erkenntniß lichkeit der, so
a priori fern thea priori
Erkenntniß
905 sie auf dem Verstande 905 sieberuht,
auf dem undVerstande
mit- ofberuht,
hin nicht allein transscendental,
hin nicht allein
sonderntransscendental,
auch bloß rein intellectual.auch bloß Weilrein
in unsintellectual.
aber eine gewiße Form aber dereinesinnlichen
gewiße Form
zum Grunde aliegt,
Anschauung a priori Anschauung priori zum
910 welche auf der Receptivität
910 welche der auf Vorstel-
der Receptivität
lungsfähigkeit (Sinnlichkeit)
lungsfähigkeit
beruht,(Sinnlichkeit)
so fundamental, beruht,which so fundamental,
kann der Verstand alskann Spontaneität
der Verstandden alsreceptivity
inneren Sinn durch inneren das Mannigfaltige
Sinn durch sentations
gegebener Vorstellungen gegebener
der syntheti-
Vorstellungen
915 schen Einheit der915Apperception
schen Einheit gemäß
der Apperception
bestimmen und so synthetische
bestimmen Einheit
und so synthetische
der Apperception des der Mannigfaltigen
Apperception derdes Mannigfaltigen
sinnlichen Anschauung sinnlichen denken, apperception,
a priori Anschauung
als die Bedingung, unter als welcher
die Bedingung,
alle Ge-unter
920 genstände unserer 920 (der
genstände
menschlichen)
unserer (der
§ 24.derOfCatego-
the Application
890 § 24.ofOf thethe
Cate- 3.12 of§24:
Application Of the Application
the Cate- 3.12 §24:of Of thetheCategories
Application to Objects
of the Categories
of the Senses to Objects
as such. of the Senses as such.
der to
gories Sinne
Objects of the goriesSenses
to ObjectsB150of(ll.the Senses
892–9): Kant’sB150
title (ll.
to 892–9):
§24 and Kant’sopening title
statement
to §24 and recount
opening his painstaking
statement recount conclusion his painstaking conclusion
as such. as such. from §23, yet §24 is notfrom redundant!
§23, yetKant §24 isagain
not redundant!
states that throughKant again use states
by thethat understanding
through useinby the understanding in
The pure bezie-concepts of Thethepure under-
concepts of the
judging, under- connect
categories judging,to objects
categories presented
connectbytointuition
objects as presented
such, regardless
by intuition of the
as such,
kind of regardless of the kind of
standingVerstand auf bystanding
connect mere under-connect intuition
by mereinvolved, under- provided
intuition onlyinvolved,
that it be provided
sensibleonly intuition
that it(ll.be892–9).
sensible(Thisintuition
point(ll. supports
892–9). (This point supports
standing to über- objects standing
of intuition to objects
as myofsuggestion
intuition thatas Kant’s
my suggestion
Deductionthat is neutral
Kant’swith Deduction
regard is to neutral
his transcendental
with regardidealist to his transcendental
ac- idealist ac-
sie regardless
such, die unsrige of whether
such, regardless
it be ours of whether
count ofitspace be ours
and timecount= forms
of space of human
and time sensory
= forms intuition;
of human regardless,
sensoryonly intuition;
by sensoryregardless,
intu- only by sensory intu-
doch sinnliche
or another kind, provided
or another
only thatkind, ition ofonly
it provided particulars
that it which
itioncanofstimulate
particulars sensations
which can in stimulate
us can anysensations
particularsinbe uspresented
can any particulars
or ‘giv- be presented or ‘giv-
bloßeyet
be sensible; G they
e - are,
be sensible;
for that veryyet theyen’ are,tofor
us.)that
Kant’s
verystatement
en’ toaboutus.) Kant’s
the usestatement
and referenceabout(connection)
the use and reference
of concepts (connection)
to objects of concepts to objects of
reason, noch mere keinthought-forms,
reason, through intuition
mere thought-forms, through as such highlights
intuitionthat as
the such
categories
highlightsas such
that the
are categories
mere forms as of
such
thought,
are merewhichformsdo of thought, which do
erkannt wird. which
no determinate objectnoyet determinate
be not suffice
object to yetknow
be anynotspecific
suffice(determinate)
to know anyobject specific (ll.(determinate)
897–9). object (ll. 897–9).
Verbindung des orcognised.
Synthesis connection Synthesis
of Bor
150connection
(ll. 900–7):of Kant Bnow
150 focuses
(ll. 900–7): on that
Kantkindnowoffocuses
conjoining on that or ‘synthesis’
kind of conjoining
of a manifold or ‘synthesis’
(a of a manifold (a
bezog within
the manifold sich [those
the manifold
thought- withinplurality)
[those thought-
within these forms
plurality) of thought,
within these i.e., of
formscategories
of thought, (or indeed
i.e., ofother
categories
concepts)
(or indeed
used in other concepts) used in
was connected forms]
only was to theconnected
judging,onlyconnects
to the(or relates,
judging,refers)connects solely(ortorelates,
the unity refers)of apperception.
solely to the unity To anticipate,
of apperception.
Kant To anticipate, Kant
Grund of der Mög- unity
apperception and of wasapperception
thus and was thus
here turns the focus ofhere theturns
Deductionthe focus ‘upward’
of thetoDeduction
the intellectual‘upward’ conditions
to the intellectual
necessary for conditions necessary for
, so
a priori fern ofthe
ground thea possibility
priori ground any of the possibility
humanly possible anyunified
humanlyapperception.
possible unified
Due to apperception.
this connection Due (totounitary
this connection
appercep- (to unitary appercep-
und so
cognition, mit-far asofthis
cognition,
[possibil- so fartion),
as thisthe[possibil-
conjoining effected
tion), the byconjoining
using categories effected (inbyjudging)
using categories
grounds a(in priori
judging)
the possibility
grounds a priori the possibility
ity] is based sondern
upon theity] understanding,
is based upon the understanding,
of knowledge, insofar asofthis
knowledge,
possibilityinsofaris based
as this
upon possibility
understanding.
is basedBecause
upon understanding.
this ground ofBecause this ground of
and soWeilis notinonly
uns transcendental,
and so is notbut only transcendental,
apperception isbut entirely
apperception
conceptual isand entirely
judgmental,
conceptual it is and
altogether
judgmental,
purelyitintellectual
is altogether (as purely intellectual (as
alsoder sinnlichen
utterly, purely intellectual.
also utterly, How- well as transcendental).
purely intellectual. How- well as transcendental).
Grunde liegt,
ever, because withinever, us abecause
specificwithin us a specific
B150–1 (ll. 907–26): Kant B150–1 contrasts
(ll. 907–26):
the understanding
Kant contrasts to our
the human
understanding
form oftosensoryour human intui-form of sensory intui-
form of dersensible
Vorstel-intuition
form of a priori
sensible
is intuition
ting. He astatespriorithat
is a specific
ting. Heform statesofthatsensory
a specific
intuitionformis of a priori
sensory fundamental
intuition istoaour priori human
fundamental to our human
rests upon the whichcognisance,
rests upona form the ofcognisance,
sensory intuition a formbased of sensory
upon our intuition
sensory basedreceptivity
upon our to sensory
representa- receptivity to representa-
Spontaneität dencapability
of the receptivity
of repre-
of the capability
tions (ourofsensibility).
repre- tions
(All of (our thissensibility).
characterisation(All ofofthis ourcharacterisation
sensibility can of be our
accommodated
sensibility can be accommodated
das Mannigfaltige(sensibility),
sentations
the under- (sensibility),
by mythe under- minimal
alternative, by myclaim alternative,
about our minimal
sensory claimreceptivity.)
about ourKant’s sensory point
receptivity.)
is that, inKant’s
con- point is that, in con-
der as
standing syntheti-
spontaneity standing
can thus as spontaneity
de- trast to sensoryde-
can thus receptivity,
trast to oursensory
understanding
receptivity, is active
our understanding
or ‘spontaneous’, is active
and or can‘spontaneous’,
determine and can determine
termine the gemäß inner sensetermine
throughthe the
inner sense
our innerthroughsensethethrough
oura inner
manifold sense(or through
plurality)a manifold
of given (or representations
plurality) of in given
accordrepresentations
with the in accord with the
manifold ofEinheitgiven representations
manifold of given in representations in
synthetic unity of apperception.
synthetic unity In this of regard,
apperception.
understandingIn this regard,
can a priori
understanding
think (judge, cancon-
a priori think (judge, con-
accord with the der synthetic
accord unitywith of the synthetic unity of a synthetic
ceive, comprehend) ceive, comprehend)
unity of apperceptiona synthetic of unity
any of manifold
apperception
withinofsensory
any manifold
intuition,within sensory intuition,
a priori denken, and so can
apperception,
think a priori and soand cancanthink a priori
do so as the (intellectual)
and can do so condition
as the (intellectual)
under whichcondition all objectsunderof human whichintuition
all objects must
of human intuition must
welcherunity
synthetic alle Ge-
of apperception
synthetic unityof theof apperception
necessarily stand,of theso that
necessarily
the categories stand, as so mere
that theformscategories
of thoughtas mere obtainformsor achieve
of thought objective
obtain or achieve objective
menschlichen)
manifold of sensible manifold
intuition as sensiblereality,
of the by being
intuition appliedreality,
as the to objects
by being givenapplied
us within
to objects
(sensory) given
intuition.
us within (Note(sensory)
that theintuition.
intellec-(Note that the intellec-

66 66 67 67
66 67
 Anschauung nothwendiger AnschauungWeise stehen
nothwendiger Weiseunder
condition stehenwhich condition
all objects under tual all
of which integration
objects of distinct tual integration
concepts within of distinct
judging concepts
may sufficewithinfor judging
Kant’smay keysuffice
claim, thatfor Kant’s
the key claim, that the
müssen, dadurch dennmüssen, die Categorien
dadurch als denn ourdie Categorien als our
(human) intuition must (human)
necessar- analytic
intuition must unity
necessar- of apperception
analytic unity can only of apperception
occur in necessary can only conjunction
occur in necessary
with some conjunction
synthetic with some synthetic
bloße Gedankenformen bloße objective
Gedankenformen
Reali- ilyobjective
stand, soReali- that the ily categories
stand, so as unitycategories
that the of apperception,as unity
i.e., with
of apperception,
such an integration i.e., withofsuch distinct
an integration
concepts inofjudging, distinct where
concepts in judging, where
tät, d.i. Anwendung tät, aufd.i. Gegenstände,
Anwendung auf mereGegenstände,
forms of thought mere canforms
thus of these concepts
ob-thought can thus ob- are more
these thanconcepts
mere thought-forms
are more than only
mere when
thought-forms
used to identify,
only when
differentiate
used to identify, differentiate
925 [B151] die uns in 925 der [BAnschauung
151] die uns gege- in der Anschauung
tain objectivegege- reality,tain
i.e. objective
applicationreality, andi.e.integrate
application sensed features
and integrate of particulars
sensed features
presented of particulars
to us via sensory presented intuition.
to us viaIf thissensoryis intuition. If this is
ben werden können,ben aberwerdennur alskönnen,
Er- to aber nur als
objects whichEr- cantobeobjects
given us which correct, Kant’s
in can be given us in Deduction
correct,holds Kant’s
independently
Deduction of
holds
his transcendental
independently idealism.)
of his transcendental idealism.)
scheinungen bekommen; scheinungen
denn nurbekommen;
von intuition, denn nur von only
although intuition,
as appear-
although Bonly as 926–9):
151 (ll. appear-Understandably,
B151 (ll. 926–9): KantUnderstandably,
recalls his transcendental Kant recalls idealist
his transcendental
qualifier, that idealist
ob- qualifier, that ob-
diesen sind wir der Anschauung diesen sind wir der Anschauung
a priori ances, for only of these
a priori ances,are for
we only
capa-of these are we capa-
jects are given to us within jects are (sensory)
given tointuition
us within only(sensory)
as appearances.
intuition That only as doctrine
appearances.
Kant be- That doctrine Kant be-
fähig. fähig. ble a priori to intuit. ble a priori to intuit. lieves is demonstratedlieves in the is Tr.
demonstrated
Aesth.. That in doctrine
the Tr. Aesth..and itsThat qualifier,
doctrine however,
and itsarequalifier,
not however, are not
930 Diese S y n t h930 e s i s des Diese Mannigfalti-
S y n t h e s i s desThisMannigfalti-
synthesis of theThis manifold
synthesisof of required
the manifold of
or justified byrequired
anythingorKant justified
demonstrates
by anything (soKant
far) indemonstrates
the Deduction. (so far) in the Deduction.
gen der sinnlichen Anschauung, gen der sinnlichen die a Anschauung,
sensible intuition die a whichsensible is aintuition
priori which is a priori
B151 (ll. 930–42): KantBnow 151 (ll.expressly
930–42): distinguishes
Kant now expressly two different distinguishes
kinds or two domains different
of synthetic
kinds or domains of synthetic
priori möglich und nothwendig priori möglich ist, kann
und nothwendig
possible and ist, kann
necessary,possible
can beand called
necessary, can be called
integration (unification,integration
conjoining) (unification,
of manifolds: conjoining)
one within of manifolds:
sensibility, one the otherwithinwithin
sensibility,
intel- the other within intel-
f i g ü r l i c h (synthesisf ispeciosa
gürlich ) genannt speciosa) (synthesis
(synthesis figurative genannt speciosa)
figurativeto (synthesis
distin- speciosa) to distin-
lect. Both are guided by lect.
theBoth
sameare formal
guided aspects
by theofsame judging formaland aspects
by the same of judgingcategories,
and byyetthe one same categories, yet one
werden zum Unterschiede werdenvon zumderjeni-
Unterschiedeguish von derjeni-
it from that synthesis
guish itwhich from that in synthesis which in
concerns sensory integration concerns(binding)
sensory required
integration merely
(binding)
to perceive
required sensed
merely objects;
to perceive
the other sensed objects; the other
935 gen, welche in Ansehung 935 gen, des welche Mannigfal-
in Ansehung des to
regard Mannigfal-
the manifoldregard of antointuition
the manifold of an intuition
concerns judgmental differentiation,
concerns judgmental classification
differentiation,
and integrationclassification
withinand judgments,
integrationby which
within judgments, by which
tigen einer Anschauung tigenüberhaupt
einer Anschauung
in der asüberhaupt
such would in der
be thought
as such within
wouldthebe thought within the
we can apperceive anything we canweapperceive
perceive, anything
and so canweknow perceive,
it empirically.
and so canMy knowcomments
it empirically.
above My comments above
bloßen Categorie gedacht bloßen würde Categorie und gedacht würde und
mere category and ismerecalledcategory
intellec-and (isB150,called intellec-
ll. 900–7) capitalised
(B150,upon ll. 900–7)
Kant’scapitalised
own indication upon Kant’sof the ‘purely
own indication
intellectual’ of the
conjunction
‘purely intellectual’ conjunction
VerstandesverbindungVerstandesverbindung
(synthesis intellec- tual (synthesis
connection
intellec- (synthesis
tual intellectualis);
connection (synthesis effected intellectualis);
by judging. Kant’s effected transition
by judging. here Kant’s
to considering
transitionsub-personal
here to considering
sensory integration
sub-personal orsensory integration or
tualis) heißt; beyde tualis sind ) t rheißt;
a n s s cbeyde
e n - sindboth tare
r a ntranscendental,
s s c e n - both not aremerelytranscendental,
be- not
synthesis merely
is an be-expository,
synthesis
not an is inferential,
an expository, transition.
not an This inferential,
sub-personal
transition. sensory
This integration
sub-personal sensory integration
940 d e n t a l , nicht bloß 940weild e nsie
t aselbst
l , nicht bloß weilcause
a priori sie selbst
they aeachprioriproceed
causea theypriori,each
but proceed a priori,
Kant calls but synthesis
figurative Kant calls (l. figurative
930–4) orsynthesissynthesis speciosa
(l. 930–4) (l. 934)
or synthesis
primarily speciosa
concerns
(l. 934)process
primarily concerns process
vorgehen, sondern auch vorgehen,
die Möglichkeit
sondern auch diebecause
also Möglichkeitthey ground
also because
the possi- they ground the possi-
(the subjective deduction), (the subjective
yet Kant stressesdeduction),that, yet
likeKantintellectual
stressesjudgment,
that, like sensory
intellectual
integration
judgment, sensory integration
anderer Erkenntniß a anderer priori gründen.
Erkenntniß a priori bilitygründen.
of other cognitions bilitya of
priori.
other cognitionstoo isagrounded
priori. and guided
too is by grounded
a priori conditions,
and guided from by a priori
whichconditions,
the possibilityfromofwhich furthertheapossibility
priori of further a priori
Allein die figürliche Synthesis,Allein die wenn figürliche Synthesis,
However, wenn figurative However,
synthesis,figurative synthesis,
knowledge follows. Hence knowledge both follows.
kinds orHence domains bothof kindssynthesis or domains
can afford of transcendental
synthesis can afford transcendental
sie bloß auf die ursprünglich-syntheti-
sie bloß auf die ursprünglich-syntheti-
merely in regard to the merelyoriginal
in regard
syn- to knowledge
the originalproperlysyn- speaking
knowledge (Tr. properly
Aesth. §3, B40). (For
speaking (Tr.discussion
Aesth. §3,of B40).
Kant’s
(Foraccount
discussionof figura-
of Kant’s account of figura-
945 sche Einheit der 945 Apperception,
sche Einheit d.i.der
diese
Apperception,
thetic unity d.i. of
diese
apperception,
thetic unity i.e., of
thisapperception,
tive synthesis, i.e., this
see Longuenesse
tive synthesis, (1998), see202–29,
Longuenesse 240–7;(1998),
Kant’s202–29,
functionalist
240–7;cognitive
Kant’s functionalist
architec- cognitive architec-
transscendentale Einheit, transscendentale
geht, welche Einheit,
in transcendental
geht, welcheunity in which is thoughtunity ture,
transcendental which most of which is sub-personal,
is thought ture, most of which is charted in KCE, §43.)is charted in KCE, §43.)
is sub-personal,
den Categorien gedacht den wird,
Categorien
muß zum gedachtin wird, muß zum must,
the categories, in thein contradis-
categories, must, in contradis-
B151 (ll. 943–61): KantBfurther 151 (ll. 943–61):
characterises Kantfigurative
further characterises
synthesis, butfigurative
now expressly synthesis,
callsbutit tran-
now expressly calls it tran-
Unterschiede von derUnterschiede bloß intellectuellenvon der bloß intellectuellen
tinction to the merely tinction intellectual
to the merely scendentalintellectual
synthesis ofscendental
the powersynthesis of imagination
of the power (ll. 949–50,
of imagination
cf. ll. 966–71). (ll. 949–50,
Becausecf.Kant’sll. 966–71). Because Kant’s
Verbindung die transscendentale Verbindung Synthe- die transscendentale
conjunction, Synthe-
be called conjunction,
the transcen- be called the transcen-
remarks primarily concern remarkscognitive
primarily process,
concern and cognitive
so belongprocess, to his subjective
and so belong deduction,
to hisIsubjective
fore- deduction, I fore-
950 sis der Einbildungskraft 950 sis der heißen.
Einbildungskraft
E i n - dental heißen. E i nof
synthesis - thedental
power synthesis
of ima- of the go detailedofcomment.
power ima- go
Thedetailed
transcendental
comment. point
Theoftranscendental
Kant’s discussion pointofoffigurative
Kant’s discussion
synthesis of ef-figurative synthesis ef-
b i l d u n g s k r a f t ist bdasi l d Vermögen,
u n g s k r a f t ei-ist das Vermögen,
gination. The powerei- of gination.
imaginationThe is the
power offected
imagination is the
by transcendental fected
power by transcendental
of imagination power (sub-personally)
of imagination is that(sub-personally)
some such integration is that some such integration
nen Gegenstand auchnen ohneGegenstand
dessen Ge- auch capacity
ohne dessen Ge- capacity
to represent an object to represent
in an object
of sensory intake over ofin timesensory
and through
intake over space timeis required
and through for usspaceat allistorequired
perceive our
for ussurround-
at all to perceive our surround-
genwart in der Anschauung genwartvorzustellen.
in der Anschauung vorzustellen.
intuition even without intuition
its presence.
even without ings, its presence.
without which weings,could without
neverwhich (self-consciously)
we could never apperceive
(self-consciously)
our surroundings, apperceivemuch ourlesssurroundings, much less
Da nun alle unsere Anschauung Da nun allesinnlichunsere Anschauung
Now as allsinnlichof our intuition
Now as isallsensi- of our intuition is sensi-
ever think to ourselvesever ‘I think
think…’ to ourselves
that particular‘I thinkover…’ there
thatisparticular
now such-and-so.
over thereKant’s is nowcon- such-and-so. Kant’s con-
955 ist, so gehört die 955Einbildungskraft
ist, so gehört die der Einbildungskraft
ble, the power der of imagination,
ble, the power due toof imagination, due to appears
cern with synthesis cern withmuchsynthesis
earlier inappears
KdrV (much A77–8/ B103);inrecall
earlier KdrVKant’s(A77–8/ comment:
B103); recall ‘Syn-Kant’s comment: ‘Syn-
subjectiven Bedingung subjectiven
wegen, unter Bedingung
der the wegen, unter der conditions
subjective the subjective under conditions under

68 68 69 69
68 69
 sie allein den Verstandesbegriffen
sie allein den eine Verstandesbegriffen
which alone iteine can provide
which alone an intu- it can thesis
provide as such,
an intu-as we shallthesisseeaspresently,
such, as iswethe shallmere seeeffect
presently,
of imagination,
is the mereaeffect blind of yetimagination,
indispens- a blind yet indispens-
correspondirende Anschauung
correspondirende geben Anschauung
ition corresponding geben to itionthecorresponding
concepts able
to function
the concepts of the soul, ablewithout
function which
of thewesoul,
would without
have altogether
which we no wouldknowledge;
have altogether
[yet] to bring
no knowledge; [yet] to bring
kann, zur Sinnlichkeit;kann,
so fernzuraber
Sinnlichkeit;
doch of sothefernunderstanding,
aber doch of thusthebelongs
understanding,
to thisthussynthesis
belongs to to
conceptsthisis asynthesis
functiontoexercised
concepts is byaunderstanding,
function exercised by which
by understanding,
understandingbyfirst which understanding first
960 ihre Synthesis eine 960Ausübung
ihre Synthesis
der Spon-eine Ausübung
sensibility; der however,
Spon- sensibility;
insofar as however, its provides us
insofar as its knowledge provides
in the proper
us knowledge
sense of in
the the
term’
proper( A 77/
sense
B 103).
of Kant’s
the term’doubled
(A 77/ roles
B 103). for
Kant’s doubled roles for
taneität ist, welche taneität
bestimmend ist, welche
und synthesis
bestimmend is ofundcoursesynthesis
an exercise category-guided
is ofofcourse an exercise forms of category-guided
of synthesis is first forms
stated of at A79/B104–5.
synthesis is first stated at A79/B104–5.
nicht wie der Sinn [B152]nichtbloßwie bestimm-
der Sinn [B152] bloß bestimm-
spontaneity which is determining
spontaneity which and isB151 determining
(ll. 954–9): andKant Bhere151 assigns
(ll. 954–9):power Kant of here
imagination
assigns to power
sensibility,
of imagination
and stresses to sensibility,
that tran- and stresses that tran-
bar ist, mithin a priori bardenist, Sinn
mithin seiner den
a priorinot likeSinn seiner merely
the senses not likedetermina-
the senses merely
scendental determina-
power of imagination
scendental power and its of figurative
imagination (sensory-perceptual)
and its figurativesynthesis (sensory-perceptual)
is required synthesis is required
Form nach der Einheit Form dernach
Appercep-
der Einheit ble,der Appercep-
hence can determineble, hence
a priorican thedetermine
for theaconceptspriori theof the for understanding
the concepts of (i.e.,thetheunderstanding
categories) ever (i.e.,tothehavecategories)
‘a corresponding
ever to have ‘a corresponding
965 tion gemäß bestimmen 965 tionkann,
gemäß so bestimmen
ist die senses kann,according
so ist dieto senses
its formaccordingin ac- tointuition’,
its formi.e., in aac-
sensoryintuition’,
presentation i.e., aofsensory
any particular
presentation properly of anyclassified
particularor characterised
properly classified by or characterised by
Einbildungskraft so fern Einbildungskraft
ein Vermögen, so fern
cordeinwith Vermögen,
the unity of cordapperception,
with the unityany of category
apperception, (or any specification
any category of (oraany category)
specification
used asofa apredicatecategory)inused (evenasa acandidate)
predicate in (even a candidate)
die Sinnlichkeit a prioridie zu bestimmen,
Sinnlichkeit the zu
a priori bestimmen,
power of imagination
the power is thusof inimagination
cognitiveis judgment.
thus in Hence cognitivethis judgment.
sub-personal Hence sensory-perceptual
this sub-personal integration
sensory-perceptual
is crucial tointegration
any is crucial to any
und ihre Synthesis der undAnschauungen,
ihre Synthesis der thatAnschauungen,
regard a capacitythat to regard
determine a capacity
human to thought
determineever human being about thought any sensed
ever being particulars
about any = anything
sensed particulars
other than= ourselves,
anything other than ourselves,
den Categorien gemäß, denmuß Categorien
die trans- gemäß, muß diea priori,
sensibility trans-andsensibility
its synthesis a priori,
of and within our surroundings,
its synthesis of withinof which
our surroundings,
we ever can be ofaware,
which whether
we ever merely
can be aware,
perceptually
whether or merely
also perceptually or also
970 scendentale Synthesis970 scendentale
der Einbildungs-Synthesis intuition
der Einbildungs-
in accord with intuition
the categories
in accord with apperceptively.
the categories This entire
apperceptively.
discussionThis of transcendental
entire discussion imagination
of transcendental
concerns imagination
process and concerns process and
kraft seyn, welches krafteine Wirkung
seyn, welchesdes einemust Wirkung des must be
be the transcendental synthesis belongs to
the transcendental Kant’s subjective
synthesis belongsdeduction,
to Kant’s yet subjective
Kant uses deduction,
it here also yet Kant
to highlight
uses it hereissuesalsoaboutto highlight issues about
Verstandes auf die Sinnlichkeit
Verstandes und auf die Sinnlichkeit
of the power undofdieimagination,
of the power whichof the very possibility
is imagination, which is of the object-directed
very possibility human of object-directed
sensory perception, human apperception
sensory perception,and thought; apperception and thought;
erste Anwendung desselbenerste Anwendung
(zugleich desselben
an effect (zugleich
of the understanding
an effect of upon i.e., the very possibilities
the understanding upon i.e.,for
theusvery
of ‘objective
possibilities reality’
for us(=ofintentionality
‘objective reality’ qua object-directedness,
(= intentionality qua object-directedness,
der Grund aller übrigen) der auf
GrundGegenstän-
aller übrigen) auf Gegenstän-
sensibility and its firstsensibility
application and its orfirst the constitution
application of or objects
the constitution
as objects of of attention
objects asorobjects thought) of attention
and of ‘objective
or thought) validity’
and of ‘objective validity’
975 de der uns möglichen 975 de Anschauung
der uns möglichen ist. (and Anschauung
equally theist. ground
(and of equally
all further (= accuracy,
the ground of all further truth, justifiedness
(= accuracy, or justification).
truth, justifiedness or justification).
Sie ist als figürlich vonSie
deristintellectuellen
als figürlich vonapplications)
der intellectuellento objectsapplications)
of our possi- to objects
B151–2 of our possi- Kant
(ll. 959–72): B151–2 indicates,
(ll. 959–72):
withoutKant hereindicates,
explaining, without
a cognitively
here explaining,
much more a cognitively
signif- much more signif-
Synthesis ohne alle Synthesis
Einbildungskraft,
ohne alle ble Einbildungskraft,
intuition. As figurativeble intuition.
it is dis- As figurative it is
icant, much more active dis- icant,and muchproductive
more activerole ofand imagination
productive(or rolefigurative
of imagination
synthesis), (or de-
figurative synthesis), de-
bloß durch den Verstand, bloß unterschieden.
durch den Verstand, tinctunterschieden.
to that intellectual tinct to synthesis
that intellectual
scribed assynthesisan ‘exercise scribed
of spontaneity’
as an ‘exercise
and as of ‘determining’
spontaneity’orand ‘specifying’,
as ‘determining’
hence not or ‘specifying’,
merely hence not merely
So fern die Einbildungskraft
So fern nun die Einbildungskraft
Spon- withoutnun theSpon-
power without
of imagination the powerreceptive,of imagination
being determined receptive,or specified,
being determined
nor merely or reproducing
specified, norormerely retainingreproducing
in presentorat-retaining in present at-
980 taneität ist, nenne980ichtaneität
sie auchist,bisweilen
nenne ich merely
sie auchthrough
bisweilenthe merelyunderstanding.
through the understanding.
tention immediately passed tentionsensory-perceptual
immediately passed states.
sensory-perceptual
This active rolestates. can specify
This activethe formrole can specify the form
die productive Einbildungskraft
die productive und Einbildungskraft
un- Now insofar undasun- the power
Now insofarof imagi- as theofpower
sense of (or imagi-
sensibilityof in sense
sensing) (or asensibility
priori in accordin sensing)with the a priori
unityin of
accord
apperception.
with the unity This por-
of apperception. This por-
terscheide sie dadurch terscheide
von dersierepro- dadurchnation
von is derspontaneity,
repro- nation occasionally
is spontaneity,
I tentous claim canI be tentous
occasionally understood claimto canindicate
be understood
this a prioritorole indicate
does thisnot amerely
priori roleresponddoestonot merely respond to
ductiven, deren Synthesisductiven,
lediglich
derenempi-
Synthesis
call lediglich empi- imagination
it productive call it productive and sensory
imagination intake and (cf. ll. 979–87);
sensoryitintake is an active
(cf. ll. 979–87);
responding it istoancontinuing
active responding
sensory intake
to continuing
(sensorysensory intake (sensory
rischen Gesetzen, nämlichrischen denen
Gesetzen,
der A-nämlichthus denen der A-
distinguish it from
thusthedistinguish
reproduc- it from binding). I surmise: This
the reproduc- binding).
role isI explicated
surmise: This in the roleAnalytic
is explicated
of Principles
in the Analytic
as the anticipatory
of Principles as the anticipatory
985 ssociation, unterworfen
985 ssociation,
ist, und unterworfen
welche tive, ist,theund welche
synthesis of which
tive, the is subject character
synthesis of which is subject of sensory perception,
character ofby sensory
which perception,
we identify byand which
discriminate
we identify
particulars
and discriminate
within particulars within
daher zur Erklärung der daher
Möglichkeit
zur Erklärung der derto Möglichkeit
merely empirical der tolaws, merely namely our sensory
empirical laws, namely experience our in sensory
part by experience
anticipating in what
part are
by anticipating
their structures what and arefeatures,
their structures
such and features, such
Erkenntniß a priori nichts beyträgt
Erkenntniß und nichts
a priori those beyträgt und those
of association, and which of association,
thus thatandourwhichcontinuing
thus perception
that our continuing
of them is perception
likely to exhibit of them some is likely
(causallyto exhibit
possible) some set(s)
(causally
of possible) set(s) of
um deswillen nicht um in die deswillen
Transscen- nicht in die Transscen-
contributes nothing tocontributes
the explication characteristics
nothing to the explication rather than
characteristics
others (in rather
contrast than to those
others characteristics
(in contrast toof those
our continuing
characteristics per- of our continuing per-
dentalphilosophie, sondern
dentalphilosophie,
in die Psy- sondern of the in die Psy-of cognition
possibility a priori ofception
of the possibility cognition of them
a prioriwhichceptionare instead
of them duewhich
to ourare own instead
bodily, dueperceptual-motor
to our own bodily, activity).
perceptual-motor
This activity). This
990 chologie gehört. 990 chologie gehört.[…] and so belongs[…] not toandtranscendental conjecture
so belongs not to transcendental accords with KCE Ch. accords
conjecture 8; Kant’s discussion
with KCE Ch.here 8; Kant’s
is explicatory,
discussion not here
argumentative
is explicatory, not argumentative
[B158] philosophy but rather philosophy
[B158] to psychology. but (not justificatory).
[…]rather to psychology. […]
(not justificatory).

70 70
71 71
70 71
 B152 (ll. 963–75): Kant’s
B152 statement
(ll. 963–75):
recapsKant’s
the points
statement
just recaps
discussed,
the points
to stress
just thatdiscussed,
this roleto ofstress that this role of
‘imagination’ within human
‘imagination’
sensorywithin
perception,
humanactively
sensoryspecifying
perception, sensibility
actively andspecifying
its synthe-
sensibility and its synthe-
sis of (sensory) intuition
sis of in (sensory)
accord with intuition
the categories,
in accord‘must
with bethethe
categories,
transcendental
‘must be synthesis
the transcendental synthesis
of imagination’. ThisofKant imagination’.
describes This
as ‘anKanteffectdescribes
of the understanding
as ‘an effect ofupon the understanding
sensibility’. upon sensibility’.
This action of understanding
This action uponofsensibility,
understanding which upon sensibility, which
IS transcendental synthesis
IS transcendental
of imagina- synthesis of imagina-
tion, is ‘the first application’
tion, is ‘theof understanding
first application’ (which
of understanding
is the power of (which
judgingis theby using
powerthe of judging by using the
categories) to objects categories)
(Gegenstände)toof objects
any humanly
(Gegenstände)
possible
of any
sensory
humanlyintuition.
possible Thissensory
is ‘figura-
intuition. This is ‘figura-
tive synthesis’ (l. 976);tive
it grounds
synthesis’
any(l.and
976);
allitfurther
grounds possible
any andusealloffurther
categories
possiblein connection
use of categories in connection
with objects which wewith canobjects
at all sense
whichorweperceive;
can at alli.e.,sense
it grounds
or perceive;
any and i.e.,allitexplicit
groundsjudg-any and all explicit judg-
ments we can make about mentsthem. we can
(These
makesyntheses
about them. all pertain
(Thesetosyntheses
sensory binding.)
all pertain to sensory binding.)
B152 (ll. 976–90): ThisB152
active,
(ll. figurative
976–90): Thissynthesis
active,counts
figurative
as ‘productive
synthesis counts
imagination’.
as ‘productive
It con- imagination’. It con-
tributes to explicating tributes
a priori the
to explicating
very possibility
a priori
of the
knowledge;
very possibility
I surmise,
of knowledge;
it concerns Ipercep-
surmise, it concerns percep-
tual discrimination. Thetualmerely
discrimination.
reproductive Theimagination
merely reproductive
does not imagination
so contributedoes
(Kantnotsays);
so contribute (Kant says);
although its retention of
although
passingitsandretention
immediately
of passing
past sensory
and immediately
states is necessary
past sensory
to any
states
andisall
necessary to any and all
sensory-perceptual discrimination,
sensory-perceptual
it has no
discrimination,
implications forit has
a priori
no implications
explication for
of those
a prioriformal
explication of those formal
structures by which objective
structuresvalidity
by which
is at objective
all possiblevalidity
for ouris sensory
at all possible
experience
for our
or sensory
perceptual experience or perceptual
judgments. (The long judgments.
ellipsis here(Theomitslong
Kant’s
ellipsis
discussion
here omitsof self-affection,
Kant’s discussion of self-affection,
B152–8, including B152–8, including
the start of §25. My keythereason
start offor§25.
omitting
My keyitreason
is statedforabove,
omitting§2.5.)
it is stated above, §2.5.)
§ 25. [Ohne Überschrift]
§ 25. [Ohne Überschrift] §25. [untitled] §25. [untitled] 3.13 §25: [untitled]3.13 §25: [untitled]
[…] So wie zum Erkenntnisse
[…] So wieeines zumvon Erkenntnisse
[…] Just eines
as forvon cognition
[…] Just
of anasobject
for cognition of an object
mir verschiedenen Objects
mir verschiedenen
außer dem Objects distinctaußer
to me,dem besidesdistinct
the thought
to me,of B158
besides the(ll. 993–8):ofKantBrecalls
thought 158 (ll.his
993–8):
key deictic,
Kant recalls
referential
his keypoint,
deictic,
that referential
any knowledge point,ofthat
anyanyob-knowledge of any ob-
995 Denken eines Objects
995 Denken
überhaupteines(inObjects
der an überhaupt
object as (insuch
der (inantheobject
category)
as such ject distinct
I (in the category) I to oneself ject
requires,
distinctin to
addition
oneself to
requires,
the thought
in addition
of an object
to the as
thought
such (using
of an one
object
or as such (using one or
another category, or some another categories),
category,some or somesensory
categories),
intuitionsome (of some
sensorysensorily
intuitiongiven,
(of some
per- sensorily given, per-
Categorie) ich dochCategorie)
noch einer ich An-doch of noch einerstillAn-
course also require
of coursean still
intui-also require an intui-
ceptually presented particular).
ceptually presented
Yet he recalls particular).
this referential
Yet he recalls
point to this
highlight
referentialan important,
point to highlight an important,
schauung bedarf, dadurch
schauung ich bedarf,
jenen all- dadurch
tion ich jenen which
through all- Ition
determine
throughthat which I determine that
parallel point about the parallel
very possibility
point about of the
anyvery
human possibility
thinking: of ‘Ianythink
human
…’. thinking: ‘I think …’.
gemeinen Begriff bestimme,
gemeinen soBegriffbedarfbestimme,
universalso concept;
bedarf for universal
cognition concept;
of for cognition of
ich auch zum Erkenntnisse
ich auch meiner
zum Erkenntnisse
selbst myself, meiner selbst tomyself,
in addition in addition toB158
that conscious- that(ll. 998–1006): Kant’s
conscious- B158 (ll.self-referential
998–1006): Kant’s point isself-referential
that the self-attribution
point is that expressed
the self-attribution
by and expressed by and
1000 außer dem Bewußtsein,
1000 außer
oder demaußer
Bewußtsein,
dem, ness, oderoraußer dem, ness,
additionally, that Iorthink
additionally,
my- achieved
that I thinkthrough
my- anyachieved
actual thought
throughthat any‘Iactual
think thought
…’ requires,that ‘I in think
addition
…’ to requires,
that thought,
in addition to that thought,
daß ich mich denke, daßnochich einer
mich An-denke, self,
nochI require
einer An- likewiseself,
an Iintuition
require of also some intuition
likewise an intuition of ofalso
some some
manifold
intuitionwithin
of some
oneselfmanifold
(within within
one’s cognisance)
oneself (within
by which
one’s cognisance)
one by which one
schauung des Mannigfaltigen
schauungindes mir,Mannigfaltigen
wo- the manifoldin mir, wo- withintheme, manifold specifies
throughwithin me, through that first-person
specifies
thought
that that
first-person
‘I think …’
thought
(such-and-so).
that ‘I think …’ (such-and-so).
durch ich diesen Gedanken
durch ichbestimme,
diesen Gedankenwhich Ibestimme,
determine this which
thought,
I determine
and I this thought,
B158–9 and I
(ll. 999–1013): B158–9
Kant’s(ll.point
999–1013):
is extremely
Kant’simportant,
point is extremely
however speculative,
important, however
conten- speculative, conten-
und ich existiere als und
Intelligenz,
ich existiere
die sichals Intelligenz, die sich exist
exist as intelligence whichas isintelligence
only which is only
tious, anti-Cartesian, tious,
anti-Humean
anti-Cartesian,
or anti-egoist
anti-Humean
it may or appear
anti-egoist
to be (re:
it may egoism,
appearcf. to
Anth.
be (re: egoism, cf. Anth.
1005 lediglich ihres 1005
Verbindungsvermögens
lediglich ihres Verbindungsvermögens
conscious of its capacity conscious
to conjoin,
of its capacity to conjoin,
§2). Kant claims that§2). anyKant
actualclaims
occurrence,
that any anyactual
actualoccurrence,
‘tokening’ any (as is
actual
said ‘tokening’
today), of (as‘I is said today), of ‘I
bewußt ist, in [B159] Ansehung
bewußt ist,des in Man-
[B159] Ansehung des Man-
yet in regard to this manifold
yet in regardit shall
to this think
manifold
…’ isit notshall
self-sufficient;
think …’itiscan not be
self-sufficient;
thought, Kant it can
claims,
be thought,
only in connection
Kant claims,with onlysome
in connection with some
nigfaltigen aber, das nigfaltigen
sie verbinden aber,soll,
das sie verbinden
conjoin, soll, to
it is subject conjoin,
a limiting
it iscon-
subject complex
to a limiting con-
or manifold complex
of whichor onemanifold
is awareofand which
regarding
one is which
aware one and thinks
regardingthatwhich
‘I thinkone…thinks that ‘I think …
einer einschränkenden einerBedingung,
einschränkenden
die dition,
Bedingung,
which die may dition,
be called whichinnermay (such-and-so)’.
be called inner If indeed
(such-and-so)’.
thinking requires
If indeed
judging,
thinking
and judging
requiresrequires
judging,forming
and judgingand requires
consid- forming and consid-
sie den inneren Sinn nennt,
sie denunterworfen,
inneren Sinn nennt,sense,unterworfen,
to make that sense,conjunction
to make that conjunction

72 72 73 73
72 73
1010 jene Verbindung 1010nurjene
nachVerbindung
Zeitverhält-nur intuitable
nach Zeitverhält-
(or viewable)intuitable
only accord- eringonly
(or viewable) complete
accord- ering complete
judgments, thinking that judgments,
‘I think thinking
…’ is only that ‘I thinkby…’
possible alsois thinking
only possibleits pro- by also thinking its pro-
nissen, welche ganz nissen,
außerhalb
welche
den ganz
ei- außerhalb den ei- relations,
ing to temporal ing to which
temporal per complement
lie relations, which lie on someper complement
occasion, within on some some occasion,
temporalwithin context.some Anytemporal
one of context.
us finiteAny one of us finite
gentlichen Verstandesbegriffen
gentlichen Verstandesbegriffen
liegen, entirely outsideliegen,the entirely of the the homo
conceptsoutside sapiensofsapientes
concepts the who homothinks
sapiens‘Isapientes
think …’ whoexists
thinks as ‘Iintelligence
think …’ solelyexists conscious
as intelligence solely conscious of one’s
of one’s
anschaulich machen,anschaulich
und sich machen,
daher understanding
und sich daher proper.understanding
Hence one can own capacity
proper. Hence one can to own
conjoin in capacity
regard of to
someconjoin in
manifold regard
whichof some
is to manifold
be conjoined, which i.e.,is to
some be conjoined,
plural- i.e., some plural-
selbst doch nur erkennenselbst kann,
doch wie
nur sie,
erkennen
onlykann,
knowwie sie, asonly
oneself one know ap- asityone
merelyoneself or complex
merely ap- ity or
of sensed orcomplex
perceivedoffeatures
sensed or of perceived
particularsfeatures
and some of plurality
particulars of and some plurality of concepts
concepts
1015 in Absicht auf1015 einein Anschauung
Absicht auf (dieeine pears
Anschauung
in regard(die
to an pears
intuition
in regard by which they
(whichto an intuition (which are by which
classified andthey
so are
are classified
identified, and
at so
least are identified,
tentatively, soat least
that tentatively,
they can be so that they can be
nicht intellektuell und nichtdurch
intellektuell
den Ver-und isdurch den Ver-andiscannot
not intellectual be given and(provisionally)
not intellectual cannot be given (provisionally)
ascribed to some particular. ascribed to some particular.
stand selbst gegeben standseinselbst
kann),gegeben
ihr through
sein kann), ihr through
the understanding itself),
the understanding
and B159 (ll.itself), and The
1001–9): B159necessity
(ll. 1001–9):
of thisThe complex
necessity complement
of this complexrequiredcomplement
ever to consider required ever to consider
selbst bloß erscheint,selbst
nichtbloß
wie sie
erscheint,
sich nicht
not aswieonesie would
sich know
not asoneself
one would
if know oneself
thinking ‘I thinkif…’ isthinking
a condition ‘I think
restricting
…’ is athe condition
human restricting
possibility the of thinking
human possibility
‘I think …’. of thinking ‘I think …’.
erkennen würde, wenn erkennen
ihre Anschauung
würde, wenn one’s
ihre Anschauung
intuition were intellectual.
one’s intuition were intellectual.
B159 (ll. 1003–14): More B159specifically,
(ll. 1003–14): thisMorecomplex
specifically,
complement this complex
to ‘I think complement
…’ involves, to ‘Idi-think …’ involves, di-
1020 intellektuell wäre.
1020 intellektuell wäre.
rectly or indirectly, some rectlysensory-perceptual
or indirectly, somecontent sensory-perceptual
which, insofar content
as it can which,
be judged
insofaroras it can be judged or
can by judgment be comprehended,
can by judgment alone
be comprehended,
provides any occasion alonetoprovides
judge and anyso occasion
providesto judge
any and so provides any
occasion to think ‘I think occasion
…’ nowto think
(and ‘Ihere thinkabout
…’ that).
now (andAs an here
occasional
about thought,
that). As an theoccasional
‘I think thought, the ‘I think
…’ is subject to temporal …’ is relations,
subject towhich temporalpertain
relations,
both towhich the relevant
pertain bothsensory-perceptual
to the relevant sensory-perceptual
integration and also to integration
the conceptual-classificatory
and also to the conceptual-classificatory
conjoining which is theconjoining judging now which thatis the judging now that
this (or these) particular(s)
this (orarethese)
such-and-so.
particular(s)Temporal
are such-and-so.
relations (and Temporal
likewise,relations
may be (and added: likewise, may be added:
spatial relations) are not spatial
defined relations)
or specified
are not by defined
the 12orcategories;
specified theyby the are12defined
categories;
or speci-
they are defined or speci-
fied by properly delimitingfied bythe properly
distinctdelimiting
a priori concept
the distinct
‘time’ a(andpriori‘space’)
concept so‘time’
as to be (andable
‘space’)
to so as to be able to
specify what is now sensorily
specify what presented
is now(here sensorily
and now)presentedto me. (here
Hence,and now)
to elucidate
to me.Kant’s
Hence, to elucidate Kant’s
point further, our thinkingpoint further,
‘I think our …’ thinking
requires using‘I think the…’ categories,
requires which
using the themselves
categories, canwhich themselves can
be used only by also be using
usedtheonly concepts
by also‘time’
using(andthe ‘space’)
conceptsso‘time’ as to(andidentify‘space’)within
so asone’sto identify within one’s
present (i.e., current) perceptual
present (i.e.,context
current) whatever
perceptualis nowcontext
to be whatever
seen here. is (Including
now to bespace seen andhere. (Including space and
its concept accords with its concept
Kant’s marginalium
accords withthat Kant’sthe Schematism
marginaliummust that the
alsoSchematism
be developed mustin also be developed in
connection with space,connection
not only time; with GS space,23:48.16–7;
not only cf. time;
Erdmann
GS 23:48.16–7;
(1881), No. CXXVII.) (1881), No. CXXVII.)
cf. Erdmann
B159 (ll. 1015–20): These
B159restrictions
(ll. 1015–20):
uponThese
the restrictions
humanly possible
upon the usehumanly
of ‘I think
possible
…’ allusefol-of ‘I think …’ all fol-
low from our sensory, receptive
low fromform our sensory,
of intuiting;
receptive
we can
formonly
of intuiting;
think ‘I think
we can …’only
now,think
on some‘I think …’ now, on some
occasion, hence at some
occasion,
time, hence
hence subject
at sometotime,
conditions
hence subject
not specified
to conditions
solely bynotthespecified
cate- solely by the cate-
gories (plus the conccepts
gories‘space’
(plus and
the conccepts
‘time’), nor‘space’
by theand
bare‘time’),
‘I think
nor…’byasthe
such.
bare ‘I think …’ as such.

74 74 75 75

74 75
 § 26. Transscendentale § 26.Deduction
Transscendentaledes §26. Deduction
Transcendental des §26. Deduction of 3.14Deduction
Transcendental §26: Transcendental
of 3.143.14 §26: Deduction of the Universally
Transcendental Deduction Possible
of theExperiential Use of the
Universally Possible Experiential Use of the
allgemein möglichen allgemeinErfahrungs- möglichen the Erfahrungs-
Universally Possible the Experi-
Universally Possible Experi- Pure Concepts of the Pure Understanding.
Concepts of the Understanding.
gebrauchs der reinengebrauchsVerstandes- der reinen ential Verstandes-
Use of the Pureential Concepts
Use of the Pure Concepts
B159 (ll. 1025–33): Kant B159recalls
(ll. 1025–33):
his previous Kant
presentation
recalls hisof previous
the categories
presentation
as corresponding
of the categories pre- as corresponding pre-
begriffe. begriffe. of the Understanding.of the Understanding. cisely to the universal logicalcisely to functions
the universal
of judging.
logicalThat functions
is Kant’s
of judging.
‘metaphysical
That isdeduction’
Kant’s ‘metaphysical
of the deduction’ of the
1025 In der metaphysischen
1025 In der Deduction
metaphysischen In theDeduction
metaphysical In deduction
the metaphysical
the deduction the
categories. In contrast,categories.
their ‘transcendental’
In contrast,deduction
their ‘transcendental’
must presentdeduction
their possibility
must presentas a priori
their possibility as a priori
wurde der Ursprung der wurdeCategorien
der Ursprung
a pri- der Categorien
origin of thea pri- categories
origina ofpriorithe ascategories
cognitions a priori as objects
of intuited cognitions as such.
of intuited
Kant’s objects
refers toas§§20,such.21 Kant’s
as indicating
refers tothis§§20,
task21 ofas their
indicating
tran- this task of their tran-
ori überhaupt durch ihre ori überhaupt
völlige Zusam-durch ihre suchvöllige Zusam- bysuch
was exhibited theirwas complete
exhibited by their complete
scendental deduction; he scendental
does not deduction;
claim to have he does
already notexecuted
claim tothathavetask.
already executed that task.
mentreffung mit denmentreffungallgemeinenmit logi-den correspondence
allgemeinen logi- to the
correspondence
universal logi- to the universal logi-
B159 (ll. 1033–9): Kant’s B159task (ll. now
1033–9):is toKant’s
explicate taska priori
now isthetopossibility
explicate aofpriori cognition
the possibility
of any of cognition of any
schen Functionen desschen DenkensFunctionen
darge- des Denkens cal functionsdarge- of thinking,
cal functions
however of in thinking, however in
1030 than, in der transscendentalen
1030 than, in der abertransscendentalen
die the transcendental aber die [deduction]
the transcendental
their objects
[deduction] whichtheir
can be objects
presented whichto (or canby)
be our
presented
senses,tonot(oraccording
by) our senses,
to theirnot intuitive
according formto their intuitive form
(as spatio-temporal), but (as according
spatio-temporal),
to (a priori)
but laws
according
of their to connection
(a priori) laws orofconjoining.
their connection or conjoining.
Möglichkeit derselbenMöglichkeit
als Erkenntnisse
derselben a als Erkenntnisse
possibility as cognitions
a possibility
a priorias of cognitions a priori of
priori von Gegenständen priorieiner
von Anschau-
Gegenständen einerof
objects Anschau-
an intuitionobjects
as suchof(§§ an 20,
intuition
B159as (ll.
such (§§ 20, SuchB159
1036–9): an explication
(ll. 1036–9):is,Such ‘as itanwere’explication
(gleichsam)is, to
‘asprescribe
it were’ (gleichsam)
the law totonature prescribe the law to nature
ung überhaupt (§ 20, 21) ungdargestellt.
überhaupt Jetzt(§ 20, 21) 21)dargestellt.
was exhibited.Jetzt Now 21) was
shall exhibited.
be ex- Now and soshall to ‘make’
be ex-nature and ‘possible’.
so to ‘make’ Kant’s nature
expressly
‘possible’.
figurative
Kant’s language
expressly cautions
figurative against
language
hasty cautions against hasty
soll die Möglichkeit,soll durchdie Categorien
Möglichkeit, plicated durch Categorien
the possibility plicated
by these thecate- appeal
possibility to thecate-
by these generative
appeal sense to the
of ‘constitution
generative sense of objects’,
of ‘constitution
and expresslyof objects’,
allows and for theexpressly allows for the
1035 die Gegenstände,1035 die die
nurGegenstände,
immer unseren die nur immer
gories to unseren
cognize thegories objects to which
cognize the presuppositional
objects whichsensepresuppositional
of ‘constitution’sense of nature
of ‘constitution’
(or of particularsof naturewithin(ornature)
of particulars
as objects within nature) as objects
Sinnen vorkommen Sinnen mögen, vorkommen
und zwar mögen, can onlyund everzwar presentcanthemselves
only ever topresent of our possible to
themselves sensation,
of our perception,
possible sensation,
experience, perception,
judgment experience,
and apperceptive judgment awareness
and apperceptive
(a- awareness (a-
nicht der Form ihrernicht Anschauung,
der Formson- ihrer Anschauung,
our senses, and son- indeedournot
senses,
according bove, §2.15).
and indeed not according Kant’s Deduction
bove, §2.15).
of the
Kant’scategories
Deduction does ofsetthe
constraints
categories on
does particulars
set constraints
we can on particulars we can
dern den Gesetzen dern ihrer denVerbindung
Gesetzen ihrer to theVerbindung
form of theirto intuition,
the formbut perceive,
of their intuition,experience
but or perceive,
judge, but experience
these are or epistemic,
judge, but transcendental
these are epistemic, constraints;transcendental
they are constraints; they are
nach a priori zu erkennen, nach also derzu
a priori Natur
erkennen, alsoaccording
rather der Naturto the rather
lawsaccording not developed
of their to the laws of their in the Analytic
not developed
of Concepts,
in the Analytic
but in the of Analytic
Concepts, of but
Principles.
in the Analytic of Principles.
1040 gleichsam das 1040 Gesetz gleichsam
vorzuschreiben
das Gesetzconnection vorzuschreibena priori, hence
connection
as it were
a priori, Bhence
160 (ll.as1042–7):
it were TheB160 point(ll.of1042–7):
Kant’s Deduction
The point is ofto Kant’s
showDeduction
that properis use to show
of thethat catego-
proper use of the catego-
und sie sogar möglichund zu machen,
sie sogarerklärt
möglich zu to machen,
prescribeerklärt
the law to nature
prescribe andthe to lawries
to nature and to
is necessary to beries awareis necessary
of sensedtoparticulars,
be aware of as the
sensedparticulars
particulars,theyasare; theso particulars
that what-they are; so that what-
[B160] werden. Denn[B160] ohnewerden.
diese ihre Denn make ohne it diese
[nature] ihrepossible.
makeFor it [nature]
withoutpossible.
ever can Forbewithout
presented ever
to our cansenses
be presented
must standto our under
senseslawsmust
deriving
standa under
priori from
laws deriving
the under- a priori from the under-
Tauglichkeit würde nicht Tauglichkeit
erhellen,würde wie nicht this, erhellen, wie this,
their sufficiency, it would
their not
sufficiency,
be it would not be
standing alone. (Serious standing
philosophical
alone. (Serious
issues concern
philosophical whether issues
Kant’sconcern
Deductionwhether must,
Kant’sor Deduction must, or
alles, was unseren alles, Sinnenwasnurunseren vor- Sinnen clear how nur everything
vor- clear whatsoever how everything whatsoever
does, prove such an unrestricted
does, prove universal
such an unrestricted
thesis aboutuniversal any particulars
thesis the
about senses
any particulars
may pres- the senses may pres-
1045 kommen mag, unter 1045 kommen
den Gesetzenmag, unterste- den which Gesetzen
can confrontste- our whichsensescan confront
must our or
ent; senses
whether must it mayent;
suffice
or whether
for Kantit to mayshow
suffice thatforapperceptive
Kant to show humanthatexperience
apperceptive is only
human experience is only
hen müsse, die a priorihen ausmüsse,
dem Verstan-
die a priori standaus dem Verstan-
under laws which standstem under
a priori possible
laws which stemif asome sensedpossible
priori particular(s)
if somecan sensed
be properly
particular(s)identified
can be byproperly
correct use identified
of the by catego-
correct use of the catego-
de allein entspringen. de allein entspringen. only from the understanding. only from the understanding.ries, leaving it then tories, empirical
leavinginquiry
it thentotospecify
empirical howinquiry
extensiveto specify
may behow suchextensive
identifiability
may be such identifiability
Zuvörderst merke ich Zuvörderst
an, daß merke ich ich
Firstan,I daß
remark ich that First
by synthesis
I remark of sensed
of that objects.
by synthesis of Kant’s
of sensed
observations
objects.atKant’sthe end observations
of §25 about at thethe end
occasional
of §25 character
about the of occasional character of
unter der S y n t h e s i sunter
d e r der
A p pS ryenht ehne -s i s dapprehension
e r A p p r eIh eunderstand
n - apprehension
the placing any actual
I understand the placing ‘I think …’ any
may actual
support ‘I think
the latter,
…’ may
weaker support
thesis.)
the latter, weaker thesis.)
1050 s i o n die Zusammensetzung
1050 s i o n die des Zusammensetzung
Man- togetherdes of theMan- manifold
together
in anof empir-
the manifold
B160 in (ll.an1048–54):
empir- Kant B160 remarks
(ll. 1048–54):
on the Kantcognitiveremarks process(es)
on the cognitive
involved inprocess(es)
integratinginvolvedmani- in integrating mani-
nigfaltigen in einer nigfaltigen
empirischen in An- einer ical empirischen
intuition, An- so thaticalperception,
intuition, i.e.so that perception,
fold, complex, i.e. variegated
fold,sensory
complex, intake,
variegated
sufficient sensory
to afford
intake,perceptual,
sufficient i.e.,
to afford
empirical perceptual,
con- i.e., empirical con-
schauung verstehe, dadurch schauung Wahrneh-
verstehe, dadurch empiricalWahrneh-
consciousness empirical
of it (as consciousness
ap- of it (as ap-
sciousness (as distinctsciousness to apperceptive (as distinct
perceptual
to apperceptive
consciousness).perceptualHis point
consciousness).
about process His point about process
mung, d.i. empirisches mung,
Bewußtseyn
d.i. empirisches
der- pearance)Bewußtseyn becomesder- possible
pearance) […].becomes possible […]. issues ofhelps
helps identify cognitive
identify validity
issuesaddressed
of cognitive subsequently.
validity addressed
(Omitted subsequently.
is a brief passage (Omitted is a brief passage
selben (als Erscheinung), selbenmöglich
(als Erscheinung),
wird möglich wird about space and time about as unitary
spaceformal
and time intuitions,
as unitary notformal
merelyintuitions,
forms of sensory
not merely receptivity;
forms of sensory receptivity;
1055 […]. 1055 […]. [B161] [B161] his key premiss for thehis ensuing
key premiss
proof for is retained
the ensuing on B161,
proofhere l. 1056–7.)
is retained on B161, here l. 1056–7.)

76 76 77 77

76 77
 […] E i n h e i t d e r S y[…]
n t hEeisni sh edes
i t dMan-
e r S y n[…]
t h eUnity
s i s desof Man-
synthesis of
[…]the Unity
manifold 161the
of synthesis Bof (ll. manifold
1056–79): Insofar
B161 (ll.
as 1056–79):
particulars Insofar (of whatever as particulars
sort or scale)
(of whatever
are sensed sort byor or scale)
pre-are sensed by or pre-
nigfaltigen außer oder nigfaltigen
in uns, außer mithinoderoutside
in uns,or mithin
within us, outside
henceoralso within
a us, sentedhenceto usalsovia aour senses
sented and
to us sovia areour sensed
senses by andor presented
so are sensed to usbyspatio-temporally,
or presented to us thespatio-temporally, the
auch eine Verbindung, auchdereine
alles,Verbindung,
was im connection
der alles, was withimwhich connection
must accord with whichtwo amust prioriaccord
concepts ‘space’
two a priori
and ‘time’
concepts pertain
‘space’to them;
and ‘time’whateverpertain is so
to presented
them; whatever to us fallsis so presented to us falls
Raume oder der ZeitRaume bestimmt oder vorge-
der Zeit everything
bestimmt which vorge-shalleverything
be represented
which shall within the intension (scope)
be represented within theof those
intension two (scope)
concepts. of However,
those twothese concepts.
conditions
However, as suchthesedoconditions as such do
1060 stellt werden soll, 1060gemäß
stelltseyn
werden muß,soll,
[ist]gemäß
determinately
seyn muß, [ist] within determinately
space or time, withinnotspace
at all orsuffice
time,to individuate,
not at all suffice
discriminate to individuate,
or identify discriminate
any sensedor particular
identify whatever.
any sensedNei- particular whatever. Nei-
a priori als Bedingunga der prioriSynthesis
als Bedingung
aller der Synthesis
[is] given allera priori
at once [is] given
as condition ther do these
at once a priori as condition conditionsther suffice
do theseto specify
conditions any suffice
instance to of
specify
any a any
prioriinstance
categorical
of any
feature(s)
a priori categorical feature(s)
Apprehension schon Apprehension
mit (nicht in) schon die- mit of the(nicht in) die-of all
synthesis the synthesis of of
of apprehension all our concept of an object
apprehension of ourasconcept
such. of Hence an object
these as sensory,
such. Hence
intuitive, these
spatio-temporal,
sensory, intuitive, concep- spatio-temporal, concep-
sen [raum-zeitlich, sinnlichen]
sen [raum-zeitlich,
Anschau-sinnlichen]
already with Anschau-(not in)already
these [sensible, tual and
with (not in) these [sensible, judgmental conditions
tual and judgmental
do not suffice
conditions
to specify do any
not suffice
complement to specify
to anyany (attempted)
complement to any (attempted)
ungen zugleich gegeben. ungen zugleich gegeben.spatio-temporal] intuitions. spatio-temporal] intuitions.apperceptive ‘I think apperceptive
…’. Actually ‘Itothink think…’. any Actually
instance to of think
‘I think
any …’ instance
involves of ‘Ithinking
think …’ involves thinking
1065 Diese synthetische
1065 EinheitDiese aber synthetische
kann Einheit However, aber this
kannsynthetic However,
unity can about some
this synthetic unity can particular(s)about
or some
others particular(s)
now sensorily or presented
others now (here
sensorily
or there).
presented
Any such(here
humanly
or there). Any such humanly
possible thought mustpossible be structured
thoughtand mustfacilitated
be structured
by judgmental
and facilitated
use of by categories,
judgmental which use of categories, which
keine andere seyn, als keinedie andere
der Verbin- seyn, alsbedie nonederother
Verbin-than thebebinding
none other of thethan the binding of the
we must be able to usewetomust discriminate
be able tosome use tosensorily
discriminate
presented someparticular(s).
sensorily presented
This doesparticular(s).
en- This does en-
dung des Mannigfaltigen dung einer
des Mannigfaltigen
gegebe- manifold einer of gegebe-
a given intuition
manifoldasofsuch a given intuition as such
tail constraints on humanly tail constraints
identifiable onparticulars,
humanly identifiable
but those constraints
particulars, are but the
thosetopic
constraints
of the are the topic of the
nen Anschauung überhaupt nen Anschauung
in einem ur- überhaupt
in an inoriginal
einem consciousness
ur- in an original accord- consciousness accord-
Analytic of Principles.Analytic Kant’s point
of Principles.
in the Deduction
Kant’s point is thatin theanyone
Deduction
who can is that
thinkanyone
‘I thinkwho can think ‘I think
sprünglichen Bewußtseyn, sprünglichen
den Categori-Bewußtseyn,ing to dentheCategori-
categories, ingapplied
to thesolely
categories,
to applied solely to
…’ must think by using …’themust
categories
think byinusing making the judgments,
categories in however
makingapproximate,
judgments, however tentativeapproximate, tentative
1070 en gemäß, nur1070 aufenunsere
gemäß,sinnliche
nur auf our unseresensiblesinnliche
intuition.ourConsequently
sensible intuition. Consequently
or inaccurate, by which or inaccurate,
s/he can identify by which ands/he discriminate,
can identify at least
and discriminate,
presumptively,at some least presumptively, some
Anschauung angewandt. Anschauung
Folglich angewandt.
steht all synthesis,
Folglich steht by which all even
synthesis,
percep-by which even percep-
spatio-temporal sensedspatio-temporal
particular(s), sosensed as to be particular(s),
able to think so that
as tos/he
be ableperceives
to think thatthat
or s/he
them, perceives that or them,
alle Synthesis, wodurch alleselbst
Synthesis,
Wahrneh-wodurchtion selbst Wahrneh-
is possible, standstion
under
is possible,
the cat- standsnowunder the cat-
(and there), so as tonowrealise
(and thethere),
incomplete
so as to realise
thought the‘Iincomplete
think …’ by thought
ascribing ‘I think
that thought
…’ by ascribing that thought
mung möglich wird, unter mung den möglichCategori-
wird, unter den and
egories; Categori-
since experience
egories; and is cog-
since experience
to oneself isincog- the context
to oneself
of being in the ablecontext
to identify,of beingindividuate
able to and identify,
correctly
individuate
(if perhaps and correctly (if perhaps
en; und da Erfahrungen; Erkenntniß
und da Erfahrungdurch Erkenntniß
nition through durchconnected
nition through
percep- connected percep-somecrudely)
crudely) identify feature(s)identify
of some some perceived
feature(s) particular(s),
of some perceived and onlyparticular(s),
thus being able andtoonly thus being able to
1075 verknüpfte Wahrnehmungen
1075 verknüpfte ist, Wahrnehmungen
so sind tions, the ist, so sind tions,
categories are thus the condi-
categoriesthink
are thus
and tocondi-
correctlythink
conceive
and oneself
to correctly as perceiving
conceive that oneselfor those
as perceiving
particular(s).
that or Without
those particular(s).
us- Without us-
die Categorien Bedingungen die Categorien der Bedingungen der tions
tions of the possibility of experience
of the possibility of experience
ing the categories in presumptive
ing the categories cognitive in presumptive
judgments about cognitive some judgments
particular(s) about or some
other(s), particular(s) or other(s),
Möglichkeit der Erfahrung Möglichkeit und der gelten
Erfahrung
and areund thusgelten
valid a and
prioriare
alsothus
of valid
all aone priori alsoneither
could of all think onenorcould
say neither
‘it is (such-and-so)’;
think nor sayindeed, ‘it is (such-and-so)’;
not even to think indeed, or not
to say even ‘it to think or to say ‘it
also a priori auch von allen
also Gegenstän-
a priori auch von objects
allen Gegenstän-
of experience.objects of experience. […] seems to me to be (such-and-so)’,
[…] seems to me because to be (such-and-so)’,
even this thought because andevenjudgmentthis thought
require and discrimi-
judgment require discrimi-
den der Erfahrung. den der Erfahrung. nating by localising the nating
relevant
by localising
‘it’, in part theby relevant
delimiting ‘it’, in
thepartregionby delimiting
(spatial scope) the region
within (spatial scope) within
1080 * * *
1080 * * * * * * * * which
* one now (period)which perceives
one now it, by(period)
ascribing perceives
at leastit,someby ascribing
feature(s) at to
least
it. Kant’s
some feature(s)
Deduc- to it. Kant’s Deduc-
tion focuses on the highest tion focuses
conceptual on theand highest
judgmentalconceptualconditions
and judgmental
which must conditions
be satisfied which must be satisfied
for any actual instanceforofany anyactual
humanly instance
possibleof any‘I think
humanly …’. The possible
Analytic
‘I thinkof Principles
…’. The Analytic ex- of Principles ex-
amines the correlativeamines constraints
the correlative
upon sensed, constraints
perceived uponparticulars,
sensed, perceived
such that we particulars,
can at allsuch that we can at all
identify them. identify them.
Kant’s point in the deduction Kant’s pointis thatinany thehumanly
deduction possible
is that discrimination
any humanly possible of specificdiscrimination
regions of specific regions
of space and of specificofperiods space and of timeof specific
require periods
discriminating
of time require particulars
discriminating
which one identifies
particulars which one identifies
within some perceptual-experiential
within some perceptual-experiential
context, on some occasion, context, as on
having
sometheir occasion,
specificasspatial
having their specific spatial
configuration and temporal configuration
duration,and both temporal
of which duration,
can be both specifiedof which
only by canconjointly
be specified speci-only by conjointly speci-
fying some features of those fying particulars
some features byofwhich
thoseone particulars
can at allbydiscriminate
which one them can atfromall discriminate
one an- them from one an-
other, and contrast it orother, themandto onself
contrast anditone’s
or them perceiving
to onselfofand it orone’s
them.perceiving
All these specific,
of it or them.
par- All these specific, par-
ticular discriminations ticular requirediscriminations
competent judgmental require competent
use of thejudgmentalcategories and use of thetheconcepts
categories and the concepts
78 78
79 79
78 79
 [B162] Wenn ich also [z.B162] B. die Wennempirische
ich also z. B.If,diee.g.,
empirische
I make the empirical make the‘space(s)’
If, e.g., I intu- empirical andintu-
‘time(s)’ ‘space(s)’
to identifyand by‘time(s)’
classifying to identify
(specifying) by classifying
conjointly all(specifying)
of these discriminated
conjointly all of these discriminated
Anschauung eines Hauses Anschauung
durch Appre-
eines Hauses itiondurch
of a Appre-
house through ition of apprehen-
a house throughfeatures,apprehen-
particulars, relations
features,and particulars,
occasion.relations
Withoutand suchoccasion.
possibleWithout
competent such usepossible
of categories competent use of categories
hension des Mannigfaltigen hension des derselben
Mannigfaltigen
sion of its derselben
manifold sion of its manifoldininto
into perception, prospectively
perception, cognitive
in prospectively
judgments within cognitive
perceptual
judgments contextswithinweperceptual
never could contexts
be ablewe merely
never could be able merely
zur Wahrnehmung mache, zur Wahrnehmung
so liegt mir mache, fundamental
so liegt tomirmy so fundamental
doing is the to judge
to my so doing is the (or to say), this
toparticular
judge (or to
IS such-and-so;
say), this indeed,
particular ISwesuch-and-so;
could never indeed,
merely we
judgecould (or never
say), merely judge (or say),
1085 die n o t w e n d i g1085
e E idie
n h ne iot t des
w e nRaumes
d i g e E i nnecessary
h e i t desunity
Raumesof spacenecessary
and outer unitysen-
of space‘I think ... this sen-
and outer particular‘I think
appears ... this
to me particular
such-and-so’,
appearsbecause
to me such-and-so’,
such hesitant becausereports of suchsensory
hesitant reports of sensory
und der äußeren sinnlichen und derAnschauung
äußeren sinnlichen sible Anschauung
intuition as such, sibleand intuition appearances
I as itas such, and I as it require identifying
appearances that require
which identifying
so appears that
to oneself
which so
as some
appears particular
to oneself which as some
so particular which so
überhaupt zum Grunde, überhaupt
und ichzum zeichne
Grunde, unddraw
were ich zeichne
its figure were in accord its figureappears.
draw with in accord This with
much, atappears.
least, Kant Thisproves
much,inathis least,
Deduction
Kant proves of theinCategories.
his Deduction of the Categories.
gleichsam seine Gestalt, gleichsam
dieser seinesyntheti-Gestalt,
thisdieser syntheti-
synthetic unity ofthis the synthetic
manifold unityin of B162the (ll.
manifold
1081–1099):in Mercifully,
B162 (ll. 1081–1099):
Kant illustrates Mercifully,
his point Kant withillustrates
an example his point
whichwith canan onlyexample
be which can only be
schen Einheit des schen Mannigfaltigen
Einheit des im Mannigfaltigen
space. However,imthisspace. very same However,
syn- thisfully veryexplicated
same syn- in thefully
‘Analogies
explicated of Experience’
in the ‘Analogies (N.B.: ofall Experience’
three Analogies (N.B.:conjointly!
all three Analogies
KCE conjointly! KCE
1090 Raume gemäß. 1090 EbenRaume
dieselbe gemäß.
syntheti-Eben thetic
dieselbeunity,syntheti-
if I abstract
thetic from unity, the
if I abstract from the
§§44–61): perceiving a§§44–61): house (B162, perceiving
cf. B235, a house
237). Recalling
(B162, cf. the B235,previous
237). Recalling
comments, thethe previous
key comments, the key
sche Einheit aber, wenn sche Einheit
ich vonaber, der wennformich von der
of space, is rootedform in ofthespace,
under-is rooted
points in the
are under-
these: Perceiving
points (e.g.)are these:a house Perceiving
presupposes (e.g.) athe house
necessary
presupposes
unity ofthe spacenecessary
within unity of space within
Form des Raumes abstrahiere,
Form des Raumes hat im abstrahiere,
standing, and hat isimthe standing,
the category and of is thewhich
the category
the houseofis located. whichThat the housepresupposition,
is located.however,
That presupposition,
does not suffice however,
to specifydoesany notregion
suffice to specify any region
Verstande ihren Sitz, Verstande
und ist dieihren Catego- Sitz, und ist die of
synthesis Catego-
the uniform synthesisin anofintu- of space
the uniform in occupied
an intu- by the of space
house.occupiedSpecifying by this
the house.
region Specifying
requires arbitrarily
this region delimiting
requiresthe arbitrarily
con- delimiting the con-
rie der Synthesis des rie Gleichartigen
der Synthesis in ei-des Gleichartigen
ition as such, in ei-i.e., the as such,ofi.e., cept
itioncategory the ‘space’
category to conceive
of ceptthis‘space’
specific toregion
conceive of space,
this specific
by ‘asregion
it were’ of outlining
space, bythe ‘as boundary
it were’ outliningof the boundary of
1095 ner Anschauung1095 überhaupt,
ner Anschauung
d. i. die Ca- überhaupt,
quntity,d.with
i. diewhich
Ca- that quntity,
synthesis
with which
of the
that house,
synthesiswhich of requires
the house,
identifying whichsome requires
structural
identifying
features some of thestructural
house: Itsfeatures
foundation of the (at
house: Its foundation (at
tegorie der G r ö ß e ,tegorie
welcherderalso G rjene
ö ß e , welcher
apprehension,also jene i.e., the perception,i.e., ground
apprehension, level), walls and
the perception, ground roof,level),
at least wallsapproximately.
and roof, atHere least Kant
approximately.
anticipatesHere exactly Kant Evans’
anticipates exactly Evans’
Synthesis der Apprehension,Synthesis d. deri. Apprehension,
die must therefore d. i. die entirely must
accord.*
therefore entirely (1975) point about the(1975)
accord.* mutual point interdependence
about the mutual of identifying
interdependence the spatial of identifying
boundariesthe of spatial
any boundaries of any
Wahrnehmung, durchaus Wahrnehmung,
gemäß sein durchaus gemäß sein perceived thing and ascribing perceived to thing
that thing
and ascribing
some manifest to thatfeatures
thing some (by which
manifestalone features
the relevant
(by which alone the relevant
muß.* muß.* boundaries can be identified).
boundaries Here can Kant
be identified).
stresses that
Here
identifying
Kant stresses
and discriminating
that identifying (differen-
and discriminating (differen-
1100 * Auf solche Weise 1100 wird
* Aufbewiesen:
solche Weise daß wird* Inbewiesen:
this way isdaß proven:* Inthatthisthe
waysyn- tiating)
is proven: thatthatthespatial
syn- regiontiating)occupied
that spatial
by that region
houseoccupied
uses (inter by alia)
that house
the category
uses (interof quantity
alia) thetocategory of quantity to
die Synthesis der Apprehension,
die Synthesiswelche der Apprehension, welche thesis
thesis of apprehension, which of apprehension,
is em- identify the
which is em-house’s spatial
identify quantity
the house’s
(size, shape,
spatial place),
quantity and (size,
that shape,
the sensory
place), synthesis
and that required
the sensory synthesis required
empirisch ist, der Synthesis
empirisch derist,Apper-
der Synthesis
pirical,der must Apper-
necessarilypirical,
accordmustwith to perceive
necessarily accord with this house to
must perceive
also accord
this house
with must
this same
also quantitative,
accord with this
categorial
same quantitative,
synthesis andcategorial
the synthesis and the
conceptual specification conceptual
it affords specification
of the location it affords
and dimensions
of the location
of the and house.
dimensions of the house.
zeption, welche intellektuell
zeption,und welche
gänzlich
intellektuell und gänzlich
the synthesis of apperception,
the synthesis which of apperception, which
a priori in der Categorie a priori enthalten
in der Categorie
ist, is intellectual
enthaltenand ist,is contained
is intellectual
entirely
and is contained entirely Kant
B162 (ll. 1100–10): B162 notes
(ll. 1100–10):
(*) that this Kantillustration,
notes (*)together
that thiswith illustration,
the previoustogether main withtextthe previous main text
1105 nothwendig gemäß 1105 sein
nothwendig
müsse. gemäß Es ist sein müsse.
a priori in the Es category.
ist a priori It is inonetheandcategory.
of §26,It isprove
one and that theofempirical
§26, prove synthesis
that theofempirical
sensory apprehension
synthesis of sensory (sensoryapprehension
binding) must (sensory binding) must
eine und dieselbe Spontaneität,
eine und dieselbe welche Spontaneität,
the same welche spontaneity thewhichsame there,
spontaneity necessarily
which accordthere, with necessarily
the intellectual,
accord with categorial
the intellectual,
synthesis which categorial affords
synthesis
any explicit
which affords any explicit
d ort, unter dem d ort,N amunter en d er dem underN am enname
the d erof imagination,
under the name and of (apperceptive,
imagination, and prospectively
(apperceptive,
accurate)prospectively
recognition of accurate)
that space recognition
occupiedofbythat thatspace
house. occupied
Kant by that house. Kant
Einbildungskraft, hier Einbildungskraft,
des Verstandes,hier here des under
Verstandes,
the namehere under the namereiterates
of understand- the two-foldreiterates
of understand- spontaneous the two-fold
use of the spontaneous
categories, use one of sub-personal
the categories, by transcenden-
one sub-personal by transcenden-
Verbindung in das VerbindungMannigfaltigein der das Mannigfaltige
ing, brings conjunctionder ing,into
brings
the man- tal power
conjunction into the man- of imagination, tal power
which ofaffords
imagination,
sensory which
synthesisaffords(binding)
sensory required
synthesis to perceive
(binding)any required to perceive any
1110 Anschauung hineinbringt.
1110 Anschauung hineinbringt. ifold of intuition. ifold of intuition. particulars; the other particulars;
explicit by the
understanding,
other explicit exercised
by understanding,
in explicit judging
exercised of in whatever
explicit judging of whatever
particular(s) one localises particular(s)
within one’s one localises
surroundings, withinwhich one’s can surroundings,
be judged inwhich overtcan cognitive
be judged in overt cognitive
* * * [… B163]* * * * * *
[… B163] * * judgments.
* That thesejudgments.
are one and Thatthethese
sameare ‘spontaneity’
one and the doessamenot‘spontaneity’
entail token does identity notofentail token identity of
particular conjunctions, particular
combinations conjunctions,
or synthesescombinations
effected orin syntheses
these twoeffected fundamental in these re- two fundamental re-
gards: one sensory-perceptive, gards: one thesensory-perceptive,
other intellectual. the other intellectual.

80 80
81 81
80 81
 Categorien sind Begriffe, Categorien
welchesindden Begriffe, welche are
Categories denconcepts Categories
which pre- B163 (ll.
are concepts 1112–16):
which pre- Kant B163 again
(ll. 1112–16):
states thatKant the categories
again states prescribe
that thelaws categories
to nature prescribe
(as thelaws sum to nature (as the sum
Erscheinungen, mithin Erscheinungen,
der Natur als mithinscribe der laws
Natura als priori scribe laws a priori total
to appearances, of appearances) atotal
to appearances, priori.of This
appearances)
may appear a priori.
to affirm
This may the generative
appear to sense affirmofthe‘constitution
generative sense of ‘constitution
dem Inbegriffe aller dem Erscheinungen
Inbegriffe (aller
na- Erscheinungen
hence to nature (na-as thehencetotality
to nature
of all as the of objects’
totality (above,
of all §2.15),of objects’
but it need(above,not§2.15),
be so but interpreted:
it need not It maybe sosuffice
interpreted:
to affirm It may
the sec-
suffice to affirm the sec-
1115 tura materialiter 1115
spectata
tura) Gesetze
materialitera priori ) Gesetze a priori
spectataappearances (natura materialiter
appearancesspecta- ond, presuppositional
(natura materialiter specta- ond,
sense, presuppositional
that only those sense,
sensed thatparticulars
only those which
sensedcan particulars
be judged which
using can be judged using
vorschreiben; und nun vorschreiben;
frägt sich, da undsienun ta);frägtandsich,
now da thesie question
ta); and is,now since the categories
the question is, since can be the‘anything
categories for me’,
can be as ‘anything
Kant saysfor earlier
me’, inasthe KantDeduction
says earlier (§16),
in thewhen Deduction (§16), when
nicht von der Naturnicht abgeleitet
von der werden
Natur abgeleitet
they are not werden
derived theyfromare nature
not derived
and recognising
from nature and that sensory
recognising
states maythatwell
sensory
occur states
within may
oneself,
well occur
of which
withinone oneself,
would or
of could
which one would or could
und sich nach ihr als und ihrem sichMuster
nach ihrrich-als ihrem
so wouldMuster rich- itsoas would
address their exem-address itnever as theirbecomeexem- self-consciously
never become awareself-consciously
(above, §3.4). Kant’s aware (above,
term ‘appearances’
§3.4). Kant’scan termbe ‘appearances’
used, can be used,
ten (weil sie sonst bloß ten (weil
empirisch
sie sonst
seyn bloß plaryempirisch
instanceseyn (because
plarythey instance and
would(because they wouldis used by Kant, andin is
several
used senses.
by Kant, Caution
in several
is required
senses. to
Caution
discern is which
required senses
to discern
of which senses of
1120 würden), wie es 1120
zu begreifen
würden),sei, wiedaßes zu
diebegreifen
thus besei,merely
daß dieempirical),
thus behow merely ‘appearance(s)’
is it empirical), how is isitor is‘appearance(s)’
not ruled in, orisruled or is out,not ruled
by various
in, or aspects
ruled out, of by
Kant’s
various transcendental
aspects of Kant’s transcendental
Natur sich nach ihnenNatur richten sichmüsse,
nach ihnen
d.i. richten müsse, d.i.that comprehensible
comprehensible reflections
nature must ad- that nature must ad- on possible reflections
experience on andpossible
its conditions.
experience and its conditions.
wie sie die Verbindung wiedes sie Mannigfalti-
die Verbindungdress des Mannigfalti-
them, i.e. how dress can they them,deter- i.e. howB163 can (ll.
they deter- Kant
1116–25): B163 poses
(ll. 1116–25):
the puzzleKant about poses
howthe ourpuzzle
a prioriabout
categories
how our can a(even
prioriappear
categories can (even appear
gen der Natur, ohnegen sie der
von Natur,
dieser ohne
ab- sie mine vona dieser
priori theab- connection
mine a priori of the the connection
to, ‘as it were’)of theprescribe to, ‘aslaws it were’)
to (or prescribe
constraints lawsupon)
to (or nature,
constraints
if they upon)
are a priori
nature, andif not
they are a priori and not
zunehmen, a priori bestimmen
zunehmen, können. a priori bestimmen
manifold können.of nature,manifoldwithout of being nature,taken from nature.
without being taken from nature.
1125 Hier ist die Auflösung
1125 Hierdiesesist die
Räthsels.
Auflösung diesesderived Räthsels.
from it. Herederived is the from solution it. Here is the solution
B164–5 (ll. 1126–70): BKant’s 164–5 solution
(ll. 1126–70):to theKant’s puzzlesolution
appealstotothe transcendental
puzzle appeals idealism,
to transcendental
ac- idealism, ac-
to this riddle. to this riddle.
cording to which ‘appearances’ cording to ‘inhere which ‘appearances’
in the subject’‘inhere (ll. 1131–40).
in the subject’
Accordingly,(ll. 1131–40).
whateverAccordingly, whatever
B164] Es ist um nichts B164] befremdlicher,
Es ist um nichts Itbefremdlicher,
is no more baffling,Ithow is nothe morelawsbaffling, how theinhere laws in structure(s)
structure(s) appearancesinhere depend in upon
appearances
the subjectdepend in which
upon those
the subject
appearances
in which in-those appearances in-
wie die Gesetze derwie Erscheinungen
die Gesetze in der Erscheinungen
of the appearances in ofwithin the appearances
nature here.within
Hencenaturethere is no here.
particular
Hence surprise
there is no thatparticular
appearances surprise
mustthat exhibit
appearances
whatevermust structures
exhibit whatever structures
der Natur mit dem Verstande
der Naturund mit seiner
dem Verstande
must asund suchseiner
be connected
must as with suchthe be connected
are required withbythethat subject’s
are required forms by ofthat sensibility
subject’s(receptivity)
forms of sensibility
and forms (receptivity)
of intellectand (judg-
forms of intellect (judg-
Form a priori, d.i. seinem
FormVermögen
a priori, d.i.dasseinem Vermögen das
understanding and itsunderstanding
a priori form,and its a priori form,
ment). ‘Appearances, ment).
however, ‘Appearances,
are only representations
however, are of only
things’,
representations
and these representations
of things’, and these representations
1130 Mannigfaltige überhaupt
1130 Mannigfaltige
zu verbinden,
überhaupt i.e., zu
withverbinden,
its capacity i.e.,to with
connect its capacity
the aretostructured
connect the by the representing
are structuredsubject by the(ll. representing
1143–50). subject (ll. 1143–50).
als wie die Erscheinungenals wieselbst
die Erscheinungen
mit der manifold selbst as mitsuch,
der than manifold
how appear- as such, than Kant’s how appear-
solution is notKant’s entirely solution
satisfactory,
is not in entirely
part because
satisfactory,it is too
in part
convenient.
because it I have
is too convenient. I have
Form der sinnlichen Anschauung
Form der sinnlichena priori Anschauung
ances themselves a priori must ances agreethemselves
a priori must argued agree a priori (KTPR
elsewhere ) that elsewhere
argued Kant’s transcendental
(KTPR) that Kant’s idealism transcendental
requires (as he idealism
insists)requires
a radical(as he insists) a radical
übereinstimmen müssen. übereinstimmen
Denn Gesetze müssen. withDenn the Gesetze
form of sensiblewith theintuition.
form of sensible dichotomy intuition.
between the dichotomy
formal structures
between the of experience
formal structures(which of alone
experience
are said(whichto be ‘legis-
alone are said to be ‘legis-
existiren eben so wenig existiren
in deneben Erschei-
so wenigFor in laws
den Erschei-
exist just asFor littlelaws
withinexistap- just aslated’
littleby within ap-
our human form
lated’ of by cognisance)
our human and formthe ofmaterial
cognisance) content(s)
and theofmaterial
experience, content(s)
includ-of experience, includ-
1135 nungen, sondern1135 nur nungen,
relativ auf sondern
das Sub- nur relativ auf dasbut
pearances, Sub-ratherpearances,
only relative buttoratheringonly quite relative
specific tosensory
ing quite
contents.
specificKant’s
sensorytranscendental
contents. Kant’sidealism transcendental
is designed toidealism accountisfor designed to account for
ject, dem die Erscheinungen
ject, dem inhäriren,
die Erscheinungenthe subject inhäriren,
in which the appearances
subject inin- whichformal a priori in-
appearances conditions
formal of apossible
priori conditions
human apperceptive
of possible experience
human apperceptive
which are experience
either con-which are either con-
so fern es Verstand hat, so fern
als Erscheinun-
es Verstand hat,here, als Erscheinun-
so far as it hashere, understanding,
so far as it has ceptual or intuitive. Yet
understanding, ceptual
Kant’s or probing
intuitive.examination
Yet Kant’s probingof the formal examination
a priori conditions
of the formal neces-
a priori conditions neces-
gen nicht an sich existiren,
gen nicht sondern
an sichnurexistiren, sondern nur
as appearances do notas exist
appearances
in them-do not saryexist
for inthethem-
possibility saryof forourthe apperceptive
possibility experience
of our apperceptive
also identifies experience
a key formal
also identifies
a priori a key formal a priori
relativ auf dasselbe relativ
Wesen,auf so dasselbe
fern es Wesen, so fern es
selves, but rather onlyselves, relative buttorather condition
that only relative to that which is neither
conditionconceptual
which is
nor neither
intuitive conceptual
but rather nor is intuitive
material: The
but rather
humanly is material:
iden- The humanly iden-
1140 Sinne hat. Dingen 1140anSinne
sich hat.
selbstDingen
würdean sich sameselbstbeing,würde
insofar as same it hasbeing,senses. tifiable kinds
insofar as it has senses. and degrees
tifiable of kinds
similarity
and and
degrees varietyof similarity
amongst the
and contents
variety amongst
of sensory the intake.
contents of sensory intake.
ihre Gesetzmäßigkeitihre nothwendig
Gesetzmäßigkeit
auch nothwendig
To things in auch themselves
To thingswouldinnec- Such would
themselves humanlynec- identifiable
Such kindshumanly andidentifiable
degrees of kinds similarity
and and degrees
varietyof similarity
amongst the andcontents
variety amongst the contents
außer einem Verstande, außer dereinem
sie erkennt,
Verstande,essarily
der siebeerkennt,
ascribed their
essarily lawfulness, of sensory
be ascribed their lawfulness, intake, andof likewise
sensory at
intake,
a richerand level
likewise
of integration
at a richer such
level sensory
of integration
intake affords,
such sensory intake affords,
zukommen. Allein Erscheinungen
zukommen. Allein sind Erscheinungen
also apart from sind anyalso understanding
apart from any alsounderstanding
amongst the objects alsoofamongst
sensory intuition
the objectsand of sensory
perception intuition
(Kantand makesperception
the point (Kant
at both
makes the point at both
nur Vorstellungen von nurDingen,
Vorstellungen
die nachvon whichDingen, die nach
knows them. However
which knows appear- these levels),
them. However appear- in principle
these cannot
levels),be in
generated
principle by cannot
the structure
be generated
and functioning
by the structure
of ourandhuman
functioning of our human
1145 dem, was sie an1145 sich dem,
seyn was mögen,
sie anuner-
sich seyn
ancesmögen, uner- representations
are only ances are only sensibility
of representations of or intellect, sensibility
whether singly
or intellect,
or conjointly.
whether The
singly matter
or conjointly.
of sensationThe itself,
matter mustof sensation
be itself, must be
given us ab extra (from given
without),
us ab extranot generated
(from without), by the not human generated
subject;bythisthethesis
human is subject;
(partly) this thesis is (partly)
kannt da sind. Als bloße kannt Vorstellungen
da sind. Als bloße Vorstellungen
things, which are there, things,altogether
which are there, altogether
82 82 83 83
82 83
 aber stehen sie unter aber gar keinem
der Verknüpfung, alsder demjenigen,
hes das verknüpfende hes Vermögen
1150 schreibt. Nun ist1150das,schreibt.
was das Mannigfal-
tige der sinnlichen tige Anschauung
knüpft, Einbildungskraft, knüpft, dieEinbildungskraft,
stande der Einheit ihrer standeintellectuellen
Synthesis und von der Synthesis
1155 Mannigfaltigkeit1155 der Mannigfaltigkeit
Apprehension nach
abhängt. Da nun vonabhängt.
Apprehension alle mögliche Apprehension Wahrneh- alle mögliche
mung, sie selbst aber, mung,
Synthesis, von der Synthesis,transscendentalen,
1160 mithin den Categorien
1160 mithinabhängt,den soCategorien
sen alle mögliche Wahrnehmungen,
sen alle mögliche
hin auch alles, was zum hin empirischen
wußtseyn immer gelangen wußtseynkann,
[B165] alle Erscheinungen [B165]der
1165 Verbindung nach 1165unter
Verbindung
stehen, von welchen stehen, die Natur von(bloß
Natur überhaupt betrachtet)Natur überhaupt
sprünglichen Grundesprünglichen
gen Gesetzmäßigkeitgen (alsGesetzmäßigkeit
1170 liter spectata) abhängt.
1170 liter Auf
G e s e t z e aber als die,G e sauf
N a t u r ü b e r h a u p tN als
keit der Erscheinungen keit der
Zeit beruht, reichtZeit
1175 Verstandesvermögen 1175 Verstandesvermögen
bloße Categorien den bloße
priori Gesetze vorzuschreiben.
priori Gesetze Besonde-
re Gesetze, weil sie empirisch
re Gesetze, bestimmte
Erscheinungen betreffen, Erscheinungen
1180 nicht vollständig1180 abgeleitet
nicht vollständig
sie gleich alle insgesammt sie gleich unteralle jenen
stehen. Es muß Erfahrung stehen. Es dazumuß kom- Erfahrung
84 84
84 85
stehen Gesetze
sie unter garregardless
keinem Gesetze
of what they regardless
Verknüpfung, welc-als demjenigen, welc- themselves.
themselves. However,
das verknüpfendevor- sentations
Vermögenthey vor- standsentations
Nun ist das, was lawsdasofMannigfal-
connection than
der sinnlichen ver- Anschauung
the connecting ver-capacity
vom Ver- Now diethat
vomwhichVer- connects
der Einheit ihrer foldintellectuellen
of sensible intuition fold isofthesensible
Sinnlichkeit
und von der derofSinnlichkeit
imagination,der
der Apprehension
the understanding nach forthe
der Synthesis
Da nunder von intellectual
der Synthesis
synthesis
bility ofWahrneh-
the manifold
diesesieempirische
selbst aber, sion.
dieseNow empirische
since all possible
von der transscendentalen,
tion depends upon the
müs- apprehension,
abhängt, so müs-
mit-
Wahrnehmungen,
pirical synthesis, mit- depends
auch alles, was Be-zumtranscendental
empirischen Be-
immerd.i.gelangen kann, d.i. so must
on the categories,
alleNatur,
Erscheinungen
ihrer perceptions,
der Natur, ihrer hence perceptions,
den Categorien
nach unterwhich den Categorien
can ever enterwhich
welchenals die Natur (bloß
sciousness, i.e., als
als dem ur- betrachtet)
ture as als dem
regards ur- their
ihrer nothwendi- Grunde must ihrer stand
nothwendi-
under themust categories,
natura forma- (on als which
natura depends
forma- nature on which
m e)h rabhängt.
spectata e r e merelyAuf as m enature
h r e r eas such)
e t zdenen
e aber eine als die,nalauf denenofeine
ground
a t uGesetzmäßig-
r ü b e r h a u p t ness
als Gesetzmäßig-
(as natura formaliter
in RaumErscheinungen
und However, in Raum undmanyHowever,
to the
auchberuht,
das reine reicht those
auch upondas which
reine reststhosea nature
nicht zu, durch nicht zu, durch
as lawfulness of appearances as lawfulnessin spaceof appearances
Erscheinungen
Categorien aden and Erscheinungen
time, even the
vorzuschreiben.
understandingBesonde- is insufficient
weil sie empirisch
categories bestimmte
to prescribe
können davon betreffen, können davon
appearances. Particularappearances.
werden, ob abgeleitet werden, empirically
they concern
insgesammt unter jenen
appearances, cannotappearances,
deriveddazu from kom- [thosederived
may be of in what constitutive
they may be of inKant’sconstitutive
transcendental of Kant’s
idealism, transcendental
and is required idealism,
to distinguish
and is requiredhis idealism
to distinguish his idealism
as mere repre- However, from unmitigated
as mere repre- subjective
from unmitigated
idealism. Ifsubjective
the matteridealism.of sensationIf theitself
matter is ofgiven
sensation
us ab extra,itself is given us ab extra,
under no they otherstandthen under whatever
no other similarities
then andwhatever
varietiessimilarities
that matter and of varieties
sensation thathas,
matter
it has.
of sensation
Which of has, theseit has. Which of these
lawsthose
of connection
which than may be thosehumanly
which recognisable
may be humanlyis a distinct recognisable
issue, butiswhichever
a distinct of issue,
them butmay whichever
be or are of hu-them may be or are hu-
the connecting
prescribes. capacity manly prescribes.
recognisable, those manlyvarieties
recognisable,and similarities
those varietiesare notand ‘legislated’
similarities
by theare human
not ‘legislated’
mind inby the human mind in
Now that the mani- the sense
which connects the mani- of generating the
them.senseOur of mind
generating
can them.
only setOurconstraints,
mind can constraints
only set constraints,
which Kant constraints
ac- which Kant ac-
powerintuitionknowledges cannot be
is the power knowledges
specified acannot priori on be philosophical
specified a priori grounds,
on philosophical
upon there grounds,being some upon there being some
whichofdepends
imagination, minimal,
uponwhich depends upon humanly recognisable
minimal, humanly
degree ofrecognisable
similarity and
degree
variety of similarity
amongst the
and content
variety amongst
of our the content of our
theunderstanding
unity of its for sensory
the unityintake, such that
of its sensory
we canintake,at allsuch
integrate
that we ourcansensory
at all integrate
intake (binding)
our sensory
so as intake
to be able (binding) so as to be able
der intellectual
and upon sensi- to perceive
synthesis and upon sensi- our surroundings,
to perceive and our
so surroundings,
to be able to judge
and so
at to
least
be some
able to
particulars
judge at least
to besome
such- particulars to be such-
and-so, such that we can and-so,
at allsuch
thinkthat ‘I think
we can …’atthatall think
those‘Iparticulars
think …’ that therethose
and then
particulars
or nowthere and then or now
bility
of ofapprehen-
the manifold of apprehen-
and here are such-and-so, and here and are onlysuch-and-so,
thus to be able and only
to apperceptive
thus to be them able to(and apperceptive
ourselves).them (and ourselves).
sion. Now percep-
since all possible percep-
This minimum degreeThis of humanly
minimumrecognisable
degree of humanly similarityrecognisable
and variety similarity
amongst the andcontents
variety amongst the contents
tion synthesis
depends of upon the synthesis of
of sensations is the transcendental
of sensations affinityis the transcendental
of the sensoryaffinity manifold. of the
I have
sensoryargued (KTPR CIh.have argued (KTPR Ch.
manifold.
whichapprehension,
itself, this em- which itself, this em-
3) that Kant justifies3)this thatrequirement
Kant justifies by sound
this requirement
transcendental by sound
proof transcendental
in KdrV, that proof this in KdrV, that this
pirical upon
synthesis,the depends upon the
sound proof demonstrates soundthat proof Kant’s
demonstrates
key arguments that Kant’s
for transcendental
key arguments idealism
for transcendental
are invalid, idealism are invalid,
[synthesis],
transcendental
hence up-[synthesis],and that hence up- proof
this sound and thatexhibits
this sound
exactlyproofthe structure
exhibits and exactlyprovides
the structure
exactly theand model
provides re- exactly the model re-
on theallcategories,
possible so quiredmust all forpossible
sound versions
quiredoffor thesound‘neglected
versions alternative’
of the ‘neglected
objection alternative’
to Kant’s arguments
objection to forKant’s arguments for
also everything hence transcendental
also everything idealism.
transcendental
Remarkably,idealism. paying more Remarkably,
careful attention
paying more to Kant’s
carefulown attention
distinc- to Kant’s own distinc-
empirical
can evercon- enter empirical
tions con- between
and relations tions and the relations
two distinct between
uses of thethetwocategories,
distinct uses oneofinthe sub-personal
categories,sen- one in sub-personal sen-
all appearances
sciousness,ofi.e., na-all appearances
sory binding of and
na- object-discrimination
sory binding and object-discrimination
(productive imagination), (productive
the other imagination),
in making the any other in making any
ture conjunction,
as regards their conjunction,
cognitive judgments, whether cognitiveexplicit
judgments, or implicit
whether (understanding),
explicit or implicit and to (understanding),
Kant’s own distinc- and to Kant’s own distinc-
stand underup- the categories,
tions and relationsup- between
tions and issuesrelations
of cognitive
between process
issues andof cognitive
issues ofprocess
cognitive and validity,
issues pro- of cognitive validity, pro-
(regarded
depends videsnaturea sound(regarded and sufficient
vides a sound
basis for andhissufficient
Transcendentalbasis forDeduction
his Transcendental
of the Pure Deduction
Conceptsof the Pure Concepts
merely as as
thenature
origi- as such)
of theasUnderstanding,
the origi- of without
the Understanding,
appeal to hiswithout transcendental
appeal toidealist
his transcendental
account of objects idealistasaccount of objects as
their necessary
nal ground lawful-
of their (mere)
necessary lawful- to(mere)
appearances us. Thisappearances
vindicatestothe us. presuppositional
This vindicates the ratherpresuppositional
than the generative rather than the generative
ness (asspectata). sense of ‘constitution
natura formaliter spectata). sense
of objects’
of ‘constitution
(above, §2.15). of objects’
Kant’s(above,
account§2.15).of sensation,
Kant’s account
sensory of intu-sensation, sensory intu-
laws, othertothan the manyitionlaws,andotherthe than
‘matter ofition
appearance’
and the ‘matter are in of factappearance’
more subtle areand in fact
sophisticated
more subtle thanand thissophisticated
pas- than this pas-
uponaswhichsuch restssagea allows;
nature asseesuch§5. sage allows; see §5.
in space
B165 (ll. 1170–87): Without B165 (ll.specifying
1170–87): them,
WithoutKantspecifying
merely states them, that
Kant
his Deduction
merely states canthatdem- his Deduction can dem-
a pure
and time,
capacity evenofthe onstrate
pure capacity no more of lawsonstrate
than those no morerequired lawsfor than
thethose
lawfulness
required of nature
for the as lawfulness
such. These of nature
‘laws’ as such. These ‘laws’
understandingby mere is insufficient
are specified by mere
in the ‘Analytic
are specifiedof Principles’
in the ‘Analytic
(and anticipated
of Principles’ in the(andSchematism;
anticipated KCE in the§30). Schematism; KCE §30).
categories
a priori laws
to prescribe
to Particular laws
a priori laws toof nature,
Particular
Kantlaws avers, of must
nature, be Kant
specifications
avers, must of these
be specifications
a priori principles,
of these a priori principles,
laws, because Particular
which laws,webecause
can only learnwhich through
we canempirical
only learn inquiries.
throughThis empirical
leaves inquiries.
open many This questions
leaves open re- many questions re-
ob they determined
concern empirically determined
garding Kant’s ‘Analytic garding
of Principles’
Kant’s ‘Analytic and its of relations
Principles’to empirical
and its relations
physics, to onlyempirical
some ofphysics, only some of
be completely cannotwhich be completely
are addressed in which
the ‘Transcendental
are addressed inDialectic’, the ‘Transcendental
others are considered
Dialectic’, others
in Kant’s are considered
Meta- in Kant’s Meta-
categories],
from al- [those categories], al-
85 85
 men, um die letzteremen, überhaupt
um diekennen letztere überhaupt
though they kennenall standthough
underthey them. all stand under
physical them. of Natural
Foundations physical Foundations
Science. None of of
Natural
theseScience.
issues None
shouldofbethese addressed
issues within
shouldKant’sbe addressed within Kant’s
zu lernen; von Erfahrung zu lernen;
aber überhaupt
von Erfahrung aber überhaupt
Experience too mustExperience
be considered too must Deduction,
be considered so it is unsurprising
Deduction,that so ithere
is unsurprising
they are no more that here
thanthey mentioned
are no more by Kant.than mentioned by Kant.
1185 und dem, was als 1185ein und
Gegenstand
dem, wasdersel- als ein Gegenstand
to discoverdersel- these latter to in
discover
any regard; these latter in any regard;
ben erkannt werden ben kann, erkannt
geben werdenallein kann, only gebenregarding alleinexperience
only regarding
as such, experience as such,
jene Gesetze a priori die jeneBelehrung.
Gesetze a priori dieand Belehrung.
that which can beand cognized
that which as ancan be cognized as an
object of experience, object do those of experience,
a priori do those
3.15 §27:a priori
Result of
3.15this Deduction
§27: Result of the
of this
Concepts
Deduction of theofUnderstanding.
the Concepts of the Understanding.
laws [of the understanding] laws [of instruct
the understanding] instruct
B165–6 (ll. 1190–1202): B165–6
Surprisingly,
(ll. 1190–1202):
most of Surprisingly,
Kant’s resultsmost in the of Kant’s
Deduction results
are injustified,
the Deduction are justified,
us. us.
even if his transcendental even idealism
if his transcendental
be set aside. idealism
Setting asidebe sethisaside.
transcendental
Setting aside idealism
his transcendental
re- idealism re-
Result ofder this Deduction quires acknowledging
§ 27. Resultofofthethis Deduction of the quiresthat we acknowledging
might well sense thatorweeven might perceive
well sensesome or particulars
even perceive which some
we particulars which we
§ 27. Resultat dieser § 27.Deduction
Resultat der dieser§ 27. Deduction
cannot comprehend using cannotour comprehend
categories usingand whatever
our categories
more specific
and whateverconcepts more we specific
might concepts we might
Verstandesbegriffe. Verstandesbegriffe. Concepts of the Understanding. Concepts of the Understanding.
devise (specify) on their devise
basis,(specify)
in which on case
theirwe basis,
could in not
which apperceive
case we couldsuch irregular
not apperceive
particu-such irregular particu-
1190 Wir können 1190 uns keinen Wir Gegenstand
können uns keinen We Gegenstand
cannot think anyWe object,
cannot if not
think any object, if not
lars; they would be ‘nothing lars; they forwould
me’. Even be ‘nothing
if so, Kant’s
for me’. Deduction
Even if so, is focussed
Kant’s Deduction
primarily on is focussed primarily on
denken, ohne durch Categorien;
denken, ohne wirdurch through categories;
kön- Categorien; wir kön- we through
cannot categories;
cog- we cannot cog-
the minimal sensory and the minimal
perceptual sensory
constraints
and perceptual
which must constraints
be fulfilled whichif ever
must one beisfulfilled
to be if ever one is to be
nen keinen gedachten nen keinen Gegenstand gedachten nise Gegenstand
any object thought, nise any except object thought, except
able to think ‘I think able …’, to
whichthinkcan ‘I think
only be…’,thought
which (by can us only human
be thought
beings)(by in usconnection
human beings) in connection
erkennen, ohne durch erkennen, ohne durchthrough
Anschauungen, intuitions which
Anschauungen, throughcorrespond
intuitions which correspond
(reference) to some perceived(reference) particular(s)
to some perceived
we can perceptually
particular(s)discriminate
we can perceptually
and localise discriminate
on and localise on
die jenen Begriffen die entsprechen.
jenen Begriffen to those concepts.
Nun entsprechen. Nun Now to those
all our concepts.
intu- Now somealloccasion
our intu- in some
some spatio-temporal,
occasion in some perceptual
spatio-temporal,
context, and perceptual
so can judge context,them and(accu-
so can judge them (accu-
1195 sind alle unsere1195 Anschauungen
sind alle unsere sinnlich, itions are sinnlich,
Anschauungen sensory, and itions
this are
cognition,
sensory, and thisenough)
rately cognition, to be such-and-so.
rately enough) Such to be
occasions
such-and-so. only can Suchbeoccasions
provided only us bycan spatio-tempo-
be provided us by spatio-tempo-
und diese Erkenntniß, und dieseso fern der so far
Erkenntniß, so asfernits object
der is so given,
far asis its
empiri-
object isral
given, is empiri-
particulars which ralwe particulars
can localisewhich withinwespacecan localise
and time within
by perceptually
space and discriminating
time by perceptually discriminating
Gegenstand derselben Gegenstand
gegeben ist, ist cal.
derselben However,
gegeben ist, empirical
ist cal. However,
cognition isempirical themcognition
by identifying is andthem integrating
by identifying at leastandsome integrating
of their atmanifest
least some features,
of their
all of
manifest
which features,
we all of which we
empirisch. Empirische empirisch.
Erkenntniß Empirische
aber experience.
Erkenntniß aber Consequentlyexperience.
no cognition
Consequently no cognition
can classify and judgecan to be
classify
these features
and judge of tothatbeparticular
these featuresin someof thatsufficiently
particularaccurate
in somecog- sufficiently accurate cog-
[B166] ist Erfahrung. Folglich
[B166] ististErfahrung. is possible
uns k e i - Folglich ist unsfor k e ius
- a ispriori,
possible
except forofus a nitive
priori,judgment.
except ofThis nitiveconditional
judgment. thesisThisis aconditional
bit of a priori thesis
knowledge
is a bit of about
a priori
necessary
knowledge condi- about necessary condi-
1200 n e E r k e n n t n1200 e E r kmöglich,
i ß a npriori objects of possible
e n n t n i ßals a priori möglich, als experience.*
objects of possible experience.*
tions for the very possibility
tions for ofthe humanvery apperception:
possibility of human We can,apperception:
and we can only, We can,
use ourand basic
we can only, use our basic
lediglich von G e g e nlediglich
s t ä n d e nvon mG ö gelgi -e n s t ä n d e n m ö g l i - conceptual categoriesconceptualto judge sensed, categoriesperceived
to judge particulars
sensed, within
perceived ourparticulars
surroundings. withinHence
our surroundings. Hence
c h e r E r f a h r u n g .* c h e r E r f a h r u n g .* we can only use our categories
we can only in use
(referential,
our categories
ascriptive)
in (referential,
connectionascriptive)
to such particulars
connectionweto such particulars we
* Damit man sich nicht * Damit
voreiliger sich nicht* voreiliger
man Weise So that no one prematurely
Weise * So that no stum- one prematurely
can experience. stum-Thesecan areexperience.
Kant’s epistemic These aremodalities
Kant’s of epistemic
possiblemodalities
experienceofand possible
some experience
of and some of
an den besorglichenannachtheiligenden besorglichen bles over
Fol- nachtheiligen Fol- the worrisomebles over
disadvanta-
the worrisome disadvanta-
its necessary a priori conditions.
its necessary If such
a prioriresults
conditions.
seem meagreIf suchfor results
all this
seemeffort,
meagre
theyfor suffice
all this
to effort, they suffice to
1205 gen dieses Satzes 1205stoße,
gen dieses
will ichSatzes
nur instoße, geouswill consequences
ich nur in geous of thisconsequences
proposi- undercut Cartesian, Humean,
of this proposi- undercutPyrrhonian
Cartesian, Humean,
and globalPyrrhonian
perceptualand scepticisms
global perceptual
– no trivial scepticisms
re- – no trivial re-
Erinnerung bringen, Erinnerungdaß die Categorienbringen, daß tiondieI wish to recall tion
Categorien that Iinwish thinking, sult! It also
to recall that in thinking, provides sult!
the cognitive
It also provides
semantics the of
cognitive
singular semantics
reference of
required
singular to reference
undercut required
all to undercut all
im D e n k e n durchimdieD eBedingungen n k e n durch the die categories
Bedingungen are notthelimited
categories by the global
are not perceptual
limited by the ‘hypotheses’
global perceptual
as mere ‘hypotheses’
thoughts with as nomerepossible
thoughts reference
with noto possible
particulars,reference to particulars,
unserer sinnlichen unserer Anschauung sinnlichen conditions ofnicht
nicht Anschauung our sensible
conditions intuition, hence no
of our sensible intuition,cognitive status
hence
whatsoever;
no cognitivehence
status
they whatsoever;
do not undermine
hence they
or do
‘defeat’
not undermine
cognitive justi-
or ‘defeat’ cognitive justi-
eingeschränkt sind, eingeschränkt
sondern ein sind,butsondernhave an unlimitedein but field,
haveand an only
unlimitedfication. (Foronly
field, and detailed fication.
discussion, (Forsee detailed
KCE.) discussion, see KCE.)

1210 unbegrenztes Feld 1210haben,

unbegrenztes
und nurFeld das haben,the cognition
und nurofdas that which
the cognition
we think, of that Bwhich
166–7 we (ll. think,
1203–22):B166–7
Kant hastens
(ll. 1203–22):to stressKant (*) hastens
that his toDeduction
stress (*) concerns
that his Deduction
the use of concerns the use of
E r k e n n e n dessen, was E r kwir
e n nuns
e ndenken, the determining
dessen, was wir uns denken, of the
the object,
determining
requires of the
categoriesrequires
object, in knowledge.categories
That their in knowledge.
intension (conceptual
That their intension
content) is (conceptual
not limitedcontent)
to sensoryis not limited to sensory
das Bestimmen des Odas b j eBestimmen
c t s , Anschau- des O bintuition; so that in intuition;
j e c t s , Anschau- absence of so this
that inparticulars
absence of this thatparticulars
entails they haveentails a much thatbroader
they have semantic
a much scopebroader
(intension),
semantic which
scope Kant
(intension), which Kant
ung bedürfe; wo beimung Mangel
bedürfe;der woletzte- latter the
beim Mangel der letzte- thought of latter
an object
the thought
always of an object always
here indicates is important here indicates
to usingis categories
important intopractical
using categories
philosophy, in practical
which isphilosophy,
another which is another
ren der Gedanke vom renObjecte
der Gedanke
übrigens vom still can have
Objecte übrigensits true still
andcanuseful havecon- its true and useful con-

86 86 87 87
86 87
1215 noch immer seine 1215wahre
noch und immer nützliche
seine wahre sequences
und nützlichefor the subject’s
sequences
use of reason, topic use
for the subject’s (though
of reason, topic (thoughDialectic
the Transcendental the Transcendental
has important Dialectic has important
discussions discussions
of the regulative use of the regulative use
Folgen auf den V e Folgen r n u n f t auf
g e b rden
a u cVh e r nwhich
u n f t gcannot
e b r a ubec h considered
which cannot here be- of experience-transcendent
be considered here be- of experience-transcendent
ideas of reason to organise ideas ofour reason to organise
empirical enquiries ourandempirical
knowl- enquiries and knowl-
d e s S u b j e c t s habend e s kann,
S u b j dere c t ssich
habencause kann, theyder do sich
not always
causeconcern
they dothe edge).concern the
not always edge).
aber, weil er nicht immer aber, weil auf er dienicht
B e - immer auf die ofBthe
determination e - object,
determination
and so cogni- of the object,
B168 and (ll.so cogni- I have
1222–52): B168omitted
(ll. 1222–52):
most of I have
Kant’s omitted
discussion
most of of aKant’s
possible discussion
alternative of atopossible
his alternative to his
s t i m m u n g d e s O bs jtei m
c tms , umithin
n g d eaufs
s O b j etion,
c t s , but
mithinratheraufsconcern
tion, thebut subject
rather concern the subject
Deduction, that thereDeduction, might be some that there
sort of might
pre-established
be some sort harmony
of pre-established
by preformation harmony of by preformation of
1220 Erkenntniß, sondern 1220 Erkenntniß,
auch auf die sondern
des auch and itsauf will.die des and its will. […] our human cognitive […] capacities,
our humansuch cognitive
that these
capacities,
be suited
suchtothatknowing
these benaturesuitedas to
it is,
knowing
and as itnature as it is, and as it
Subjects und dessen Wollen Subjectsgerichtet
und dessen ist, Wollen gerichtet ist, is manifest to us. Kantis rightly manifest rejoins
to us.thatKant norightly
such explanatory
rejoins that hypothesis
no such explanatory
can addresshypothesis
the key can address the key
hier noch nicht vortragen hier noch
läßt. nicht [… Bvortragen
168] läßt. [… B168] normative issues of whether normative anyissues
judgments of whether
so formed any judgments
using our most so formed
basic using
concepts ourare most or basic concepts are or
[…] daß in solchem […] Falledaß [einesin solchem
Präfor- Falle […] [eines
that in Präfor-
such a case[…] [ofthat
a system
in such ofa case
can[ofbea objectively
system of valid, cani.e.,besufficiently
objectively accuratevalid, i.e.,and
sufficiently
justified accurate
to constitute
and justified
knowledge. to constitute
This knowledge. This
mationssystem] denmationssystem]Categorien die den preformation]
Categorien die the categories
preformation] wouldthe categories
holds for any wouldand all holds
sorts for
of ‘innateness’
any and all hypotheses.
sorts of ‘innateness’
Insofar ashypotheses.
such hypotheses Insofar(merely)
as such hypotheses (merely)
1225 N o t h w e n d i g k1225
eit Nmangeln
o t h w ewürde,
n d i g k die
e i t mangeln würde,
lack necessity, die belongs
which lack necessity,
essentially
which belongs
explain essentially
how we can or explain
must howthink,wethey canare or open
must invitations
think, they to aresceptics
open invitations
to rejoin, so to sceptics
much to rejoin, so much
ihrem Begriffe wesentlich ihrem Begriffe angehört.wesentlichto their angehört.
concept. Fortothe theirconcept
concept. of Forthetheworseconceptfor how of wethemust worse or fordo think;
how we nonemust of or
thatdoproves
think; anything
none of that aboutproves
whether anything
our about whether our
Denn z.B. der Begriff Denn derz.B. U r sder
a c hBegriff
e , cause, der e.g.,U r which
s a c h e expresses
, cause, e.g.,the which thinking
neces- expresses thecan or does ever
neces- thinking count canasor knowledge
does everofcount particulars
as knowledge
in our surroundings.
of particulars Kant’s in our surroundings.
ex- Kant’s ex-
welcher die Nothwendigkeit welcher die einesNothwendigkeit
Er- sity of a eines Er- sity
consequence underof aa consequence
presup- ample
underand his comments
a presup- ampleonand it, namely,
his comments the concepton it, ‘cause’,
namely, directly
the concept
recall ‘cause’,
his earlierdirectly
com-recall his earlier com-
folgs unter einer vorausgesetzten
folgs unter einer Bedin- vorausgesetzten
posed condition, Bedin- would posedbe condition,
false, if it wouldments beon the if
false, ‘dignity’
it ments
(B124,on the ‘dignity’
l. 171), the modal (B124,intension
l. 171),and the justificatory
modal intension statusandof justificatory
this con- status of this con-
1230 gung aussagt, würde 1230 falsch
gung aussagt,
seyn, wenn würdeer falsch
restedseyn, only wennupon er an rested
arbitrary only upon ancept,
subjec- whichsubjec-
arbitrary in principlecept, contrasts
which in to principle
the subjective contrasts
contingencies
to the subjective
of our empirical
contingencies (or rather:
of our empirical (or rather:
nur auf einer beliebigen nurunsauf eingepflanz-
einer beliebigentive uns necessity,
eingepflanz- implanted
tive necessity, our empiricist)
in us, byimplanted in us, by evidence,
our and
empiricist)
that to evidence,
these subjective
and thatcontingencies
to these subjective
contrasts, contingencies
in principle, contrasts, in principle,
ten subjectiven Nothwendigkeit,
ten subjectiven gewiße
Nothwendigkeit,
which we gewiße connect certain
which we connect the
empirical certainapparently
empirical non-modal
the apparently
assertoric non-modal
judgment, ‘it assertoric
(the object)judgment, ‘it (the object)
IS such-and-so’ (B141–2,IS such-and-so’
l. (B141–2, l.
empirische Vorstellungen empirische
nach einer Vorstellungen
sol- representations
nach einer sol- according
representations 610–21).
to such aaccording to such a Fully examined
610–21).
and reconstructed,
Fully examined Kant’s
and reconstructed,
analysis of our Kant’s
perceptual analysis
judgments
of our perceptual
(in judgments (in
chen Regel des Verhältnißeschen Regel zu des
verbin-
Verhältnißes
regular zu verbin-I would
relation. regular notrelation. the ‘Analytic
be able I would not be able of Principles’)
the ‘Analytic
shows that
of Principles’)
they are discriminatory,
shows that they
and are
that
discriminatory,
they can be discrim-
and that they can be discrim-
1235 den, beruhte. Ich1235 würde
den,nicht
beruhte.sagenIch kön-
würdetonichtsay: sagen kön- is connected
the effect to say: thewithin inatory (of within
effect is connected particulars)inatory
only by (ofidentifying
particulars)(howeveronly by approximately)
identifying (however some approximately)
of their causal in- some of their causal in-
tegrity. (This is the main tegrity.
burden(This ofisKCEthe, main
PARTburden of KCE
2, especially Ch.
, P8.)
ART 2, especially Ch. 8.)
nen: die Wirkung ist nen: mit der die Ursache
Wirkungim ist mittheder Ursache
object im the object
(i.e., necessarily), but (i.e.,
rather necessarily), but rather
Objecte (d.i. nothwendig) Objecte verbunden,
(d.i. nothwendig) only that verbunden,
I am so constituted
only that Ithat am Iso constituted
3.16 [no §]thatBrief I Concept
3.16 [no of this
§] Brief
Deduction.
Concept of this Deduction.
sondern ich bin nur sondernso eingerichtet,
ich bin daß nur socannot
eingerichtet,
think thisdaß representation
cannot thinkoth- this representation oth-
B168–9 (ll. 1254–65): BKant 168–9cannot
(ll. 1254–65):
be moreKant clearcannot
or concise be more
aboutclear
his orDeduction
concise about
than this his Deduction than this
ich diese Vorstellungich nichtdiese
andersVorstellung
als so nicht erwise anders
than as als so
soconnected;
erwise than which as so
is connected; which is
brief paragraph! Recallbrief thatparagraph!
‘determine’Recall or ‘determination’
that ‘determine’ often
or ‘determination’
means, and doesoften heremeans,
mean, and does here mean,
1240 verknüpft denken 1240kann;
verknüpft
welches denken
geradekann; welches
exactly whatgerade
the sceptic
exactlymost whatwants;
the sceptic most
‘specify’ or wants;
‘specification’.
‘specify’ or ‘specification’.
das ist, was der Sceptiker das ist, am wasmeisten
der Sceptiker for then am all meisten
our insightfor through
then all pre-our insight One through pre- is that Kant
key point One key is correct
point isabout that theKantparallel
is correct
of theabout
Transcendental
the parallel of Deduction
the Transcendental
of Deduction of
wünscht; denn alsdann wünscht;
ist alle denn unsere
alsdannsumed ist alle unserevalidity
objective sumed of ourobjective
judg- validity of our judg-
the Categories to the Transcendental
the Categories to Deduction
the Transcendental
of (the ConceptsDeductionof) Space
of (the and
Concepts
Time: Particu-
of) Space and Time: Particu-
Einsicht durch vermeinte Einsichtobjective
durch Gül- vermeinte ment objective
is nothing Gül- but mere
mentappearance,
is nothing but mere appearance,
lars cannot be sensed larsby us, cannot
or presented
be sensedtoby usus,by or
or presented
in sensorytoperception,
us by or inexcept sensory insofar
perception,
as except insofar as
tigkeit unserer Urtheile tigkeit
nichtsunsererals lauter
Urtheileand nichts
therealswould lauternot and
fail tothere
be people
would notthey fail to be people
are spatio-temporal, theysoare thespatio-temporal,
concepts ‘space’soand the‘time’
concepts must‘space’
pertainand to ‘time’
them. must
Sensed pertain
par- to them. Sensed par-
1245 Schein, und es 1245 würdeSchein,
auch und an Leuten
es würde who auchwould an Leuten
not themselves
who would corrobo-
not themselves corrobo-
ticulars cannot be at allticulars
thoughtcannot
by us except
be at allinsofar
thoughtasbyweusjudge
excepttheminsofar
using as the
we categories,
judge thembe- using the categories, be-
nicht fehlen, die diese nicht
subjective
fehlen, Noth- die diese ratesubjective Noth- necessity
this subjective rate this subjective
(which necessity (which
cause the categories arecause required
the categories
for any judging are required
of anyfor particulars
any judging whatsoever,
of any particulars
and because whatsoever,
we and because we
wendigkeit (die gefühlt wendigkeit
werden(die muß)gefühlt must werden
be felt); muß)at the must
least be onefelt);
could at thecannot
least one evencould
think ‘I think
cannot …’evenexcept thinkas part
‘I think
of actively
…’ except integrating
as part of some
actively
plurality
integrating
of conceptssome plurality of concepts
von sich nicht gestehen von sich würden; nichtzum gestehen not würden;
argue with zum anyonenot argueabout with that anyone about that
of particulars or their of particulars
features or their features
(presumptively) identified
(presumptively)
(classified) by identified
those concepts,
(classified) allbyof those concepts, all of
wenigsten könnte man wenigsten
mit niemandenkönnte manwhich mit niemanden
merely depends which
uponmerely
how his dependswhichupon concepts
how hiscan only whichbeconcepts
specifications can only of ourbe specifications
categories. Anyofinstanceour categories.
of the analytical
Any instance of the analytical
1250 über dasjenige hadern,
1250 überwasdasjenige
bloß aufhadern, der subject[ivity]
was bloß aufisder organised.
subject[ivity] is organised.

88 88 89 89
88 89
 Art beruht, wie seinArt
Subject
beruht,
organisirt
wie sein Subject organisirt unity apperception expressedunity apperception
by the ‘I thinkexpressed
…’ requires
by the as‘I its
think
necessary
…’ requires
complement,
as its necessary
some complement, some
ist. ist. synthetic unity of apperception
synthetic unity
whichofis apperception
the integratedwhichjudging is the
of this
integrated
(sensed,judging
specified)
of this
partic-
(sensed, specified) partic-
ular, now within this spatio-temporal
ular, now withinsensory-perceptual
this spatio-temporal context.
sensory-perceptual context.
Kurzer Begriff dieser Kurzer
Deduction.
Begriff dieser Deduction.
Brief Concept of this Brief Concept of thisKant’s
Deduction. Deduction need
Deduction. Kant’s
not, and
Deduction
does not, need
prove
not,that
andany
doessuch not,humanly
prove that sense-able,
any suchintu-humanly sense-able, intu-
Sie ist die DarstellungSie
deristreinen
die Darstellung
Ver- Itderisreinen
the presentation
Ver- It ofis the pure itable,ofperceptible,
the presentation the pure judgable
itable, particulars
perceptible,exist
judgable
or occur;
particulars
it need not,existand
or occur;
does not,
it need
prove
not,that
andanydoes not, prove that any
1255 standesbegriffe 1255
(undstandesbegriffe
mit ihnen aller (und concepts
mit ihnen of aller
the understanding
concepts of (and and all particulars
the understanding (and are and
such allasparticulars
can be sensed,
are such
intuited
as can
andbejudged
sensed, byintuited
us. It proves
and judged
that no
by hu-
us. It proves that no hu-
theoretischen Erkenntniß
theoretischen
a priori)Erkenntniß
als with athese ) als
prioriof all a with
priori these of all amanly
theoretical priori possible instance
theoretical manlyof the
possible
analytical
instanceunityofoftheapperception
analytical unity(expressed
of apperception
by ‘I think(expressed
…’) by ‘I think …’)
Principien der Möglichkeit
PrincipienderderErfah-
Möglichkeit
cognition)der asErfah-
principles
cognition)
of the as possi- can occur without
principles of the possi- itscan
complementary
occur without synthetic
its complementary
unity of apperception,
synthetic unity
and of
that
apperception,
this cannot and that this cannot
rung, dieser aber alsrung,
Bestimmung
dieser aber derals bility
Bestimmung der bility
of experience, of this,of again, as occur
experience, of this, without
again, sensory-perceptual
as occur withoutpresentation
sensory-perceptual
of somepresentation
particular(s)ofwhich somecan particular(s)
be (accu- which can be (accu-
Erscheinungen in Raum und [B169] Zeit
Erscheinungen in Raum und [B169] Zeitof determination
determination rately
appearances inof appearances in if approximately) rately
judged
if approximately)
by us, in part judged
by delimiting
by us, the
in part
spatial
by delimiting
region of the
the particu-
spatial region of the particu-
lar(s) when sensed andlar(s) perceived
when sensed
by ‘me’and in this
perceived
spatio-temporal
by ‘me’ inperceptual
this spatio-temporal
context, inperceptual
part by context, in part by
1260 überhaupt, – endlich
1260 überhaupt,
dieser aus – endlich
dem space dieserand austime
demas such,
space– and timefinallyas such, – and finally
using (accurately enough) using the
(accurately
determinable
enough) a priori
the concepts
determinable ‘space’
a priori
and concepts
‘time’, which‘space’
Kantand ‘time’, which Kant
Princip der ursprünglichen
Principsynthetischen
der ursprünglichen synthetischen
of these from the of principle
these from
of thethe principle of the
claims are not amongstclaims the categories
are not amongst
(see below,
the categories
§4). The scope
(see below,
and aim §4).ofTheKant’s
scopeDeduc-
and aim of Kant’s Deduc-
Einheit der Apperception,
Einheitalsder
derApperception,
Form original als der Form unity
synthetic original
of appercep-
synthetic unity of appercep-
tion is not trivial, yet tionit is is
much
not trivial,
more restricted
yet it is much
than often
more supposed.
restricted thanHis chapter
often supposed.
brings inHis chapter brings in
des Verstandes in Beziehung
des Verstandes
auf Raumin Beziehung
tion as auf formRaum
of the tion
understanding
as form ofinthe understanding in
so many wide-rangingsoissues manythatwide-ranging
readers understandably
issues that readers have understandably
lost track of many haveguiding
lost track of many guiding
und Zeit als ursprüngliche
und ZeitFormen
als ursprüngliche
der connection Formen to der
space and
connection
time as to orig-
space and time as orig-
threads Kant provides, threads
in particular,
Kant provides,
how he in uses
particular,
questionshow of process
he uses to questions
raise and of address
process to raise and address
1265 Sinnlichkeit. 1265 Sinnlichkeit. inal forms of sensibility. inal forms of sensibility.issues of cognitive validity.
issues of cognitive validity.
* * * * * * * * * * * * Why such elaborate contextualisation?
Why such elaborate Because
contextualisation?
the Deduction Because
has a thequiteDeduction
specific role
has a quite specific role
within a very complexwithin
Critique a very
of Pure
complex
Reason,Critique
and Kant of Pure
mustReason,
make andplainKant
howmustand make
why this plain how and why this
Transcendental Deduction
Transcendental
(§26) matters,Deduction
and why (§26)
therematters,
are goodandreasons
why there to think
are good
it is reasons
true to think it is true
of us finite human beings
of us –finiteevenhuman
if not beings
all of Kant’s
– even reasons
if not all forofsoKant’s
thinking
reasons
are, can
for soor thinking are, can or
should be provided within
should thebechapter
providedon within
the Transcendental
the chapter onDeduction
the Transcendental
itself. Deduction itself.
As for the comprehensive As forscopethe comprehensive
of apperceptionscope and theof apperception
use of ‘I think and
…’the (§§16,
use of17),
‘I think …’ (§§16, 17),
any actual extent within
any anyone’s
actual extent apperceptive
within anyone’s
life will apperceptive
depend directly life upon
will depend
how exten-
directly upon how exten-
sively anyone can chartsivelyheranyone
or his can
course
chart
through
her orthe hisworld
courseduring
throughhis the
or her
worldlife.during
Kant’shis or her life. Kant’s
point in the Deduction pointis only
in thethat
Deduction
any plurality
is onlyof experiences
that any plurality
can beofthought
experiences
to be one’s
can be thought to be one’s
own only so far as one own canonly
identify
so far
each
as one
and can
all asidentify
belonging
each within
and alltheas belonging
scope of what withinonethe scope of what one
can ascribe to oneself by
can thinking
ascribe toofoneself
them allby‘Ithinking
think …’. of them all ‘I think …’.
To contemporary readers, To contemporary
who are happy readers,
to use who
logicareas much
happy as topossible,
use logic though
as muchwith-
as possible, though with-
out much consideringout howmuchwe areconsidering
at all able tohowusewelogic
are at
as all
such
able(pure
to uselogic),
logicnor
as such
how (pure
we arelogic), nor how we are
at all able to use logicat to
allthink
able to about
use whatever
logic to thinkwe can about
and whatever
do perceive we (applied
can and logic),
do perceive
the (applied logic), the
sticking point will be sticking
Kant’s purported
point will dependency
be Kant’s purported
of any instance(s)
dependency of the
of any
analytical
instance(s)
unityof the analytical unity
of apperception uponofsome apperception
instance(s)uponof asome
synthetic
instance(s)
unity ofofapperception.
a synthetic unityPerhaps
of apperception.
ironi- Perhaps ironi-
cally, Kant’s case forcally,
this dependency
Kant’s case –forthat thisit dependency
holds true of – that
us homo
it holds
sapiens
truesapientes
of us –homois sapiens sapientes – is
clinched by his probingclinched
analysis by of
histhe
probing
transcendental
analysis of affinity
the transcendental
of the sensoryaffinity
manifoldof the
andsensory manifold and
its counter-factual failure,
its counter-factual
‘transcendentalfailure,
chaos’,‘transcendental
the very principle chaos’,
andthephenomenon
very principle which
and phenomenon which
undercuts his transcendental
undercuts idealism.
his transcendental idealism.

90 90 91 91
90 91
4 THE CONCEPTS ‘SPACE 4 T’,HE ‘TIME ’ & THE‘SCPACE
CONCEPTS ATEGORIES’, ‘TIME’ & THE CATEGORIES principle distinct to those principle
relations distinct
of comprehension
to those relations (classification,
of comprehension class inclusion)(classification, class inclusion)
THE CONCEPTS ‘SPACE’, ‘TIME’ & THE CATEGORIES typical of discursive concepts,
typical
principle of
whereby
discursive
distinct more concepts,
to those general whereby
concepts
relations more
include
of comprehension general
withinconceptstheir include
(classification, classwithin their
inclusion)
4.1 Attentive readers4
4.1 4.1
may query Attentive whetherreadersI have maytoo queryglibly whether
highlightedI haveKant’s too gliblycon-highlighted Kant’s con-
scope by omitting from scope their intension
typical byof omitting
discursive (specification)
from their intension
concepts, all more(specification)
whereby specific
more general concepts all more
of specific
concepts include concepts
within their of
cepts of ‘space’ and ‘time’ceptswhilst
4.1 of ‘space’
discounting
Attentive and
readers ‘time’
hismay transcendental
whilst
querydiscounting
whether idealist his account
I have transcendental
too glibly of highlighted
idealist Kant’s
accountcon- of
that kind (e.g., colour, red, that vermillion).
kind (e.g., colour,
In these red,regards,
vermillion).
space and
In these
time
scope by omitting from their intension (specification) all more specific concepts of regards,
are altogether
space and time are altogether
space and time, and soceptsspace
have of and
lost‘space’
time,
or gravely so
jeopardised
and ‘time’ have lost Kant’s
whilst or gravely
discounting distinction
jeopardised between
his transcendental Kant’s distinction
idealist account between of
formal and extensive. Space formal
that kindis and
an(e.g.,
unbounded
extensive.
colour, red, Space
manifold is anconsisting
vermillion). unbounded
In these in continuous,
manifold
regards, space consisting
in- and time in continuous,
are altogether in-
the categories and the concepts
the categories
space and ‘space’
time, and
and
andthe
‘time’
soconcepts
and lost
have their
‘space’
orroots and in ‘time’
gravely our human
and their
jeopardised sensi-roots in
Kant’s our human
distinction sensi-
between
definitely divisible, concurrent,
definitely
formal and specious
divisible, (unreal,
extensive. concurrent,
Spacemerelyis anspecious
notional)
unbounded (unreal,
sub-regions; merelytime
manifold notional)
is
consisting sub-regions;
in continuous, timein-is
the
bilitycategories
bility (above, §§3.11, 3.12); as(above, andthethe
concepts,§§3.11, concepts
concepts
3.12); ‘space’and
as‘space’
concepts, and ‘time’
the‘time’concepts and ‘space’
would their
be roots
asand in‘time’
our human
would sensi-
be as
an unbounded manifoldan consisting
unbounded
definitely in manifold
divisible, continuous,
concurrent, consisting
indefinitely
specious in continuous,
divisible,merely
(unreal, successive,
indefinitely
notional)divisible,
sub-regions; successive,
time is
discursive or descriptivebility
discursive
as any of or
(above, thedescriptive
categories.
§§3.11, asSuch
3.12); any
as queries
of the categories.
concepts, are
thegermane,
concepts Such but queries
haveand
‘space’ are‘time’
germane, would butbehave
as
specious (unreal, merelyspecious
annotional)
unbounded (unreal,
sub-periods.merelyTo
manifold notional)
be concepts
consisting sub-periods.
(respectively)
in continuous, To beindefinitely
ofconcepts
space (respectively) of space
divisible, successive,
satisfactory answers. Thorough
satisfactory
discursive answers
oranswers. would
descriptive Thorough
asrequire
any ofanswersdetailed would
the categories.examinations,
require
Such detailed
not are germane,
queries examinations, not
but have
or of time, the conceptsor ‘space’
of time,
specious and the‘time’
(unreal, concepts must notional)
merely ‘space’
pertainand tosub-periods.
these
‘time’ distinctive
mustTopertain structural
be to these(respectively)
concepts distinctive structural
of space
only of Kant’s philosophy onlyofofmathematics,
satisfactory Kant’s philosophy
answers. but of of
Thorough hismathematics,
philosophy
answers would of
butapplied
ofrequire
his mathe-
philosophy of applied mathe-
detailed examinations, not
features of space and any features
or regions
of time, of delimitable
space
the and any
concepts within regions
‘space’ it, and delimitable
likewise
‘time’ must ofwithin
time
pertainit,
andand toany likewise
these of timestructural
distinctive and any
matics and the very possibility
maticsofand
only of empirical
Kant’sthe very possibility
measures
philosophy ofofspatial
empirical
of mathematics, and measures
temporal
but of hisof dimen-
spatial andoftemporal
philosophy applied dimen-
mathe-
periods delimitable within periods
it. Designation
features delimitable
of space and ofwithin
such
any structural
it. Designation
regions features
delimitable of such
iswithin
constitutive
structural
it, andof features
likewise isofconstitutive
time and any of
sions, including (thoughmatics
sions, and theto)
not limited
including very hispossibility
(though ‘Axiomsnot limitedof empirical to) hismeasures
Intuition’. Here
‘Axioms ofofspatial
I indicate and temporal
Intuition’. Here I indicatedimen-
the respective intensionsthe of respective
periods these two intensions
delimitable concepts. withinWe ofit.these
can use
twotheconcepts.
Designation termof such‘classify’
We can in use
structural con- the termis‘classify’
features constitutivein con-of
only the key points, because
only the
sions, they keysuffice
including points, to because
(though buttress they
not limitedKant’s suffice
viewhis
to) toof‘Axioms
buttress
the distinctive
Kant’s view ofHere
of Intuition’. the distinctive
I indicate
nection with ‘time’ andnection ‘times’,
the with
and in
respective ‘time’connection
intensions and ‘times’, withand
of these ‘space’
twoinconcepts.
connection
and ‘spaces’, We withcan butuse‘space’
we and ‘spaces’,
the term ‘classify’ in butcon-
we
character and role of the character
onlyconcepts
the key and ‘space’
role of
points, and the‘time’,
because concepts and suffice
they to
‘space’
reinforce
andbuttress
to ‘time’,
his appeal and
Kant’s to reinforce
view of the his distinctive
appeal to
must not thereby neglectmust the not
nection very thereby
with distinctive
‘time’ neglect
andkinds the
ofvery
‘times’, constitutive,
and distinctive
in connectionpurely
kindsformal
ofwithconstitutive,
rela-
‘space’ and purely formal
‘spaces’, butrela-
we
them in the Deduction, character
them
and ininaccord theandDeduction,
with
role of mythe elucidations
andconcepts
in accord and with
suggestions.
‘space’ my
andelucidations
‘time’, and and suggestions.
to reinforce his appeal to
tions involved in ‘space’,tions
must‘spaces’,
involved
not space,
thereby in ‘space’,
regions
neglect the ‘spaces’,
of space, space,
nor inregions
very distinctive ‘time’,
kinds‘times’,
ofofspace, timenor in ‘time’,
constitutive, purely ‘times’,
formal timerela-
The query arises in them in query
connection
The the Deduction,
with arises
Kant’sin and in accord
connection
illustration inwith
with §26 my
of elucidations
Kant’s theillustration
ubiquitous and suggestions.
in §26 of the ubiquitous
or periods of time. Kant’s or
tionsperiods
issue about
involved of time.
inthe‘space’,
very
Kant’s concepts
issue about
‘spaces’, ‘space’,
space,theregions‘time’,
very concepts
‘spaces’
of space,and ‘space’, ‘spaces’ time
nor in ‘time’, ‘times’, and
relevance of the categoriesrelevance
to any
The ofand
query the all
categories
arises sensory
in connection to
experience
any with and of all particulars
Kant’ssensory experience
illustrationwithinin §26 of particulars
of the ubiquitous within
‘times’ concerns the most ‘times’
or basic,
periods concerns
elementary
of time. theKant’s
intension
most basic, issue(with
elementary
about the the‘s’) of intension
very these four
concepts (with con- the ‘s’)‘time’,
‘space’, of these four con-
‘spaces’ and
space and time: Perceiving spacea and
relevance house, time:
of which
the Perceiving
requiresatousing
categories house,
any the which
and category requires
all sensory ‘quantity’
using to
experience the category ‘quantity’
of particulars to
within
cepts, by which alone any cepts,sophisticated
‘times’ by which alone
concerns formal
the any
most analyses
sophisticated
basic, can be formal
elementary constructed, analyses
intension andcan
(with by
thebe‘s’)constructed,
of these four andcon-by
recognise and identify the recognise
space size,
andshapeand
time:identify
and location
Perceiving the size,a of shape
this perceived
house, and requires
which location
building. of this
using Thetheperceived
categorybuilding.
‘quantity’The to
which they can presume whichany by
cepts, they
relevance,
can alone
which presume
i.e.: referrability
anyany relevance,
in principle
sophisticated i.e.:(viareferrability
formal proper
analysesinten- incan principle (via properand
be constructed, inten-
by
category ‘quantity’, Kant category
there reiterates,
recognise ‘quantity’,
and identify pertains
Kant thethere to units
size, reiterates,
shape whichandpertains
can be to
location identified
ofunits
this which
perceived can building.
be identifiedThe
sions) to spatial or temporal sions)
whichphenomena;
to
theyspatial
can or e.g.,
temporal
presume any any realphenomena;
use of reali.e.:
relevance, e.g.,
number any realanalysis
referrability use
in of in real number
principle (via proper analysis in
inten-
solely as quanta produced solely
by as
category successive
quanta
‘quantity’, produced
addition
Kant of byutterly
there successive uniform,
reiterates, addition homogenous
pertains oftoutterly
units(if uniform,
which can homogenous
be identified (if
application to spatial orapplication
temporal
sions) phenomena.
to spatialto spatial
or temporalor Thetemporal
most phenomena.
phenomena; basic issues e.g., any of
The interest
realmost use of basic
to realissues
number of analysis
interest to in
also specious) elementssolely
also
within
specious)
as aquanta
sensory elements
intuition
produced within
by(Bsuccessive
a sensory
162, cf. B115, intuition
additionA142–3, of (utterly
B162–6/
162, cf.uniform,
B115, Ahomogenous
142–3, 162–6/ (if
Kant within this very basic, Kant circumscribed,
withintothis
application verysemantic
spatial basic,
or circumscribed,
temporaland empirical
phenomena. semantic
domain The are andmore
most empirical
basic issues domain are more
of interest to
B181–2, 202–8). 181–2,
also
B 202–8).elements within a sensory intuition (B162, cf. B115, A142–3, 162–6/
specious)
fundamental and elementary fundamental
Kant withinthan are and
this thevery
elementary
apparently than
competing
basic, circumscribed, are the (point- apparently
semantic or interval-
andcompeting
empirical(point-domain or are
interval-
more
Does such perceptual use
Does
B181–2, of 202–8).
the
suchcategory
perceptual ‘quantity’
use of obviate
the category any role ‘quantity’
for theobviatecon- any role for the con-
based) formalisations of based)
theseformalisations
fundamental domains. (For
and elementary
1
of this
these reason,
than are too,
domains. (For
these this
the1 apparently mostreason, basic too,(point-
competing these or most basic
interval-
cept ‘space’? Consider whatceptDoes
‘space’?
distinguishes
suchConsider merewhat
perceptual quanta
usedistinguishes
offromthe category mere
any others quanta
sorts offrom
‘quantity’ ho- anyany
obviate others
role sorts
for the ofcon-
ho-
points about the most points fundamental
based) about the
intensions
formalisations mostoffundamental
of
thesethe domains.
conceptsintensions
1
of
(For‘space’
of the
this andconcepts
reason, of too, of ‘space’
these mostand of
basic
mogeneity. All conceptsmogeneity.
as classifications
cept ‘space’?All concepts
Consider(sortals)
whatas aim
classifications
to identify(sortals)
distinguishes kindsquanta
mere ofaimhomoge-
to
from identify kinds sorts
any others of homoge-
of ho-
‘time’ are indifferent to points
‘time’
those are metrical
aboutindifferent
issues
the most to
whichthose distinguish
metricalintensions
fundamental issues
Euclidean which offrom
distinguish
the non- concepts Euclidean
of ‘space’ from andnon-of
neity, however general mogeneity.
neity,
or specific.
however All
Thisconcepts
general
much or asspecific.
can classifications
be said,This too, much(sortals)
of thecan aim
concepts to identify
be said, oftoo, ofkinds of homoge-
the concepts of
Euclidean geometries, or‘time’Euclidean
also ‘absolute’ geometries,
are indifferent fromto ‘relativistic’
orthose
also ‘absolute’temporal
metrical from
issues orders.)
‘relativistic’
which temporal
distinguish orders.) from non-
Euclidean
‘spaces’ and of ‘times’, neity,
‘spaces’
thoughhowever and
not ofofthe ‘times’,
concepts
general though
or ‘space’
specific. not of or the
This ‘time’
muchconcepts
themselves!
can be ‘space’
said,Peror ‘time’
too, of thethemselves!
concepts Per of
To use the category ‘quantity’To useingeometries,
Euclidean theconnection
categoryor‘quantity’
with
also spaces in connection
‘absolute’ or times
from requires with spaces
‘relativistic’ specify- or times
temporal requires specify-
orders.)
Kant’s Tr. Aesth., spaces Kant’s
are regions
‘spaces’ Tr.
andAesth.,
of within spaces
‘times’, space;
thougharetimesregions
not of arethe
within
periods space;
concepts within times
‘space’time.are periods
or ‘time’ within time.
themselves! Per
ing units of space or ofing time
To unitswhich,
use ofthespaceas homogenous
category or of‘quantity’
time which,quantities, as homogenous
in connection can bewith successively
spacesquantities,
or times canrequires
be successively
specify-
Space itself is singular, time
Spaceitself
Kant’s itself
Tr.is Aesth.,
issingular;
singular, there
spacestimeisare itself
only isonesingular;
regions ofwithin
eachthere and each
space;is only is infi-
times oneareof each
periodsandwithin
each istime.
infi-
added together (whetheradded ingbyunits
perceptual
together
of space (whether
estimation
or of time byorperceptual
by
which,formal asestimation
measures
homogenous is
or here
byquantities,
formal
in- measures is here in-
can be successively
nite or (rather) unbounded Spaceor
nite (cf.itself is singular,
(rather)
above, §3.5).
unbounded time itself
These (cf.
twoabove,is singular;
unbounded §3.5). there
These is two
onlyunbounded
singularities one
areof each and each is infi-
singularities are
different). Hence Kant’sadded different).
illustrating
togetherHencethe(whether
relevance
Kant’s by illustrating
of the category
perceptual theestimation
relevance
‘quantity’ of by
or in
theformal
§26
category ‘quantity’
measures in §26
is here in-
each more basic than, or each
‘prior
nite more
or to’,basic
(rather) anyunbounded
segments
than, or ‘prior or(cf.divisions
to’, any§3.5).
above, within
segments them:
These ortwoany
divisions
spe- withinsingularities
unbounded them: any spe- are
neither supplants nor different).
neither
obviatessupplantstheHencerole Kant’snor
of the obviates
concept
illustrating the‘space’,
role relevance
the ofnor thethe concept
ofconcept ‘space’, nor
the category the concept
‘quantity’ in §26
each
cific space is but an arbitrarily more
cific space basic
delimited
is but than,
region orwithin
an arbitrarily ‘priordelimited
to’, any
space; anysegments
region
specific or
within
timedivisions
space;
is but any within them:
specific anyisspe-
time but
‘spaces’ in designating neither
‘spaces’
the relevant in designating
supplantskind of nor(spatial)
the relevant
obviates quantity.
the kindrole(Mutatis
of
of (spatial)
themutandis, quantity.
concept the (Mutatis
‘space’, nor mutandis,
the concept the
an arbitrarily delimited cific
an
period
arbitrarily
space withinis butdelimited
time. Space period
an arbitrarily contains
withinwithin
delimited time.
regionitself
Space any
contains
within and
space; allwithin itself any
any specific timeand all
is but
‘spaces’ in designating the relevant kind of (spatial) quantity. (Mutatis mutandis, the
specific regions of space; specific
an time contains
regions
arbitrarily ofwithin
delimitedspace; itself
timeany
period contains
within and time.
allwithin
specific
Space itself
periods
any and
contains ofwithin
all specific
itself periods
any of
and all
1
Important reminders of1 Important
these basicreminderspoints regarding of thesespatial basic or pointstemporal regardingcontinuaspatialareor temporal continua are
time. These relations ofspecific
time.
containment
These regions relations
or of
inclusion
of containment
space; – formally:
time contains or
thatinclusion
space itself
within and
– formally:
time
any areandthat spaceprovided
all specific and time
periods byare
of
Arsenijević &provided
1 al. (2003–2014).
by Arsenijević Theseof & issues
al. (2003–2014).
arebasic
technical; These
they are
issuessummarised
are technical; they arecontinua
summarised
Important reminders these points regarding spatial or temporal are
each continuous, unbounded,each continuous,
time. infinitely
These dense
relationsunbounded,
ofmagnitudes
containment infinitely
(and or dense
nothing
inclusion magnitudes
else) – are(and
– formally: in that
nothing else)
spaceclearly –and
and time arenon-technically
in
are clearly
in Arsenijević
provided andbynon-technically
& Adažić
Arsenijević &(2014),
in
al. Arsenijević
§§1, 6. &
(2003–2014). ForThese
Adažić
a careful (2014),
issues account
are§§1, of6. For they
technical; a careful account of
are summarised
each continuous, unbounded, infinitely dense magnitudes (and nothingKant’s else) –treatment
are in of magnitude
Kant’s
clearlyinandtreatment
KdrV see of Sutherland
non-technicallymagnitude in(2004a,
in KdrV
Arsenijevićb). see&Sutherland
Adažić (2014), (2004a, §§1,b).6. For a careful account of
Kant’s treatment of magnitude in KdrV see Sutherland (2004a, b).
92 92 93 93
92 92 9393
same points hold regarding samethe points
concepts hold regarding
‘time’ andthe ‘times’,
concepts as in ‘time’
that period
and ‘times’,
of timeas in that period
Carnapof(1928); time it fails on Carnap
strictly (1928);
internal it fails
grounds on strictly
(Westphal internal
1989, grounds
230–2).(Westphal
Empiri- 1989, 230–2). Empiri-
same points hold
during which one perceives regarding
during the concepts
thatwhich
building onethere‘time’
perceives and
and now ‘times’,
that building as in that period
or then). there and now or then). of time Carnap (1928);
cists have been less carefulit fails on strictly
cists have
aboutbeeninternal
‘space’, grounds
lessbut careful (Westphal
about ‘space’,
the relevant 1989,
view was 230–2).
but developed Empiri-
the relevantbyview was developed by
during which
Finally, onerightly
Kant perceives that building
highlights
Finally, Kant there and
the distinctive
rightly now of
highlights
roles or our
then).
the distinctive
use of the conceptsroles of our of use of thecists have and
concepts
Descartes been less careful
of decisively Descartesaboutand
criticised ‘space’,
by decisively
Newton but (ca.
the relevantas
criticised
1684), byview
Newton
noted was by developed
(ca.
Stein1684),
(1967).by
as noted by Stein (1967).
Finally,
‘space’, Kant ‘time’
‘spaces’, rightlyand highlights
‘space’,
‘times’ intheconnection
‘spaces’, distinctive
‘time’ and roles
with‘times’
our of spatial
our
in useand
connection of the concepts
temporal
with our
forms of and temporal
spatial Descartes and decisively
forms
expressly criticised
Descartes
states an atomistic by Newton
expressly states
conception (ca.anof1684),
time as
atomistic as noted
conception
nothing bybut Stein (1967).
of time
successive as nothing but successive
‘space’,
of intuiting‘spaces’,
(forms‘time’ and
of sensory ‘times’
of intuiting in(forms
receptivity) connectionin
of our with
sensory our
capacity spatial
receptivity)
to orient and temporal
in ourselves
our forms
capacity
within Descartes
to orient ourselves
moments expressly
within
(Med. 3, AT states an atomistic
moments
7:49, (Med.I,conception
Replies 7:109,
3, AT 111,7:49, ofIIReplies
time as Inothing
, 7:164–5), , 7:109,
as does but
111,successive
Hume
II, 7:164–5),
(T as does Hume (T
of
ourintuiting (forms(Buroker
surroundings of sensory receptivity)
our surroundings
1981, Rusnock in &ourGeorge
(Buroker capacity
1981,1995, to orient
Rusnock Bernecker ourselves
& George 2012,within
1995,
KCE Bernecker moments
1.2.2.4, (Med. Hume’s
2012,1.2.3.8).
KCE 3, AT 1.2.2.4,
7:49,
concept Replies
1.2.3.8). I, Hume’s
empiricist 7:109, 111,
accounts
concept , 7:164–5),
IIof the ideasas‘space’
empiricist does and
accounts Hume (T ideas ‘space’ and ‘time’
of‘time’
the
our
§57.2).surroundings
2
These capacities(Buroker and 1981,
§57.2). roles
2
These Rusnock
are capacities & George
quiet distinct andto roles 1995,
those Bernecker
areofquiet distinct2012,
classifying particulars
to those 1.2.2.4,
KCEof classifying 1.2.3.8).internal
fail particulars
on strictly Hume’sfail concept
grounds
on strictlyempiricist
(Westphalinternal accounts
2013).
grounds of (Westphal
Descartes the ideas
problems ‘space’
2013). and
with ‘time’ problems with ‘space’
Descartes
‘space’
§57.2).
or their These
2
capacities
features, to which orandtheir roles
pertains are
features,thequiet distinctpertains
categories.
to which to those
This suffices
theof categories.
classifying
for Kant’sThis particulars
appealsuffices
to for Kant’sfail
ariseon strictly
appeal
from internal arise
to proposed
his grounds
‘strict’
from (Westphal
sense
his ofproposed 2013).
‘location’ Descartes
‘strict’
solely sense ofproblems
in terms ‘location’
of relationswith
solely ‘space’
of in
spa-
terms of relations of spa-
or their features, to
the distinctive character,the which pertains
relevance
distinctive the categories.
andcharacter,
use of therelevance This suffices
conceptsand ‘space’for
use of Kant’s
andthe‘time’ appeal
concepts to arise
in the‘space’ andtial‘time’ from his proposed
in the a view also
contiguity, ‘strict’
tial required sense
contiguity, of ‘location’
by aconcept
view also solely
empiricism.
required by in terms
Briefly,
conceptof relations
the empiricism. of
key issues are spa-
Briefly, the key issues are
the distinctive
Deduction notedcharacter, relevance
above.Deduction
Even if these and brief
noted use ofconsiderations
above. theEvenconceptsif these ‘space’
may notand
brief ‘time’hisin rea-
considerations
exhaust themay not exhaust
tial
these. contiguity,
his rea- a view also required by concept empiricism. Briefly, the key issues are
these.
Deduction
sons for this noted above.sons
distinctive Even
status forofif this
these
these brief
distinctive considerations
concepts, status
theyofsufficethesemaytoconcepts,
not exhaust
support theyhissuffice
Kant’s rea-
ac- to support these.
AKant’s ac-
fundamental problemAisfundamental
that reducingproblem spatial relations
is that reducing
to no more spatialthan relations
sets ofto no more than sets of
sons for this distinctive
count of ‘absolute’ space status
count (or of of these
likewise
‘absolute’ concepts,
time)space in terms they suffice
(or likewise
of arbitrarilyto support
time) in large Kant’s
termsreferenceac-
of arbitrarily large A fundamental
reference
contiguity problem
relations is insufficient is
contiguity tothat reducing
relations
specifyismerelyspatial relations
insufficient
kinematically to no
to specify more
anymerely than
trajectory, sets of
kinematically
whe- any trajectory, whe-
count
frames of(Carrier
‘absolute’
1992). space(All(orthelikewise
frames issues time)
(Carrier 1992).in(All
discussed terms the of
herein issues
arearbitrarily
independent
discussed largeherein
reference
of issuesare independentcontiguity
of issues
ther orbital, relations
or resulting is insufficient
ther
fromorbital,
impacttoor specify
orresulting merely
percussion. from kinematically
Newton
impact or detailedany trajectory,
percussion.
this problem
Newton whe-indetailed this problem in
frames (Carrier 1992).spaces;
about non-Euclidean (All the
about Kant’s issues
non-Euclidean discussed
specific view herein
spaces; about
Kant’s are specific
independent
Euclidean space
view about=ofhuman
issues
Euclidean spacether orbital,
= human
‘De Gravitatione or resulting
…’ (ca. 1684),from
‘De impact
Gravitatione
criticising or…’ percussion.
Descartes’
(ca. 1684), Newton
account ofdetailed
criticising ‘space’
Descartes’this problem
in termsaccount inof ‘space’ in terms solely
solely
about
space =non-Euclidean
nature’s spacespaces; space =Kant’s
requires his
nature’s specific
space view
transcendental requires about
idealism.)his Euclidean
transcendental spaceidealism.)
= human ‘De GravitationeThough
of contiguity. …’ (ca. 1684),
of criticisingThough
thiscontiguity.
manuscript Descartes’
was first account
thispublished
manuscript ofonly
‘space’ in terms
wasrecently
first publishedsolely only recently (Newton
(Newton
space
4.2
4.2 =Thenature’s
stickingspace
pointrequires
4.2 for manyhis
The transcendental
sticking
readers will
point be idealism.)
for
the many
empiricism
readers about
will bemeaning
the empiricism
(ap- about of contiguity.
meaning
1962, (ap-
90–156), Though
the this
problems
1962, manuscript
with
90–156),equating
the was first
problems
space published
with with
contiguity only
equating recently
relations
space with(Newton
have contiguity
been relations have been
4.2 The sticking point
parently) embedded in first-order for many
parently) embedded readers will
predicate calculus, be the
in first-order empiricism
where predicate about
the mostcalculus, meaning
basic terms (ap-
wherearethe most basic 1962,
thereterms 90–156),are
in Descartes’ the problems
Principles with equating
there ofinPhilosophy
Descartes’(1644), space
Principles with
where contiguity
of Philosophy
sufficient(1644),relations
difficulties have
where been
in sufficient
treat- difficulties in treat-
parently)
names of embedded
individualsinorfirst-order
names
of monadic predicate
of individualspredicates calculus,
or designating
of monadicwhere non-relational
the most basic
predicates terms are
designating
properties, there
non-relational in Descartes’
ing properties,
space solely in terms Principles of Philosophy
ingofspace
contiguity in(1644),
solelyrelations termscan where sufficient
of contiguity
be brought difficulties
relations
out easily
canenough
bein brought
treat-
on out easily enough on
names of individuals
which inevitably orwhich
suggests ofthatmonadic
inevitably predicates
our concepts suggests designating
‘space’ thatorour non-relational
‘time’
conceptsmust be ‘space’ properties,
defined, ac- must being
or ‘time’ space
thedefined,
basis of solely in termsthe
ac-Descartes’ ofbasis
own contiguity
purported relations
of Descartes’physics,own can
which be brought
purported out
equates physics,
space easily
and enough
whichmatter on
equates
or space and matter or
which
quired or inevitably
constructedsuggests
byquiredthatorour
logical concepts by
conjunctions
constructed ‘space’
of terms
logical orindicating
‘time’ must
conjunctions be
particular defined,
of terms spaces ac-
indicating
or the
particular
body, basis
spaces oforDescartes’
without appeal tobody, own
Newton’s purported
without physics; physics,
appeal indeed, which
to Newton’s
Newton’s equates
physics;
(2007,space
indeed,and Newton’s
14–21) matter
criticisms or(2007, 14–21) criticisms
quired or constructed
times, exactly as Humebytimes, logical
proposed, conjunctions
exactly thoughas Hume ofproposed,
without terms indicating
contemporary though logicalparticular
withoutsyntax. spaces
contemporary
Thisor logicalbody,
ofsyntax. without
Descartes’ appeal toof
Thistreatment Newton’s
ofDescartes’
space are physics;
basedindeed,
treatment of Newton’s
directly space
uponare (2007,
Descartes’ 14–21)
based directly views,criticisms
upon
cited Descartes’
by views, cited by
times, exactly as Hume
point challenges Kant’spointproposed, thatthough
claimchallenges theseKant’swithout
two concepts
claimcontemporary
that
are these
and must logical
two be syntax.
concepts This
a priori,are be-and must be of aDescartes’
Newton. priori,The treatment
be- quite generalof space
Newton. are quite
significance
The based directlysignificance
of Newton’s
general upon Descartes’
criticisms views, cited
of Descartes’
Newton’s view by
criticisms
of of Descartes’ view of
point space
cause challenges Kant’s
and time claim
arecause
each space that and
unbounded thesetime two
wholes
areconcepts
each
which are
are and
unbounded moremust basicbethan
wholes a priori,
whichanyare be-more basicNewton.
spe- than any
space andThe spe- quite was
location general
space significance
highlightedand location
by Stein of was
Newton’s
(1967, criticisms
highlighted
184–7), by of
andStein
notedDescartes’
(1967,
(with184–7), view of
reference and noted (with reference
cause space and time
cious ‘parts’ or regions within are each unbounded
cious ‘parts’
them (or A23, wholes
30, 144,
regions withinwhich
182–3/ them are
B38, more
(A23,46, 30, basic
183,144, than
225–6). any spe-
182–3/B38, 46, 183, 225–6). space and location
to Stein) by Laymon (1978, was highlighted
to Stein)
412–3). by
by Stein Stein
Laymon (1967,
is succinct: 184–7), and noted
(1978, 412–3). Stein is succinct: (with reference
ciousThe‘parts’
mostorcareful
regionsattempt
within Thethem tomost (A23,
account 30,for144,
careful 182–3/
‘time’
attempt on 38, 46,
to Bsuch
account an183,for 225–6).
empiricist
‘time’ on basissuch to Stein)
is an empiricist by Laymon
basis is (1978, 412–3). Stein is succinct:
What Newton points outWhat in theNewton
passagepoints I haveout quotedin theis the
passage
needIfor have what
quoted
I called,
is the need for what I called,
The most careful attempt to account for ‘time’ on such an empiricist basis is in yesterday’s
2
There is much merit in the 2
Therepositive
is much viewmerit
developed
in the by positive
Rukgaber view(2009),
developed but his positive (2009), but What
by Rukgaber Newton points out in the passage I have quoted is the need for what I called, one to discuss trajecto-
his positive lecture, a “kinematical
in yesterday’s connection,”
lecture, a “kinematical
to allow one connection,”
to discuss trajecto-
to allow
2proposal and his opening proposal
There is much merit in the critical comments
positiveandview his opening
on my critical
developed own bywork comments
Rukgaber (and upon on my
(2009), Longunesse’s)
own
but hiswork (and ries,
are upon Longunesse’s)
positive velocities,
in yesterday’s and so aforth.
are lecture, ries,The velocities,
“kinematical point of
andcentral
connection,” so forth.philosophical
to The
allowpoint
one interest
of discuss
to centralis that
philosophical
such
trajecto- interest is that such
misguidedand
proposal because he ignores
his opening misguided
criticalquite because
standardon
comments he
distinctions
ignores
my own quite regarding
work standard
(and upon aspects
distinctions
of Kant’s
Longunesse’s) regarding
views a “connection”
ries,
are aspects of Kant’s velocities,
views and is indeed arequired
so forth. “connection”
The pointfor the ofisformulation
indeedphilosophical
central required
of theforprinciples
the formulation
interest of mechan-
is that of the principles of mechan-
such
of space and
misguided of time
because he (ignores
KTPR 19+n.9,
of space quiteand 121),
standard about
of time which19+n.9,
(KTPR
distinctions I regarding
follow 121), Patonabout
aspects(1936,
which 1:101ff.)
of Kant’sI follow aics,
andPaton (1936, 1:101ff.)
views and andthat it cannot—as
“connection” is indeedics, Newtonand that
required quite
for itthe cannot—as
clearly indicates—be
formulation Newtonof thequite
definedclearly
principles in terms
ofindicates—be
simply of defined in terms simply of
mechan-
Allison
of space(1983,
and of6–7,
time96–7), Allison
(KTPR and19+n.9,
also(1983,
the121),quite
6–7,about
specific
96–7), and
whichkindalso
Ioffollow
‘sensationism’
the quite Paton specificI ascribe
(1936, kind of
to‘sensationism’
1:101ff.) Kant,
and I ascribe
ics, to
andKant,
the spatial relations
that of bodies. the
it cannot—as (Stein,
spatial
Newton 1967,
relations
187/1970,
quite of bodies.
clearly 271)
(Stein, 1967,defined
indicates—be 187/1970,
in terms271)simply of
expressly following George expressly
(1981, following 13, 44),
Georgeexpressly
(1981, distinct
Allison (1983, 6–7, 96–7), and also the quite specific kind of ‘sensationism’ I ascribe to Kant,
KTPR KTPR 13,
to 44),
Condillac’s.
expressly By distinct
sheer to Condillac’s. By
the spatialsheer
relations of bodies. (Stein, 1967, 187/1970, 271)
negligence, RukgaberGeorge
expressly following ascribes
negligence,
to meKTPR
(1981, Rukgaber
the 13,very44),sensationism
ascribes
expressly to me developed
the very
distinct bysensationism
CondillacBy
to Condillac’s. which
developed
sheerI Note that
by Condillac whichSteinI speaks of Notea kinematical
that Steinconnection;
speaks of a kinematicskinematical is connection;
one branchkinematics of New- is one branch of New-
take pains to
negligence, distinguish
Rukgaber take
and to
ascribes pains
setme aside!
to
thedistinguish
Everything
very and
sensationismRukgaber
set developed
aside! ascribes
Everything
bytoCondillac
theRukgaber
(purported)
whichascribes
I Note
ton’s
to the that
(purported)Stein speaks
mechanics, of
the other a kinematical
ton’s ismechanics,
dynamics, connection;
the
though kinematics
otherthe is causal
dynamics, is one
explanations branch
though the ofcausal
New- explanations dynamics
dynamics
‘ontology’
take pains of to space and time
distinguish ‘ontology’
and issetcaptured of space
aside! by andmy account
Everything time is captured
Rukgaber of the formal
ascribesby my tostructures
account of
of the
the (purported) ton’s
our formal structures
provides mechanics,
ofofour
kinematicalthe other
provides
phenomenais dynamics,
of kinematical
(motions though the causal
ofphenomena
bodies) is not explanations
(motions
required, of nor dynamics
bodies)is appeal
is not required, nor is appeal
spatial and of
‘ontology’ temporal
space and forms spatial
timeof intuiting
is and
capturedtemporal
= forms
by forms
my of account
sensory
of intuiting
receptivity.
of the= formal
forms Hisof ‘ontological’
sensory receptivity.
structures ofcon-
our His ‘ontological’
provides ofcon-
kinematical
to it made, by Newton’stocriticisms phenomena
it made, of (motions
by Descartes’ of
Newton’s criticisms bodies)
conception is not
ofof required,
Descartes’
space solely nor is
conception appeal
as conti-of space solely as conti-
siderations
spatial do not suffice
and temporal formssiderations
toofjustify,
intuiting nor
do=not even
formssuffice
preciselyto justify,
of sensory to state, norKant’s
receptivity. evenHis distinctive
precisely totranscen-
‘ontological’ state,
con- Kant’s distinctive
to transcen-
it made, by Newton’sguity criticisms of Descartes’ conception of space solely as conti-
guity relations. relations.
dental idealism.
siderations do notRegrettably,
sufficedental these idealism.
to justify, blunders
nor even Regrettably,
indicate
precisely what
these areblunders
to state, now
Kant’s common
indicate failures
distinctivewhattranscen-
areof now
in- common failures of in-
guity relations.relations do Contiguity
Contiguity not sufficerelations
to specifydoany notpath suffice
of motion
to specify of any
any one pathpar-of motion of any one par-
struction,
dental supervision
idealism. andstruction,
Regrettably, refereeing supervision
these blunders withinindicate
theand field.
refereeing
what They are are within
now uncorrected
the field.
common in They
failuresRukgaber
ofare
in- uncorrected in Rukgaber
(2020), 226.supervision and(2020),
struction, 226. within the field. They are uncorrected in Rukgaber
refereeing Contiguity
ticular within relations
any arraydo or not
ticular suffice
fieldwithin to specify
of particulars,
any array iforanythese path
field ofofparticulars,
latter, motion
too, may ofifor
any
these
doone par- too, may or do move.
move.
latter,
(2020), 226. ticular within any array or field of particulars, if these latter, too, may or do move.
94 94 95 95
94
94 95 95
Whether the particulars Whether in question theare particulars
physical inobjects,
question tropes
are physical
or senseobjects,data is irrele-
tropes or senseofdata reference)
is irrele-in terms ofoftheir
reference)
being carried
in termsbyofvortices their beingin the carried
subtlebymatter vortices thatinfills
the subtle matter that fills
Whether the particulars in question are physical objects, tropes or sense data is irrele- of reference) in terms of their being carried by vortices in the subtle matter that fills
vant to the basic problem vantoftospecifying
the basic the problem
origin,ofterminus
specifying andthe intervening
origin, terminus path ofand interveningthe universe.
path ofThis generates the universe.
a problem. ThisGiven
generates
Descartes’s
a problem.strictGivendefinition Descartes’s
of motion strict definition of motion
vant to the basic problem of specifying the origin, terminus and intervening path of the universe. This generates a problem. Given Descartes’s strict definition of motion
any mobile particular, if any spacemobile
= contiguity
particular, relations
if space(only).
= contiguity relations (only). as motion with respectastomotion contiguouswith bodies,
respect this to contiguous
entails thatbodies, the planets,
this entails
strictlythat the planets, strictly
any mobile particular, if space = contiguity relations (only). as motion with respect to contiguous bodies, this entails that the planets, strictly
Descartes realised that aDescartes
body might realised
have that many a body
different
might motions,
have many dependingdifferent on motions, speaking,
dependingdoonnot move! speaking, They are do stationary
not move! withThey respectare to
stationary
the contiguouswith respect bodies toof the contiguous bodies of
Descartes realised that a body might have many different motions, depending on speaking, do not move! They are stationary with respect to the contiguous bodies of
various points of comparison pointsII.31);
various (Prin. he discusses
of comparison the IIman
(Prin. .31);walking
he discusses on a ship the man walking subtle onmatter
a shipof the vortex subtlewhich
matter– what?
of the–vortex
transports which them
– what?
around – transports
their orbits. them
No-around their orbits. No-
various points of comparison (Prin. II.31); he discusses the man walking on a ship subtle matter of the vortex which – what? – transports them around their orbits. No-
which moves with respect whichto shore
moves(Prin. .24). Accordingly,
withIIrespect to shore (Prin. Descartes
II.24). Accordingly,
distinguished Descartestice distinguished
that Descartes doestice andthat
mustDescartes
be able to doesmake andthis mustlastbestatement,
able to make that this
the planets
last statement, that the planets
which moves with respect to shore (Prin. II.24). Accordingly, Descartes distinguished tice that Descartes does and must be able to make this last statement, that the planets
a strict sense of ‘motion’a from strict the
sense ordinary
of ‘motion’
sensefrom of motion:
the ordinary sense of motion: move in their orbits, and movethatinthey
theirmoveorbits,
withand respect
that they
to the move fixedwith starsrespect
(Prin. toIII.26–
the fixed stars (Prin. III.26–
a strict sense of ‘motion’ from the ordinary sense of motion: move in their orbits, and that they move with respect to the fixed stars (Prin. III.26–
29, cf. 140). However, neither 29, cf. 140).
of theseHowever,
statements neither can ofbethese
madestatements
using Descartes’ can be offi-
made using Descartes’ offi-
Motion, in the ordinary Motion,sense of in thetheterm,
ordinary
is simplysensetheofaction
the term,by which
is simply a body the action by which a body 29, cf. 140). However, neither of these statements can be made using Descartes’ offi-
Motion, in the ordinary sense of the term, is simply the action by which cial,fora‘strict’
body sense of motion; cial, ‘strict’
they sense
requireofthe motion;
ordinary theysense
require of motion
the ordinary Descartessense of motion Descartes
travels from one place travels to another. fromBy one‘motion’,
place toI another.
mean local By motion;
‘motion’,for I mean
my local motion; my cial, ‘strict’ sense of motion; they require the ordinary sense of motion Descartes
travels from one place to another. By ‘motion’, I mean local motion; eschews.for myTo have an astronomical
eschews. To theory
have anat astronomical
all requires a theory
sense of
at all
motionrequireswhicha sense of motion which
thought encompasses nothought other kind,encompasses
and hence no Iother
do not kind,thinkandthathence any Iotherdo not think that any other eschews. To have an astronomical theory at all requires a sense of motion which
thought encompasses no other kind, and hence I do not think thatDescartes any othersought to replace Descarteswith sought
his technical,
to replacestrictwithsensehis of
technical,
the term strict
(contiguity
sense of the term (contiguity
kind should be imaginedkind to exist
shouldin nature.
be imagined(Prin. IIto.24, CSM
exist 1:233) (Prin. II.24, CSM 1:233)
in nature. Descartes sought to replace with his technical, strict sense of the term (contiguity
kind should be imagined to exist in nature. (Prin. II.24, CSM 1:233)
relations). Descartes’ focus relations).
upon Descartes’
motions only focus withupon respect
motions to contiguous
only with bodies respect to contiguous bodies
If … we consider what motion If … we oughtconsider
to mean what …motion
we may oughtsay tothatmean
it is … the wetransfer
may say that it is the transfer relations). Descartes’ focus upon motions only with respect to contiguous bodies
If … we consider what motion ought to mean … we may say that it ismakes the transfer
most natural phenomena
makes mostliterally
natural incomprehensible,
phenomena literally
indeed, incomprehensible,
indescribable, un-indeed, indescribable, un-
of one piece of matter, or oneofbody,
one piece
from of thematter,
vicinityorofonethe body,
other from
bodiesthewhich
vicinity
are ofintheimmediate
other bodies which are in immediate makes most natural phenomena literally incomprehensible, indeed, indescribable, un-
of one piece of matter, or one body, from the vicinity of the other bodies which are in immediate
specifiable
contact with it, and which are contact
regarded
withasit,being
and which
at rest,areto regarded
the vicinity
as of
being
otherat bodies.
rest, to (Prin.
the vicinity of other bodies. (Prin. (Newton 1962, specifiable
92–5, 125–7/2007,
(Newton 1962, 15–8)! 92–5,As 125–7/2007,
Newton (1962, 15–8)!97–8, As129–
Newton (1962, 97–8, 129–
contact with it, and which are regarded as being at rest, to the vicinity of other bodies. 31/2007, (Prin.19–20) points specifiable
31/2007,
(Newton 1962, 92–5, 125–7/2007, 15–8)! As Newton (1962, 97–8, 129–
out (inter 19–20)
alia): If points
spatial out locations
(inter alia):
and changes
If spatialoflocations
spatial loca-
and changes of spatial loca-
II.25; CSM 1:233) II.25; CSM 1:233)
II.25; CSM 1:233) 31/2007, 19–20) points out (inter alia): If spatial locations and changes of spatial loca-
tion are specified solely by tionreference
are specifiedto spatially
solely bycontiguous
reference particulars,
to spatially at contiguous
the end of particulars, at the end of
Motion in the strict sense Motion
is to be in the
referred
strictsolely
sense to is to
thebe bodies
referred whichsolelyaretocontiguous
the bodies which are contiguous tion are specified solely by reference to spatially contiguous particulars, at the end of
Motion in the strict sense is to be referred solely to the bodies which are most contiguous
trajectories – specifically:
most trajectories
any motions – specifically:
involving more any motions
than a few involving
sequences moreofthan a few sequences of
with the body in motionwith (Prin. .28), and
theIIbody is to be(Prin.
in motion referred
II.28),only
andtoisthoseto becontiguous
referred only to those contiguous most trajectories – specifically: any motions involving more than a few sequences of
with the body in motion (Prin. II.28), and is to be referred only to those spatialcontiguous
continuity relations spatial
– thecontinuity
beginningrelations
point literally
– the beginning
no longer point exists!literally
3
no longer exists!33
bodies which are regarded bodiesas being
whichatare (Prin. II.29).
restregarded The atreasons
as being for this
rest (Prin. II.29). account
The reasons for this account spatial continuity relations – the beginning point literally no longer exists!
bodies which are regarded as being at rest (Prin. II.29). The reasons for this account
Phenomenalisms (e.g., Mach
Phenomenalisms
1922) and trope (e.g., Machtheories 1922)(e.g.,andWilliams
trope 1953),
theoriestoo, (e.g., Williams 1953), too,
lie in the difficulty of comprehending
lie in the difficulty all theof motions
comprehendingof a body, all the
andmotions
in the traditionof a body, and in the tradition Phenomenalisms (e.g., Mach 1922) and trope theories (e.g., Williams 1953), too,
lie in the difficulty of comprehending all the motions of a body, and inmust the tradition
(re-)construct space must and(re-)construct
all, even local spacemid-scale,
and all,spatial
even local phenomenamid-scale, on spatial
the phenomena on the
of viewing the earth as atofrest: viewing the earth as at rest: must (re-)construct space and all, even local mid-scale, spatial phenomena on the
of viewing the earth as at rest: basis of nothing but motions basis ofspecified
nothingby butreference
motionssolely specifiedto contiguous
by reference particulars.
solely to contiguous particulars.
basis of nothing but motions specified by reference solely to contiguous particulars.
Now all the motions willNow reallyallexist
the motions
in the wheels will really
of theexistwatchin the
[which
wheels is inofthe the watch [which is in the
Whether these particulars Whether
be physical
theseobjects,
particulars sense bedata
physical
or tropes
objects, is irrelevant
sense datatoorthis tropes is irrelevant to this
Now all the motions will really exist in the wheels of the watch [which is in the Whether these particulars be physical objects, sense data or tropes is irrelevant to this
pocket of the man walking pocket
on the of theship,manetc.],walking
but it isonnot theeasy
ship, to etc.],
havebut an itunder-
is not easy to haveproblem.
an under-Neither phenomenalisms problem. Neither
nor trope
phenomenalisms
theories can re-construct
nor trope theories
physical cankine-
re-construct physical kine-
pocket of the man walking on the ship, etc.], but it is not easy to have an under- problem. Neither phenomenalisms nor trope theories can re-construct physical kine-
standing of so many motions standing all of
at once,
so many normotions
can we have all at knowledge
once, nor can of allweofhave knowledge of
matics, all of
standing of so many motions all at once, nor can we have knowledge of allthe of minimal typematics,
of physical
the minimal
theory admitted
type of physical
by empiricism.
theory admitted by empiricism.
matics, the minimal type of physical theory admitted by empiricism.
them. So it is enough to them. confine Soour it isattention
enough to toconfine
that singleourmotion
attention which to thatis thesingle motion which is the the insufficiency
Regarding Regarding
of totalthestateinsufficiency
descriptions of specified
total stateonly descriptions
by local con- specified only by local con-
them. So it is enough to confine our attention to that single motion which is the Regarding the insufficiency of total state descriptions specified only by local con-
proper motion of each body. proper (Prin.
motionII.31,ofCSM each1:236)
body. (Prin. II.31, CSM 1:236)
proper motion of each body. (Prin. II.31, CSM 1:236) tiguity coördinates to specify tiguity anycoördinates
kinematical to connections,
specify any kinematical
and commenting connections, directlyand commenting directly
tiguity coördinates to specify any kinematical connections, and commenting directly
… if we wished to characterize … if wemotion wishedstrictly
to characterize
in terms motion
of its own strictly
nature, in terms
with- of its own nature,upon with-with-
the passage quotedupon above,theStein
passage notes:
quoted above, Stein notes:
… if we wished to characterize motion strictly in terms of its own nature, upon the passage quoted above, Stein notes:
out reference to anything outelse,
reference
then intotheanythingcase of else,
two then
contiguous
in the bodies
case of being two contiguous bodies being
out reference to anything else, then in the case of two contiguous bodies ForbeingNewtonian space-time ForasNewtonian
I have presentedspace-time it, this
as Iishave
just thepresented
remarkit,that thisthe
is just the remark that the
transferred in opposite directions,
transferredand in opposite
thus separated,directions,we should
and thussayseparated,
that therewe should say that there
transferred in opposite directions, and thus separated, we should say that there upon time andFor
mapping the
Newtonian space-time as I have presented it, this is just the remark that the
mapping Euclidean
upon time
metric and onthe each
Euclidean
instantaneous metric on
slice each
of instantaneous slice of
was just as much motionwas in just
the oneas muchbodymotionas in the in other.
the one Butbodythisaswould in theclash other. But this would clash mapping upon time and the Euclidean metric on each instantaneous slice of
was just as much motion in the one body as in the other. But this would clash do not determine
space-time space-time
a unique
do not
four-dimensional
determine a unique
affine four-dimensional
structure. (Stein affine structure. (Stein
too much with our ordinary too much
way ofwith speaking.
our ordinary
For we way are used
of speaking.
to standing For on we the are used to standing on the space-time do not determine a unique four-dimensional affine structure. (Stein
too much with our ordinary way of speaking. For we are used to standing1967, on the 187/1970, 271) 1967, 187/1970, 271)
earth and regarding it as earth at rest;and soregarding
although itweasmay at rest;
see sosomealthough
of its parts,
we may which
see some of its parts, which 1967, 187/1970, 271)
earth and regarding it as at rest; so although we may see some of its parts, which
are contiguous with other aresmaller
contiguous bodies, with beingothertransferred
smaller bodies,
out of being
their vicinity,
transferred out of their vicinity,
Putvicinity,
otherwise, the temporal Put otherwise,
and spatialthespecification
temporal and of spatial
each occurrence,
specification forming
of each a occurrence, forming a
are contiguous with other smaller bodies, being transferred out of their Put otherwise, the temporal and spatial specification of each occurrence, forming a
we do not for that reason wethink
do not of the
for earth
that reasonitself asthink
in motion.
of the earth II.29,as
(Prin.itself CSMin motion. (Prin. II.29, description
CSM
we do not for that reason think of the earth itself as in motion. (Prin. state II.29, CSM of the state
worlddescription
at each time, of the
andworldso foratalleach momentstime, and of time,
so forsolely
state description of the world at each time, and so for all moments of time, solely by
all moments
by of time, solely by
1:29) 1:29)
1:29)
According to Descartes,According true motions to Descartes,
can only be trueidentified
motions or canspecified
only beasidentified motion or specified as motion
Indeed, even this may be33 Indeed,
too generous:
even thisIf the
may initial
be toopointgenerous:
of departureIf the =initial
the specific
point ofset departure
of = the specific set of
According to Descartes, true motions can only be identified or specified 3
as motion Indeed, even this may be too generous: If the initial point of departure = the specific set of
with respect to contiguous withbodies.
respectDescartes
to contiguous explainedbodies.motions
Descartes of the explained
planets motions
with of thecontiguity
planets with relations any onecontiguity
particularrelations
has to any those oneimmediately
particular has surrounding
to those immediately
it, as soon assurrounding it, as soon as
with respect to contiguous bodies. Descartes explained motions of the planets with contiguity relations any one particular has to those immediately surrounding it, as soon as
respect to the fixed starsrespect(he carefully
to the fixedpickedstars neither
(he carefully
the Earthpicked nor the neither
Sun as thepoints
Earth nor the Sunparticularas points
respect to the fixed stars (he carefully picked neither the Earth nor thethat Sun as pointsdeparts for that otherparticular
neighbours,departs
that for
firstother
set ofneighbours,
contiguity relations
that first setvanishes.
of contiguity relations vanishes.
that particular departs for other neighbours, that first set of contiguity relations vanishes.
96 96 97 97
96 97
96 97
contiguity relations, constrains
contiguity
contiguity butrelations,
relations,
cannot specify constrains
constrainsthe 4-D butaffine
but cannot
cannot structure
specify the
specify the
required
4-D affine
4-D affine
to structure
structure required
5 required
M ODALITY to IN SENSORY
to 555  M MEODALITY
odality
ODALITY
XPERIENCE in SS
IN
IN S& PERCEPTUAL
ensory
ENSORY
ENSORY EEXPERIENCE
E XPERIENCEJUDGMENT
xperience
&&& P
PPERCEPTUAL
, IN BRIEF JJUDGMENT
erceptual
ERCEPTUAL Judgment
UDGMENT ,, IN
IN,BBRIEF
in Brief
RIEF
identify and to describeidentify
identify
any motion and to
and to
(kinematics)
describe any
describe any
– dynamic
motion (kinematics)
motion (kinematics)
explanation quite –– dynamic
dynamicaside.explanation
explanation quite quite aside.
aside.
Whether what occurs at,Whether
Whether
or occupies, what each
occurs coördinate
at, or occupies,
point ineach
space coördinate
at any
what occurs at, or occupies, each coördinate point in space at any one the one point
time in space at§3any one
noted timeempiricist psychological
time §3 noted
§3 noted the the empiricist
empiricist
modalitiespsychological
psychological
of customarymodalitiesmodalities
conjunction of and
of customary
habit- conjunction
customary conjunction and and habit-
habit-
is a physical object, a trope
is a physical
or a sense object,
datum a trope
is altogether
or a sense
an independent
datum
is a physical object, a trope or a sense datum is altogether an independent is altogether
issue; this
an independent issue;
ual belief,
issue; and this
this how Kantual ualcontrasts
belief, and
belief, and
to them
how Kant
how Kant
the distinctive
contrasts cognitive
contrasts to them
to them the the
(‘epistemic’)
distinctivemo-
distinctive cognitive (‘epistemic’)
cognitive (‘epistemic’) mo- mo-
problem with the very concept
problem ofwithspace,the its
very
intesion,
concept hold
of space,
independently
its intesion,
problem with the very concept of space, its intesion, hold independently of any pre- of any
hold pre-
independently of
dality any
involvedpre- in distinguishing
dality involved
between in the
distinguishing
tentative ‘this
between
stone the
seems
dality involved in distinguishing between the tentative ‘this stone seems to me warm’ tentative
to me ‘this
warm’ stone seems to me warm’
ferred examples (ontology) ferred
ferredof examples
spatial
examples particulars.
(ontology)
(ontology) Complete,
of spatial
of spatialmomentary
particulars.state
particulars. Complete,
Complete, descrip- momentaryand
momentary state
statethe descrip-
assertoric ‘this and
descrip- anda the
IS the assertoric
warm assertoric
stone’, and ‘thishow
‘this IS aa such
IS warmcognitive
warm stone’, and
stone’, and
modalities
how such
how such arecognitive
cognitive
dis- modalities are
modalities are dis-
dis-
tions of the universe intions
tions
termsof ofofthe
thenothing
universe but in tropes
terms and
of nothing
their spatial
but tropes
and
universe in terms of nothing but tropes and their spatial and temporal temporal
and their spatial and
tinct temporal
to, yet parasitic upon
tinct identifiable
to, yet parasitic
causal upon
modalitiesidentifiable
constitutivecausal
tinct to, yet parasitic upon identifiable causal modalities constitutive of perceptible of
modalities
perceptible constitutive of perceptible
contiguities are insufficient
contiguities
for kinematics,
contiguities are insufficient
are insufficient
whetherfor for
astronomical,
kinematics, or
kinematics, whether
tossingastronomical,
whether astronomical,
a wad or particulars
or tossing aa wad
tossing wad
(above, §§3.1, particulars
3.7, 3.14.(above,
particulars (above,
3.15). This §§3.1,pair
§§3.1, 3.7,of3.14.
3.7, 3.14.
contrasts
3.15). is
3.15). This
Thiscentral
pair both
pair of contrasts
of contrasts
to is central
is central both
both to to
into a bin. The trope theorist’s
into aa bin.
into bin.
ideal The
The description
trope theorist’s
trope theorist’s
of the ideal
ideal
universe description
cannot of
description account
of the the universe
universe
for cannot
cannot account
Kant’s
account for
Deduction
for of theKant’s
Kant’s
Categories Deduction
Deductionand toof of
histhe
thedemonstration
Categories and
Categories andin to to
thehis
his
‘Analytic
demonstration
demonstrationof Prin- in in the
the ‘Analytic
‘Analytic of of Prin-
Prin-
(very) elementary kinematics;
(very) Williams
elementary was kinematics;
mistaken to
Williams
claim that
was tropes
mistaken
(very) elementary kinematics; Williams was mistaken to claim that tropes and the re- and totheclaim
re- that tropes and
ciples’ the
that re-
we can only ciples’
perceptuallythat we identify
can onlyparticulars
perceptually which identify
unto
ciples’ that we can only perceptually identify particulars which unto themselves havethemselves
particulars have
which unto themselves have
lations of contiguity andlations
lations
qualitative
of contiguity
similarity and suffice,
qualitative
even in
similarity
principle,
of contiguity and qualitative similarity suffice, even in principle, suffice,
to ‘account’
even in principle, to ‘account’
sufficient
to ‘account’ causal integritysufficient
sufficient
to be discriminated
causal integrity
causal integrityfromto toourbe discriminated
be various
discriminated sensory from
fromexperiences
our various
our various of sensory
sensory experiences
experiences of of
for the world we occupy for andthe experience.
world we occupy
(These and
same experience.
limits also (These
for the world we occupy and experience. (These same limits also hold of Carnap’shold of sameCarnap’slimits also hold of
them, Carnap’s
or discriminated within
them, or
and discriminated
through their within
various and sensory
through appearances
them, or discriminated within and through their various sensory appearances to us, their various to sensory
us, appearances to us,
Aufbau, although these Aufbau,
problems
Aufbau, although
although
can onlythese these
be specified
problemsprecisely
problems can only
can onlywithin
be specified
be specified
the terms precisely
of
precisely withinonthe
within theany terms
occasion
terms of in which
of on we
on anysense,
any occasion
occasion circumscribe,
in which
in which we we
localise
sense,and
sense, circumscribe,
identify it (or
circumscribe, localise
them),
localise and identify
and identify itit (or(or them),
them),
the Aufbau with respect the toAufbau
the Aufbau
time, withwith
because respect
respect his to to
rudiments
time, because
time, because
for specifying
his rudiments
his rudiments
spatial for for specifying
specifying
during the spatial
period of time
spatial during
duringand the the
withinperiod
periodthe of of
surrounding
time and
time and within
within
contextthe thewithin
surrounding
which we
surrounding context
per- within
context within which
which we we per-
per-
positions and relations arepositions
so very andsketchy.)
relations As are
the sofundamental
very sketchy.) resources
As
positions and relations are so very sketchy.) As the fundamental resources and strat- the and
fundamental
strat- resources
ceive and
it (orstrat-
them). This Kant
ceive demonstrates
it (or them). This
by examining
Kant demonstrates
the most general
by
ceive it (or them). This Kant demonstrates by examining the most general conditions examining
conditions the most general conditions
egies of trope theory remain
egies unchanged
egies of trope
of trope theory
theory
(otherwise
remainthey
remain unchanged
would not
unchanged (otherwise
be tropethey
(otherwise they
theories),
would not
would not bebe trope
trope theories),
particulars
theories), must satisfy particulars
particulars
if we are atmust must
all tosatisfy
satisfy
be able ifif we
we
to identify
are at
are at all
allthem,
to be
to bebyable
able
distinguishing
to identify
to identify them, them, by by distinguishing
distinguishing
subsequent versions faresubsequent
subsequent
no better than versions Williams’.
fare noThisbetteris yet
than another
Williams’.indication
This
versions fare no better than Williams’. This is yet another indication that isthat
yet another indication
them from that
one another, them
from from
ourselvesone another,
and from from
our sensory
ourselves experiencing
them from one another, from ourselves and from our sensory experiencing of and from ourof sensory
them. experiencing of them.
them.
(putative) ‘simplicity’ is (putative)
(putative)
neither a constraint
‘simplicity’ nor
is neither
an initiala constraint
premiss; itnor
is only
an initial
‘simplicity’ is neither a constraint nor an initial premiss; it is only a princi-a princi-premiss; it is only
The a princi-
contrast between Hume’s
The contrast
customary,between merely Hume’s psychological
customary,
The contrast between Hume’s customary, merely psychological modalities and modalities
merely psychological
and modalities and
ple of choice between two ple of
ple of
otherwise
choice between
choice between
equally adequate two otherwise
two otherwise
explanationsequally–adequate
equally adequate
a rare circum- explanations –– aany
explanations a rare
rareactual
circum-
circum- human perception any actual
any actualof spatio-temporal
human perception
human perception particulars
of spatio-temporal
of spatio-temporal
is central already particulars
particulars to is is central
central already
already to to
stance! stance!
stance! Reid’s (1764) Inquiry intoReid’s
the Human
(1764) Mind,
Inquiry on into
the the
Principles
Human of Mind,
Common on
Reid’s (1764) Inquiry into the Human Mind, on the Principles of Common Sense, in ways the
Sense,
Principles
in ways of Common Sense, in ways
The strength of Kant’s The The
Criticalstrength
epistemology
strength of Kant’s
of Kant’sinCritical
Critical
the Critique epistemology
of Pure Reason
epistemology in the
in thelies Critique
in ofof Pure
Critique Purewhich
Reasonhelp
Reason lies clarify
lies in
in and substantiate
which help
which help clarify
clarify
important, and substantiate
and substantiate
unfamiliar features important,
important, of Kant’s
unfamiliar
unfamiliar Deduc- features of
features of Kant’s
Kant’s Deduc-
Deduc-
how acutely it identifieshow
how
a host acutely
of sub-personal
it identifies cognitive
a host of functions
sub-personal and cognitive
a
acutely it identifies a host of sub-personal cognitive functions and a host of im-host of functions
im- and a
tion.host of
These im-
brief remarks tion.
cite These
Reid’s brief
second, remarks corrected
cite Reid’s
edition second,
(1765),
tion. These brief remarks cite Reid’s second, corrected edition (1765), this being the corrected
this being edition
the (1765), this being the
plicit and explicit cognitive
plicitjudgments
and explicit we cognitive
can and do
judgments
make withwe sufficient
can and
plicit and explicit cognitive judgments we can and do make with sufficient reliability, do
reliability,
make with sufficient
closest reliability,
available to me toclosest
the first
available
edition to (1764),
me to which
the first
is edition
known (1764),
to have
closest available to me to the first edition (1764), which is known to have been avail- which
been avail-
is known to have been avail-
accuracy and justifiedness accuracy
so that and
we justifiedness
can think at so
all that
using we logic,
can and
think can
accuracy and justifiedness so that we can think at all using logic, and can use logical at use
all using
logical logic, and can
able use
in logical
Northern Germany ableand
able in Northern
in Northern
accessibleGermanyGermany
to Tetensand and
andaccessible
accessible
to Kant, either to Tetens
to Tetens
in English
and to
and to or Kant, either
Kant, either in in English
English or or
syntax and semantics insyntax
syntax
(referential,
and semantics
deictic) connection
in (referential, with deictic)
whatever connection
and semantics in (referential, deictic) connection with whatever particular(s)particular(s) with whatever in particular(s)
French (1768). 4
It in
precedes French (1768).
Kant’s KdrV,4
It precedes
whereas Reid’s
Kant’s Essays
KdrV,
in French (1768). It precedes Kant’s KdrV, whereas Reid’s Essays (1785, 1788) are
4 (1785,
whereas 1788)Reid’sare Essays (1785, 1788) are
we experience within space we experience
we experience
and time. All within
within of these
spaceachievements
space and time.
and time. All Allresult
of these
of these
from achievements
thinking result
achievements result contemporaneous
from thinking
from thinking to itscontemporaneous
contemporaneous
second edition. Myto toconcern
its second
its second here edition.
is not My
edition. My
withconcern
concern
historical here
here routes
is not
is not with
with historical
historical routes
routes
through this observation: through this observation:
through this observation: of access and influence, of but access
with and
systematic
influence, points but regarding
with systematic
the sophisticated
of access and influence, but with systematic points regarding the sophisticated alter-points regarding
alter- the sophisticated alter-
That which is presupposed Thatinwhich
which
any and natives to Hume’s theories
natives of ideas
to Hume’s
and of theories
perception of ideas
provided and of
by
natives to Hume’s theories of ideas and of perception provided by Reid, Tetens and perception
Reid, Tetens provided
and by Reid, Tetens and
That isis presupposed
presupposed
all knowledgein inofany
anyobjects
and all
and all
cannot
knowledge
knowledge itself be of objects
of objects cannot
cannot itself
itself be be
Kant. Some of the mostKant. Kant.
importantSomebasic of thethepoints
mostare important
clearly and basicemphatically
points are are clearly
clearly
stated and and
by emphatically
emphatically stated stated by by
known as an object. (KdrV knownA402)as an object. (KdrV A402) Some of most important basic points
known as an object. (KdrV A402)
Reid in the Inquiry. There Reid are in the
excellent Inquiry.
studies There of are
Reid’sexcellent
epistemology studies
Reid in the Inquiry. There are excellent studies of Reid’s epistemology and theory of of
and Reid’s
theory epistemology
of and theory of
Kant’s Transcendental Deduction
Kant’s Transcendental
of the Pure Concepts
Deduction of ofthethe
Kant’s Transcendental Deduction of the Pure Concepts of the Understanding Understanding
Pure Concepts is of
but the Understanding
perception; is but
is but I claim no perception;
originality,
perception; but
one facet of his incisiveone
onecritique
facet of of ourhis incisive
incisive
human capacities
critique of offor ourexperience,
human capacities
capacities
cognition, for experience,
experience, cognition,
Hume’s
II claim
claim no empiricismbut
no originality,
originality, remains
but Hume’s
Hume’s such a common
empiricism
empiricism remains such
remains such aa common
common
facet of his critique our human for defaultcognition,
presumption that it
default must be
presumption countered, that and
it can
must be countered
countered,
default presumption that it must be countered, and can be countered by selective by
and selective
can be countered by selective
action and judgment. actionaction and and judgment.
judgment.
4
Reid (1764) was held in the
4 Reid
4
Universitätsbibliothek
Reid (1764) was
(1764) was held
held in
in the
the
KielUniversitätsbibliothek
Universitätsbibliothek
(Sig.: K 2943); Reid (1768)
Kiel (Sig.:
Kiel (Sig.:
was KKheld
2943); Reid
2943); Reid (1768)
(1768) was
was held
held
in the Landschaftsbibliothek
in the
Aurich
Landschaftsbibliothek
(Sig.: O 747 (1)), Aurich
Universitätsbibliothek
(Sig.: O 747 (1)),
Rostock
Universitätsbibliothek
(Sig.:
in the Landschaftsbibliothek Aurich (Sig.: O 747 (1)), Universitätsbibliothek Rostock (Sig.: Rostock (Sig.:
Ec-3122(1)), Eutiner Landesbibliothek
Ec-3122(1)), Eutiner
Ec-3122(1)), Eutiner
(Sig.: RcLandesbibliothek
Landesbibliothek
247:1) and in Königsberg
(Sig.: Rc
(Sig.: Rc 247:1)
247:1)
in Hamann’s
and in
and in Königsberg
Königsberg
li- in Hamann’s
in Hamann’s li-
li-
brary (Immendörfer 1938,brary
brary
108);(Immendörfer
(Immendörfer
my thanks to 1938,
1938,
Kuehn’s 108);
(1987,
my thanks
168n.4) toreference
Kuehn’s to
(1987,
Immen- 168n.4) reference
108); my thanks to Kuehn’s (1987, 168n.4) reference to Immen- to Immen-
dörfer, which I have againdörfer,
dörfer,
consulted.
which II have
which have again
again consulted.
consulted.
98 98
98 99 99
99
98 99
focus.5 5 focus.5 The (i ) ‘material impressions’ The (i )upon ‘material
our sensory
impressions’ receptorsuponare oureffects
sensory uponreceptors
our bodies, are effects upon our bodies,
focus. The (i ) ‘material impressions’ upon our sensory receptors are effects upon our bodies,
In reply to Hume’s copyIntheory reply to of Hume’s
impressions copyandtheory
ideasofand impressions
his use ofand thatideas
the- and his use notof(iithat the- effects upon
) sensory not (iiour ) sensory
minds.effects
This point uponunderscores
our minds. This Reid’spoint emphaticunderscores
dis- Reid’s emphatic dis-
In reply to Hume’s copy theory of impressions and ideas and his use of that the- not (ii ) sensory effects upon our minds. This point underscores Reid’s emphatic dis-
ory to account for human oryperception
to accountand for belief,
humanReid perception
emphatically
and belief,distinguished
Reid emphatically
be- distinguished
tinction between be- (i ) the tinction
act and (ii between
) the object
(i ) the(ofactperception),
and (ii ) theand object
his (of
view perception),
that typi- and his view that typi-
ory to account for human perception and belief, Reid emphatically distinguished be- tinction between (i ) the act and (ii ) the object (of perception), and his view that typi-
tween mere sensory response tween to merestimuli
sensory
and response
perception to(6.21,
stimuli301, and305),
perception
between(6.21,the 301, 305), between
cally the sensationscally
(i ) visual are (isub-personal
) visual sensations components are sub-personal
or aspects of components
acts of (ii ) or visual
aspects of acts of (ii ) visual
tween mere sensory response to stimuli and perception (6.21, 301, 305), between the cally (i ) visual sensations are sub-personal components or aspects of acts of (ii ) visual
act and the object of perception
act and the(6.33; object6.20,
of perception
289, 290), and (6.33;between
6.20, 289,the 290),
fleeting,
and betweenperception
the fleeting, of our surroundings:
perception of our surroundings:
act and the object of perception (6.33; 6.20, 289, 290), and between the fleeting, perception of our surroundings:
scarcely conscious sensationsscarcelyinvolved
conscious in sensations
perception involved
(6.3) andinthe perception
(comparatively)
(6.3) and the (comparatively)
scarcely conscious sensations involved in perception (6.3) and the (comparatively) It is necessary that the impression
It is necessary be madethat theupon impression
our organs, be made
but notupon thatour it be organs, but not that it be
sustained attention to perceived
sustainedparticulars
attention to andperceived
the (comparatively)
particulars and perduring,
the (comparatively)
stable perduring, It isstable
necessary that the impression be made upon our organs, but not that it be
sustained attention to perceived particulars and the (comparatively) perduring, stable known. Nature carries onknown. this part Nature
of thecarries
process onof thisperception,
part of thewithoutprocessour of con-
perception, without our con-
character of the particulars character
we perceive.
of the particulars
If these contrasts
we perceive.are typically
If theseunfamiliar
contrasts to known. Nature carries on this part of the process of perception, without our con-
are typically unfamiliar
character of the particulars we perceive. If these contrasts are typically unfamiliar to sciousnesstoor concurrence.sciousness
(Reid 1765, or 6.22,
concurrence.
304) (Reid 1765, 6.22, 304)
sciousness or concurrence. (Reid 1765, 6.22, 304)
most of us, they are known most(e.g.)
of us,
to they
painters
are known
(6.3; 6.8,(e.g.)
165–7;
to painters
6.22, 315–6;
(6.3; 6.8,
6.23,165–7;
328– 6.22, 315–6; 6.23, 328–
most of us, they are known (e.g.) to painters (6.3; 6.8, 165–7; 6.22, 315–6; 6.23, 328– A thousand such instances A might
thousand be produced,
such instances in ordermight to show
be produced,
that the invisible
orderap- to show that the visible ap-
9). 9). A thousand such instances might be produced, in order to show that the visible ap-
9). pearances of objects are intended pearancesbyofnature objects onlyareasintended
signs orby indications;
nature only andasthatsignsthe or indications; and that the
In the complex chain ofIn events
the complex
transpiring chain between
of eventsany transpiring
particular objectbetween andanyany-particular object pearances
any- ofinstantly
andpasses objects are intended by nature only as signs or indications; and that the
In the complex chain of events transpiring between any particular object and any- mind to mind
the things
passes signified,
instantly without
to the things
making signified,
the least without
reflection making the least reflection
one who sees it (6.12, 200; one6.22,
who301),
sees Reid
it (6.12,
carefully
200; 6.22,
distinguishes:
301), Reid carefully distinguishes: mind passes instantly to the things signified, without making the least reflection
upon the sign or even perceiving upon thethat sign[i.e.,
or even
noticing]
perceiving
there is thatany[i.e.,
such noticing]
thing. (Reidthere is any such thing. (Reid
one who sees it (6.12, 200; 6.22, 301), Reid carefully distinguishes: upon the sign or even perceiving that [i.e., noticing] there is any such thing. (Reid
1765, 6.2, 128–9; cf. 6.3; 6.4, 1765,137) 6.2, 128–9; cf. 6.3; 6.4, 137)
(i) sensation and (ii) perception
(i) sensation
(6.21,and 301,(ii)
305);
perception (6.21, 301, 305); 1765, 6.2, 128–9; cf. 6.3; 6.4, 137)
(i) sensation and (ii) perception (6.21, 301, 305);
The hobby horse of Modern The hobby indirect
horse theories
of Modern of perception,
indirect theories
the alleged of perception,
‘resem- the alleged ‘resem-
(i) impressions upon our(i)sensoryimpressions
receptors
upon(our ourbody)
sensory andreceptors
(ii) any (mental)
(our body) sensa- The hobby
and (ii) any (mental) sensa- horse of Modern indirect theories of perception, the alleged ‘resem-
(i) impressions upon our sensory receptors (our body) and (ii) any (mental) sensa- blance’ between sensoryblance’
ideas and between
physical sensory
objects,ideas is and
irrelevant:
physical There
objects,
is none is irrelevant:
(6.5, There is none (6.5,
tion of which we are aware tion(6.8;
of which
6.22, 303);
we areweawareare not (6.8;
conscious
6.22, 303); we are not conscious ofblance’
of impressions impressions between sensory ideas and physical objects, is irrelevant: There is none (6.5,
tion of which we are aware (6.8; 6.22, 303); we are not conscious of impressions 148–9; 6.12, 202). Reid’s148–9; careful6.12, attention
202). Reid’s
to the details
careful of attention
sensation to the
and details
perception, of sensation and perception,
upon our receptors (6.8, upon 163); our receptors (6.8, 163); 148–9; 6.12, 202). Reid’s careful attention to the details of sensation and perception,
upon our receptors (6.8, 163); and his refusal to over-simplify and his refusalthem, resultto over-simplify
in an account them,of perception
result in an(6.3, account 131–5; of perception (6.3, 131–5;
and his refusal to over-simplify them, result in an account of perception (6.3, 131–5;
(i) objects and (ii) their appearance
(i) objects and to the
(ii)eye
their
(6.2,
appearance
123; 6.3); to the eye (6.2, 123; 6.3); 6.5) directly converse to 6.5)
that directly
of Russell’s
converseProblems
to that
of Philosophy
of Russell’s (1912,Problems
C h. 1),of as is clear
Philosophy (1912, Ch. 1), as is clear
(i) objects and (ii) their appearance to the eye (6.2, 123; 6.3); 6.5) directly converse to that of Russell’s Problems of Philosophy (1912, Ch. 1), as is clear
(i) colours of particular (i)objects
coloursandof(ii)particular
the sensory objects
appearances
and (ii)of these
the sensory
colours to us of thesefrom
appearances coloursReid’s
from Reid’s
remarks upon
to us from Berkeley
Reid’s (6.8,remarks168,upon192, 194;Berkeley6.11,(6.8,
remarks upon Berkeley (6.8, 168, 192, 194; 6.11, 197–8) and upon Hume.
197–8) 168,and 192,upon 194;Hume. 6.11, 197–8) and upon Hume.
(i) colours of particular objects and (ii) the sensory appearances of these colours to us Reid is emphatic about Reid
the utter
is emphatic
inadequacy about of the
Hume’sutter official
inadequacy theory of Hume’s
of ideas official theory of ideas
in various conditions (6.4,in6.5);
various conditions (6.4, 6.5); Reid is emphatic about the utter inadequacy of Hume’s official theory of ideas
in various conditions (6.4, 6.5); and its cornerstone, theand ‘copy
its cornerstone,
theory’ of ideas the and‘copyimpressions
theory’ of (6.8, ideas 159; and cf. impressions
En.1 (6.8, 159; cf. En.1
within visible appearanceswithinof objects,
visible (i)appearances
their colour(s)of objects,
are quite (i) different
their colour(s)
to (ii) are
thequite different andtoits (ii)cornerstone,
the the ‘copy theory’ of ideas and impressions (6.8, 159; cf. En.1
within visible appearances of objects, (i) their colour(s) are quite different to (ii) the §§1–7, 12). Reid has no §§1–7,
alternative 12). to Reidit, nor
has anyno alternative
account oftohow it, nor
the any‘language
account of of
na-how the ‘language of na-
appearance of their extension,
appearance
figure and
of their
motion
extension,
(6.2, 124;figure
cf. 6.5,
and147;
motion (6.2, 124; cf. 6.5, 147; §§1–7,
6.8, 164); 6.8, 164); 12). Reid has no alternative to it, nor any account of how the ‘language of na-
appearance of their extension, figure and motion (6.2, 124; cf. 6.5, 147; 6.8, 164); ture’ (4.2, 76) can be so ture’ much(4.2, as learnt
76) can or beunderstood
so much as bylearnt
us. Underor understood
the headings by us.
of Under the headings of
ture’ (4.2, 76) can be so much as learnt or understood by us. Under the headings of
(i) sensations as such and (i) (ii)
sensations
dimensional as such images
andof(ii)bodies
dimensional
or theirimages
qualities
of bodies
(6.5, or their‘instinct’
qualitiesand (6.5,of our ‘natural
‘instinct’
constitution’,
and of ourReid ‘natural
emphasises
constitution’,
the pervasive
Reid emphasises
natural reg- the pervasive natural reg-
(i) sensations as such and (ii) dimensional images of bodies or their qualities (6.5, ‘instinct’ and of our ‘natural constitution’, Reid emphasises the pervasive natural reg-
147, 148; 6.20, 288ff; ); 147, 148; 6.20, 288ff; ); ularities which enable usularities
to be atwhich
all intelligent
enable usor tocognisant
be at all intelligent
(6.12, 208; or
6.20,
cognisant
297–8; (6.12, 208; 6.20, 297–8;
147, 148; 6.20, 288ff; ); ularities which enable us to be at all intelligent or cognisant (6.12, 208; 6.20, 297–8;
(i) direction, distance and (i) direction,
position (6.8, distance
161; and
6.11,position
191; 6.21, (6.8,308–9)
161; 6.11,
are visible,
191; 6.21, 308–9) 6.21,are304, 308, 6.24, 343).6.21, He304, is quite
308, right
6.24, that343).our Hefailing
is quite to right
understand
that ourhow failing
theseto understand how these
(i) direction, distance and position (6.8, 161; 6.11, 191; 6.21, 308–9) are visible, 6.21, visible,
304, 308, 6.24, 343). He is quite right that our failing to understand how these
though (ii) not (strictly speaking)
though (ii) sensible;
not (strictly speaking) sensible; reliabilities hold or function,
reliabilities
or specifically
hold or function,
what are or
these
specifically
regularities, what is are
no these
proof regularities, is no proof
though (ii) not (strictly speaking) sensible; reliabilities hold or function, or specifically what are these regularities, is no proof
that they do not hold, or thatthat they theydo arenotunimportant
hold, or that(6.12, they 202;
are unimportant
6.22, 302). Reid (6.12,re-202; 6.22, 302). Reid re-
e.g., cataracts can reduce e.g.,
the cataracts
retina to (i) canmere
reduce sensory
the retina
reception
to (i)(6.8,
mere162),
sensory
thusreception
fail- thatthus
(6.8, peatedly
162), theyfail-
do not hold, or that they are unimportant (6.12, 202; 6.22, 302). Reid re-
e.g., cataracts can reduce the retina to (i) mere sensory reception (6.8, 162), thus fail- describes sensory peatedly
perceptiondescribesas providing
sensory perception
us information as about
providing our us surround-
information about our surround-
ing to indicate (ii) any direction,
ing to indicate
location(ii)orany
shape.
direction, location or shape. peatedly describes sensory perception as providing us information about our surround-
ing to indicate (ii) any direction, location or shape. ings (6.1, 121; 6.3, 135; ings 6.7, 155;
(6.1, 6.20,
121; 6.3,292,135;293;6.7,6.20,155; 321;6.20,
6.24, 292,
331,293; 334,6.20,341,321; 346).6.24, 331, 334, 341, 346).
ings (6.1, 121; 6.3, 135; 6.7, 155; 6.20, 292, 293; 6.20, 321; 6.24, 331, 334, 341, 346).
(i) sensory appearance and (i) sensory
(ii) whatappearance
is ‘suggested’ andor(ii)indicated
what is by ‘suggested’
sensory appear- In this appear-
or indicated by sensory way Reid develops In thisa reliabilist
way Reidalternative
develops to a reliabilist
the sceptical alternative
(justificatory,
to the ‘ac- sceptical (justificatory, ‘ac-
(i) sensory appearance and (ii) what is ‘suggested’ or indicated by sensory appear- In this way Reid develops a reliabilist alternative to the sceptical (justificatory, ‘ac-
ance (6.2, 123), what is inferred
ance (6.2,from 123),it what
(6.2, 126,
is inferred
128–9;from 6.20,it297),
(6.2, judgments
126, 128–9; 6.20, 297), cess’)judgments
internalism characteristic
cess’) internalism
of so much characteristic
Modern philosophy
of so much (de Modern
Bary 2002,
philosophy
cf. (de Bary 2002, cf.
ance (6.2, 123), what is inferred from it (6.2, 126, 128–9; 6.20, 297), judgments cess’) internalism characteristic of so much Modern philosophy (de Bary 2002, cf.
based upon it (6.3, 130),based or (likewise)
upon it ‘that(6.3, 130),
knowledge
or (likewise)
of the objects
‘that knowledge
of sense of the objectsNichols of 2007,
senseCopenhaver Nichols
2010). 2007, Copenhaver 2010).
based upon it (6.3, 130), or (likewise) ‘that knowledge of the objects of sense Nichols 2007, Copenhaver 2010).
which is got by reasoning’ which
(6.20,is297).
got by reasoning’ (6.20, 297). Yet Kant (Prol. 4:258–9)Yet is right
Kantthat (Prol.Reid4:258–9)
leaves is muchrightofthat theReid
issueleaves
just where
much the of the issue just where the
which is got by reasoning’ (6.20, 297). Yet Kant (Prol. 4:258–9) is right that Reid leaves much of the issue just where the
sceptical Hume wants. Regarding sceptical Hume induction wants.Reid Regarding
granted frankly:
induction Reid granted frankly:
sceptical Hume wants. Regarding induction Reid granted frankly:
5
Reid (1765) is cited by C5 h.§,
Reidp.;(1765)
lack of
is cited
page by
number
Ch.§, indicates
p.; lack ofthe
page
whole
number
§ is cited.
indicates
His the whole § is cited. His
5
Reid (1765) is cited by Ch.§, p.; lack of page number indicates the whole § is cited. His
spelling and typography havespelling
beenandmodernised.
typography have been modernised.
spelling and typography have been modernised.
100 100 101 101
100 101
100 101
 However, we agree with the However,
author of wethe
agree
Treatise
withofthehuman
author
nature
of the
in this,
Treatise
Thatof our
humanbe-nature in this, That our anticipating
closely be- KdrV closely
(Refl. anticipating
4849, 4851).KdrV Note(Refl.
in this4849, 4851).
regard that,Note in thisReid
although regard that, although Reid
lief in the continuance
However, we agree with ofthe
lief
nature’s
in thelaw
author
However, continuance
weis
of the not
agree derived
Treatise ofofthe
with nature’s
from
human reason.
author lawof is
nature theIt
in not is derived
this, an
Treatise instinctive
Thatofourfrom
human reason.inItthis,
be- nature is an instinctive
closely
That our anticipating
be- KdrV
speaks of sensory experience (Refl.
speaks 4849,
closelyasof 4851).
anticipating Note
usKdrV
sensory experience
providing in this
(Refl. regard
as 4849,
‘information’ that,
(per4851).
providing us Note
above), although
in this
‘information’
he has Reid
regard
no ac- that, although
(per above), he has noReid ac-
prescience of the operations
lief in the continuance of prescience
liefofin nature,
nature’s thelawofisvery
the
notoperations
like
continuance to
of that
derived ofprescience
from
nature’snature,
law isvery
reason. of
It
notishuman
like
an to that
actions
prescience
instinctive
derived from reason. of
It ishuman
an
speaks
count actions
instinctive
ofinformation
of sensory experience
speaksas
count
channels; ofofproviding
sensory
information
Dretske us ‘information’
experience
(1981) has suchas
channels; (per (1981)
providing
Dretske
an above),
account, hashe hasanno
usyet‘information’
such
lacks an ac-
(per above),
account,
ade- yet he hasannoade-
lacks ac-
which makes
prescience of us
therely uponwhich
operations theoftestimony
makes
nature,
prescience usofrely
of very
the our
likeupon
fellow-creatures:
theofprescience
to that
operations testimony
nature, and of as,
very our
likewithout
human fellow-creatures:
the
prescienceand
actions
to that of as, without
human the
actions
count of
quate accountinformation channels;
count Dretske
of
quate account
of information (1981)
information has
decodingoforinformation such
channels; an account,
Dretske (1981)
extraction. decoding cleaves yet haslacks
or extraction. such an ade-
an
close toDretske account, yet lacks an
basic cleaves close to basic ade-
latter,
which we should
makes be upon
us rely incapable
latter, of
we receiving
the testimony
which makesshould be
information
usofrely
our incapable from
of receiving
fellow-creatures:
upon the testimony menandofbyas,
information
language;
our without so,
from men
the
fellow-creatures: andbyas,language;
without so,
the
without
latter, wethe former,
be we should
without quate account
perceptual of
claims information
so as quate decoding
account
perceptual
to maximise claimsor
of
their soextraction.
information
as to
obvious Dretske
decoding
maximise cleaves
their
justificatory orobvious
externalism close
extraction. to basic cleaves
Dretske
justificatory
(cf. Dret- close(cf.toDret-
externalism basic
should latter,ofbe
incapable wetheincapable
former,
receiving
should of
we receiving
shouldfrom
information
be incapable be
ofinformation
incapable of nature
men byinformation
receiving receiving
language; by
so, information
from men by of nature so,
language; by
means
withoutofthe
experience.
former, (Reid means
1765, be
we should
without of
6.24,
experience.
the 346)
incapable
former,of (Reid 1765, 6.24,
wereceiving
should 346) of
information
be incapable of nature
receiving perceptual
ske 1998,
by information of nature by claims
81–3, so
87). as to
ske
Those maximise
perceptual
1998,
basic their
claims
81–3, 87).
perceptual obvious
so as to
Those
claims, justificatory
maximise
basic externalism
their
perceptual
however, cannotobvious
claims,
suffice (cf. Dret-
justificatory
however,
for the externalism
cannot suffice(cf. forDret-
the
means of experience. (Reidmeans 1765, 6.24, 346)
of experience. (Reid 1765, 6.24, 346) ske 1998, 81–3, 87).
natural sciences, to whichThose basic
skeReid
1998,
natural perceptual
81–3,draws
sciences,
rightly 87). claims,
ThoseReid
to which
attention.however,
basic
7
these
rightly cannot
Inperceptual
regards
draws suffice
claims,
attention. for
Kanthowever,
isIn
7 the
thesecannot
cor- regardssuffice
Kant for the
is cor-
Kant (Prol. 4:258–9) is also Kant right(Prol. that 4:258–9)
Hume’sisproblem also rightlies thatin Hume’s
challenging problem us to lies figure in challenging us tosciences,
natural figure to which Reid rightly draws attention.7 In these regards Kant is7 cor-
rect that our understanding natural
rect that
human sciences,
ourknowledge to which
understanding Reid
requireshuman rightly
a cogent draws
knowledge attention.
Critique requires
of humanIn these regards
a cogent CritiqueKant is cor-
of human
Kanthow
out (Prol.
are4:258–9)
human reasonis also
Kant
out right
and
how (Prol.that
reasoning Hume’s
are4:258–9)
human isproblem
possible,also and
reason right
such lies in we
that
reasoning
that challenging
Hume’s
can
possible,
be atusall
problem tocognis-
such figure
lies
that in we
challenging
can berect atus allto figure
cognis-
that our understanding rect
reason and reasoning. reason and reasoning. human
that our knowledge
understanding requires human a cogent
knowledge Critique of
requires human
a cogent Critique of human
out how are human reason
ant? outand
ant? howreasoningare human possible,
reason such that we can
and reasoning be at all
possible, suchcognis-
that we can bereason at all and
cognis-
This is not reasoning.
over-blown: reason
This and reasoning.
Sensory-perceptual
is not over-blown: discrimination
Sensory-perceptual is modally discrimination
rich! The is modally rich! The
ant?Tetens’ Philosophical Essays ant?Tetens’ on Human Philosophical
Nature Essays and itsonDevelopment
Human Nature (1777)andnote its Development
many (1777) This note many
apparentisjustificatory
not over-blown: deficitThis
apparent Sensory-perceptual
of ismerenot sensory
over-blown:
justificatory discrimination
deficit Sensory-perceptual
appearances,
of merestressed is modally
sensory by rich! The
discrimination
appearances,
Hume, is modally
as stressed rich! The
by Hume, as
Tetens’ Philosophical
distinctions Reid highlightedEssaysTetens’
distinctions on Human
regarding Reid the Nature
Philosophical
highlighted and itsregarding
Essays
psychological Development
on Human (1777)
Nature
complexities
the and note
psychological
involved many
its Development (1777)
incomplexities note many
involved in
apparent justificatory
compared to any assertoric deficit
apparent
compared of mere
claim justificatory
about
to anyhowsensory
assertoric appearances,
deficitclaim
anything of(inmere
about stressed
fact) sensory
is,
how instead by
anything Hume,
appearances,
marks (inthe as
fact)stressed
is, instead by marks
Hume,the as
distinctions
human Reid representation,
thought, highlighted
distinctions
human regarding
thought,
feeling, the psychological
Reidrepresentation,
highlighted
sensation andregarding complexities
judgment;
feeling, thethat
sensation the involved
psychological and
concept incomplexities
judgment;
of involved
thatcompared
the concept of in assertoric claim about how anything (in fact) is, instead marks the
insufficiency to of any compared in
‘access internalism’
insufficiency to regard
of any
‘access assertoric
tointernalism’ claim in
sensory-perceptual aboutregard how toanything
justification! (in
sensory-perceptual
This fact) is, justification!
instead marksThis the
human thought,
connotesrepresentation,
human feeling,
thought, sensation
more andand
representation, judgment;
feeling, that
can the
sensation concept
and of
judgment; that the conceptthat
causality morecausality
and other connotes
than psychological other
associations
than psychological provide; associations
that caninsufficiency
provide;
Reid had clearly ofof‘access internalism’
recognised;insufficiency
Reid this inof
theregard
had isclearly ‘access
insight tointernalism’
recognised; ofsensory-perceptual
histhis isintheregard
justificatory insight justification!
toofsensory-perceptual
externalism. This
his justificatory
Preoc- justification!
externalism. This
Preoc-
causality connotes
relations cannot bemore reduced andto
causality
relations other
those than
connotes
cannot psychological
required
be more byand
reduced Hume’s associations
toother
those than
separability
required canthesis
by provide;
psychological Hume’s that
associations
(briefly, separability canReidprovide;
thesis that
(briefly,
cupation had withclearly recognised;
Kant’s Reidthis
transcendental
cupation hadis withthe
clearly insight
recognised;
idealist
Kant’s of his between
contrast
transcendentaljustificatory
this is the
idealist
noumena externalism.
insight of
contrast
and Preoc- noumena
hisphenom-
justificatory
between externalism.
and phenom-Preoc-
relations
that cannot be requires
any distinction reduced
relations
that to those
any
real cannot
distinctionrequired
separability be requiresby numerically
reduced
into Hume’s
to those
real separability
required
separability
distinct thesis
intobynumerically
instances); (briefly,
Hume’s andseparability thesis (briefly,
distinct instances); andKant’s transcendental idealist contrast between noumena and phenom-
cupation
ena with
has obscured cupation
Kant’sena development with Kant’s
has obscured of Kant’s
a very transcendental
sophisticated
development idealist contrast
justificatory
of a very between noumena
sophisticated
externalism justificatory andexternalism
phenom-
any distinction
that rational cognition requires
involves
that real
that rational separability
anymodalities
distinction
cognition into
(ofrequires numerically
‘necessity’)
involves realmodalities
which distinct
separability
cannot instances);
(of into benumerically
‘necessity’)accounted and
whichdistinct
cannotinstances);
be accounted and Kant’s development of a very sophisticated justificatory externalism
ena has obscured
regarding sensory perception, ena hasanobscured
regarding sensory
externalism Kant’s
perception,
Kant development
details
an externalism
by his of avery very Kant sophisticated
details by justificatory
sophisticated externalism
his very sophisticated
thatby
for rational
merelycognition
sensory, involves
thatby
empiricist
for modalities
rational
merely cognition
considerations.
sensory,(of ‘necessity’)
involves
empiricist
6 which
Tetensmodalities
discusses cannot
(of
considerations. be
6 accounted
the‘necessity’)
form Tetens of judg-which cannot
discusses be accounted
the regarding
form of judg-
functionalist sensory
account perception,
of regarding
functionalist
sub-personalan externalism
sensory
account
cognitive of Kant
perception, details
functions an
sub-personal ( by
KCE his
externalism
§§30,
cognitive very43) sophisticated
Kant which
functions details
must
(KCE by his
§§30, very
43) sophisticated
which must
for by merely
ments, and thesensory,
origins ofempiricist
forthebymost
ments, and considerations.
merely thesensory,
basic origins
concepts of 6
Tetens
empiricist
the
of the
most discusses
considerations.
understanding;
basic conceptsthe formhe
6
Tetensof
thejudg-
ofquestions discusses thefunctionalist
understanding; form of judg-
he questions account
be fulfilled if ever we are of besub-personal
functionalist
tofulfilled
think in cognitive
if account
ever we of
any instance functions
aresub-personal
to‘Ithink
think in( …any
KCE §§30,
cognitive
[I now 43)
instance see which
functions
that
‘I thinkmust
(KCE
house … [I§§30, now43) seewhich must
that house
ments, reliance
and the uponoriginsinstinct,
of the most
ments, and basic concepts
theknowledge
origins of the
of requires
the most understanding;
basic concepts he ofquestions
the understanding;
Reid’s Reid’s because
reliance upon instinct, because objective
knowledge modalitiesrequires which behe
objective modalities
there]’
questions
which
fulfilled
(above, if ever weWhatever
§4.1). arebetofulfilled
there]’ thinkmayin
(above, ifbeany
ever
§4.1).instance
Kant’sweWhatever
are to‘I think
think
transcendentalmayin … beany[IKant’s
now
idealist instancesee that
distinction
transcendental house
‘I think be-… idealist
[I now distinction
see that house be-
Reid’s reliance
contrast uponsubjective
to merely instinct,
Reid’sbecause
contrast reliance
(psychological)
to merely knowledge
upon instinct,
subjective requires
modalities. because objective
(psychological)
However,knowledgemodalities
Tetens’ requires
modalities. which
rambling objective Tetens’
However, modalities which §4.1). Whatever may be Kant’s transcendental idealist distinction be-
there]’rambling
tween (above,
noumena there]’ noumena
and phenomena,
tween (above,
Kant§4.1). has Whatever
very rich may
and aphenomena, and Kant be has
subtle Kant’s taxonomy
a very transcendental
richofand dis-subtleidealist distinction
taxonomy be-
of dis-
contrast to
Versuche merelylack
(essays) subjective
contrast
Kant’s
Versuche (psychological)
to merely
logical
(essays) acumenlack modalities.
subjective
and
Kant’s However,
(psychological)
inadvertently
logical acumen
serve Tetens’
modalities.
and
to underscorerambling
inadvertentlyHowever, serveTetens’ rambling
to underscore
tween noumena and
tinct factors pertainingtinct phenomena,
tween Kant
noumena
to sensory-perceptual
factors has
pertaining a very
and phenomena, rich
experience and subtle
Kant
and has
to sensory-perceptual taxonomy
a very
its objects, rich
experience of dis-
andand
marking subtle
its taxonomy
objects, markingof dis-
Versuche
how (essays)
crucial is thelack Kant’s
contrastVersuche
how betweenlogical
crucial (essays)
is acumen
thelack
merely and
Kant’s
contrast
psychologicalinadvertently
logical
between modalities
merelyserve
acumen to the
and
psychological
and underscore
inadvertently
modali- modalitiesserveand to theunderscore
modali-pertaining to sensory-perceptual experience and its objects, marking
tinct
many factors
of the same tinct factors
distinctions
many ofReid pertaining
the stressed.
same Kanttodistinguishes,
distinctions sensory-perceptual
Reid stressed. inter Kant
alia,experience
‘sensation’
distinguishes, and its interobjects, marking
alia, ‘sensation’
howinvolved
ties crucial isinthe contrast
even how
theties between
crucialforms
simplest
involved merely
isintheeven psychological
ofcontrast
perceptual
the simplestbetween modalities
merely
experience
forms ofandandknowledge
the modali-
psychological
perceptual modalities
experience
– and
and the modali-
knowledge –
many
as the of the same
effect of an distinctions
objectmany
as the of
upon Reid
effect
the stressed.
thehumansame
of Kantupon
an distinctions
object
capacity distinguishes,
of Reid stressed.
representation
the human inter alia,
Kant
capacity
(A19–20/‘sensation’
distinguishes,
of representation
B33– inter alia, ‘sensation’
(A19–20/ B33–
ties ‘dignity’
the involved(Bin124, even the
l. 171)
the simplest
ties status forms
involved
or‘dignity’ (Bin
Kant 124, ofl. perceptual
even
notes the
171) simplest
is constitutive
or status experience
forms
Kant ofand
of causality
notes isknowledge
perceptual
constitutive
or (also) of– of causality
experience andasknowledge
or (also) of–
4); the
‘theeffect
matterofofanappearance’
objectas upon
4); theaseffect
‘the the
thathuman
matter ofofthe
‘in an capacity
object
appearance’
appearance’ ofasrepresentation
upon thesome
of
that human
‘in the particular (A19–20/
capacity
appearance’ B33–
of representation
which of‘cor-
some particular (A19–20/
whichB‘cor-33–
the ‘dignity’
any 124, l. 171)
assertoric(Bjudgment the
any or‘dignity’
about status
whatKant
assertoric 124, notes
(something
Bjudgment l. 171)isISabout
constitutive
, or
in status
whatKant
contrast oftocausality
notes
how itisISmay
something ,or in(also)
constitutive
contrast
merely of of tocausality
how 4); it mayor (also)
merely ofof appearance’ as that ‘in the appearance’ of some particular which ‘cor-
‘the
responds matter
to sensation’ 4); ‘the
20/
(ArespondsB34;matter
toemphasis of appearance’
sensation’ added);
(A20/Band as the
34; that
emphasis‘in the
‘real appearance’
ofadded);
sensation’ and as of
thesome‘a‘real particular
of sensation’whichas‘cor- ‘a
any assertoric
appear to onself.judgment about
any
Paradoxically,
appear what
assertoric
to
Tetens’ something
onself. judgment
Versuche
Paradoxically, , in altogether
about
miss
IS contrast
Tetens’ to
what somethingthehow
Versuche itmiss
ISmay
prospect , inof merely
contrast
any a to
altogether thehow it mayofmerely
prospect any a
responds to sensation’
merely subjective representation’ (A 20/
merely B 34; emphasis
respondssubjective
tobysensation’ added);
(A20/
whichrepresentation’
‘one and
canB34; the
onlyemphasis
by ‘real
be which
consciousof sensation’
added);
‘one that canand as
onlythe
the ‘a
be ‘real
sub- consciousof sensation’
that the as sub- ‘a
appearjustification
priori to onself. Paradoxically,
appear
of objective
priori Tetens’
to onself.Versuche
justification
cognitive orParadoxically,
of(also) miss
objectivecausal altogether
cognitive
modalities, the(also)
Tetens’ Versuche
or prospect
and miss
yetcausal of
prompted any a theand
altogether
modalities, prospect of
yet prompted any a representation’ by which ‘one can only be conscious that the sub-
merely
ject subjective
is affected’, and which merely
ject is‘one subjective
affected’,
relates and torepresentation’
anwhich
object‘one by which
in general’
relates to(A‘one
165/
an can
B207–8).
object only be
In conscious
in general’ (A165/that the sub-
B207–8). In
priori justification
Kant (GS 23:57) toofrecognise
objective
priori (GS
Kant cognitive
justification
exactly 23:57)thisorto of(also)
objective
prospect.
recognise causal modalities,
cognitive
exactly thisor and yetcausal
(also)
prospect. prompted modalities, andject yet isprompted
affected’, analytical
this provisional, and whichthis ‘one
jectcontext,
is relates
affected’,
provisional, to anwhich
and
this ‘object
analytical object
in in general’
‘one
general’
context, relates
isthis
some to(A
‘objectas165/
anyet 207–8).
object
in isInsome (as
in general’
Bunspecified
general’ A165/ 207–8). In
yet Bunspecified
Kant (GS Kant
When 23:57)(Prol.
to recognise
Kant
4:258–9) When exactly
(GS
credits23:57)
Kant this
Hume prospect.
to
(Prol. recognise
with
4:258–9) exactly
creditsthis
challenging the
Hume prospect.
powers
with of challenging
pure rea- the powers of pure rea-
this provisional,
particular analytical
object perceived. thiscontext,
provisional,
particular
Accordingly, this ‘object
object analytical
perceived.
the in general’
matter context,
Accordingly,
of sensationisthis
some theas
– ‘object
its yetinunspecified
sensory
matter general’
quality
of sensationis
or some
– its as yet unspecified
sensory quality or
son,When
we must Kant (Prol.
avoid 4:258–9)
hearing wecredits
When
son,merely must Kant Hume
(Prol.
a rationalist’s
avoid with
4:258–9)
hearing challenging
rejoinder
merelycredits
to the
Hume powers
a rationalist’s
empiricist with of
scepticism.
rejoinder pure rea-
challenging to the powers
Atempiricist of pureobject
scepticism.
particular rea-
At perceived. Accordingly, the matter of sensation – its sensory quality or
character, as distinct particular
the matterobject
tocharacter, asofdistinctperceived.
appearance to the (theAccordingly,
matter
character thewhatever
of appearance
of matter (theofappears
sensation
character– of its whatever
sensory qualityappears or
son,time
the we musthe isavoid hearing
reading son,merely
Tetens’
the we (1777)
time hea rationalist’s
must isavoid
Versuche
reading hearing rejoinder
Tetens’
(ca. merely
1776–78), toa rationalist’s
(1777) empiricist
Kant
Versuche scepticism.
notes rejoinder
(ca. that
1776–78),
‘meta- Atempiricist
to Kant notes scepticism.
that ‘meta- At
character,
within space as and
distinct
time)to–within
the
canmatter
character, bespace asof
generatedand appearance
distinct by to
time) – the
and (the
can
within
becharacter
matter theof
generatedsubjectof by whatever
appearance asandits(the
withinappears
character
qualitativethe subject of whatever appears
as its qualitative
the time ishenot
physics’ is reading
knowledge Tetens’
theoftime
physics’ (1777)
ishenot
objects, is Versuche
reading
but
knowledge
rather (ca.
Tetens’ 1776–78),
ofof principles
objects, Kant
(1777)(Refl.Versuche
but notes
rather
4853) (ca.of –that ‘meta-
1776–78),
inter
principles Kant 4853)
alia, (Refl. notes –that
inter‘meta-
alia,and time) – can be generated by and within the subject as its qualitative
within
sensory space
response within space
to stimulation,
sensory response and time)
although tothis –sensory
can be matter
stimulation, generated
although relatesby and
thisto within
sensory
some the subject
object
matter relates asto its qualitative
some object
physics’ is by
principles notwhich
knowledge
objects ofcan
physics’
principles objects,
is
bebynot but
known;
which rather
knowledgehe also
objects ofofcan
principles
objects,
describes (Refl.
be known; 4853)
but rather
‘metaphysics’
he also –of inter
in alia, (Refl.
principles
terms
describes 4853)
‘metaphysics’ – inter alia, to stimulation, although this sensory matter relates to some object
in response
terms
sensory
empirically intuited. These sensory
empirically response
distinctions intuited. allto hold
stimulation,
These within although
distinctions
Kant’s all this
holdsensory
‘empirical within matter
Kant’srelates
realism’, to some
‘empirical object
realism’,
principles by which objects can be known; he also describes ‘metaphysics’ in terms
6principles by which objects can be known; he also describes ‘metaphysics’ in terms
6
I forego specific references I forego
to Tetens’ specific ungainly
references
Versuche; to Tetens’
the points ungainly
relevantVersuche;
here can the be points relevant empirically
which hereiscan alsointuited.
beto say theyThese
which
hold distinctions
empirically is alsointuited.
independentlyto sayall they
hold
These
of his within
hold Kant’s all
distinctions
transcendental
independently ‘empirical
hold
of hiswithin
idealism. realism’,Kant’s ‘empirical
transcendental
Yet they idealism. Yet realism’,
they
gleaned
6
I forego from his table
specific of contents
gleaned
references
6 from
(tospecific
to Tetens’
I forego thehisungainly
first
table volume).
ofVersuche;
referencescontents Some (tosample
the
to Tetens’ the
pointsfirst
excerpts
volume).
relevant
ungainly are here
Versuche; Some
translated
thesample
can pointsexcerpts
be relevant are
which translated
here iscan
alsobeto say theywhich hold independently
is also to say they of his holdtranscendental
independently idealism. Yet they
of his transcendental idealism. Yet they
in Watkins
gleaned from(2009, 356–91),
his table in though
Watkins
of contents
gleaned these
(to
from(2009,
dofirst
thehis 356–91),
notvolume).
tableinclude
though
those
Somethese
of contents of Tetens’s
sample
(to thedofirst
not views
include
excerpts cited
are
volume). thosehere
ofsample
or
Tetens’s
translated
Some views
7
excerpts Reid
cited
are (1765),
here or1.1, 3; 3, 65;
translated
7
Reid
6.1, (1765),
120; 6.2,1.1,
194–5;
3; 3, 6.13,
65; 6.1,
231–2;
120; 6.19,
6.2, 194–5;
281–5; 6.13,
6.24, 231–2;
350–1;6.19,
7, 281–5; 6.24, 350–1; 7,
above (§3). (2009,
in Watkins (Anyone excerpting
356–91),above Tetens
(§3).
inthough (Anyone
these
Watkins (1777)
do not
(2009, deserves
excerpting
include
356–91), mercy.)
Tetens
those
though (1777)
of Tetens’s
these do notdeserves
views mercy.)
cited
include here
those ofor 370–83.
Tetens’s views
7
Reid (There
cited(1765), are no
here or1.1, 3; 3,§§65;
in
370–83.
7 Reid’s Chs.6.2,
6.1, 120;
Reid (1765),3 1.1,
(There or
are 7).
no
194–5; §§6.13,
3; 3, in Reid’s
65; Chs.6.19,
231–2;
6.1, 120; 3 or194–5;
6.2, 7).
281–5; 6.24, 231–2;
6.13, 350–1; 6.19,
7, 281–5; 6.24, 350–1; 7,
above (§3). (Anyone excerpting
aboveTetens (1777) deserves
(§3). (Anyone mercy.)
excerpting Tetens (1777) deserves mercy.) 370–83. (There are no §§ in370–83. Chs. 3 or
Reid’s (There are7).no §§ in Reid’s Chs. 3 or 7).
102 102 103 103
102
102 102
103 103
103
 raise the question, How if ever can or do we sort mere sensory appearances to us 6 ANALYTICAL CONTENTS
from§22:
3.10 any actual manifestations
The Category of spatio-temporal
has no other particulars?
Use for Cognition of Things than their Ap- 7 REFERENCES 6 Analytical Contents
Kant’splication
answer to puts paid oftoExperience.
Objects the empiricist dogma of non-modal observation 58 1 INTRODUCTION. 1
Allison, Henry, 1983. 1 Kant’sIntroduction
Transcendental 1 Idealism; An Interpretation and Defense, 1st ed.
terms; there are
3.11 §23: [untitled] none, because perceptual discrimination is episodic – it takes some
62
2 New KANTHaven, Yale.
’S DEDUCTION : BASIC CONSIDERATIONS FOR ITS UNDERSTANDING. 4
3.12
period §24:
of OftimetheandApplication
transpiresofwithin
the Categories to Objects
some spatial of –thebySenses
context whichasalone
such.we can66 Arsenijević, Miloš, 2003. ‘Generalized Concepts of Syntactically and Semantically Triv-
2.1 Kant’s dual use2 of categories: Kant’s sensory
B Deductionbinding: and Basic judgmental conjunction.
Considerations 4
for its Understanding 4
3.13 §25:any
identify actual perceived particular(s) (or states of affairs) by discriminating the
[untitled] 72
2.2 ialADifferences
pointer about and
2.1 Kant’s dual use of categories: sensory binding andJournal
Instant-Based
‘transcendental’. and Period-Based Time Ontologies’. The of4
judgmental conjunction 4
3.14 §26:actual
present, Transcendental
case from Deduction of thealternatives,
causally possible Universally which
Possible
weExperiential
can only doUse by iden- Applied Logic 1:1–12.
2.3 The structure of2.2 Kant’s A text.
pointer about ‘transcendental’ 4 4
of the Pure Concepts
tifying spatio-temporal of the
particulars Understanding.
with sufficient material (i.e., causal) integrity that 76 Arsenijević, Miloš,examines
& Miodrag Kapetanović, 2008a. ‘Thecognitive
“Great Struggle”
2.4 Kant’s KdrV 2.3 The bothstructure
cognitiveofprocess
Kant’s and
text ofNothing’. validity. Between5 4
3.15 §27: Result of this Deduction of the Concepts of the Understanding.
we can distinguish them from our own perceptual-motor activity – even if this activ- 86 Cantorians and Neo-Aristotelians: Much Ado About Grazer Philosophische6
2.5 A diagnostic clue from Ryle: beware of ‘para-mechanical hypotheses’.
2.4 Kant’s KdrV examines both cognitive process and cognitive validity 5
3.16 Brief Concept
ity be[nono§] more than howofwe thiscan
Deduction.
alter the direction in which we gaze, even momen- 90 Studien 76.1:79–90.
2.6 Ryle’s second clue: 2.5 beware
A of systematically
diagnostic clue from misleading
Ryle: expressions.
beware of ‘para-mechanical 6hypotheses’ 6
tarily (or, sub-consciously, the eyes’ saccadic movements). Any and all such elemen- ———, 2008b. ‘An Lω1ω1 Axiomatization of the Linear Archimedean Continua as
4 THE CONCEPTS ‘SPACE’, ‘TIME’ & THE CATEGORIES. 92 2.7 Merely
A fourth systematically
2.6 misleading
Ryle’s secondexpression:
clue: beware ‘analytic truth’. 2.7:39–47. 6
tary perceptual Relational Structures’. WSEAS Transactions onofMathematics
systematically misleading expressions 6
4.1 Does such discriminations
perceptual use ofrequire using –‘quantity’
the category competently
(§26)and accurately,
obviate any roleif for
approx- 2.8 Kant’s Vorstellung
2.7 or vorstellen
‘Sensory often concerns
intuition’ sensory
(sinnliche
Arsenijević, Miloš, & Miloš Adažić, 2014. ‘Gunkology and Pointilism: Two Mutually presentation(s).
Anschauung) 6 7
imately, fallibly or implicitly – the principles of cognitive judgment Kant identifies
the concept ‘space’? 92 2.9 Supervening
‘Determine’Models
(bestimmen):
2.8 Kant’s
of the cause to be as it or
Vorstellung
Region-Based is,
and or the
specify.
vorstellen often concerns
Point-Based Theory Infi-7
of thepresentation(s) 7
sensory
and justifies in the ‘Analytic of Principles’, each
4.2 Empiricism about meaning & first-order predicate calculus. of which derives from his Table of
94 2.10nite
Kant’s Deduction concerns cognitive semantics, humanly possible singular
Two-Dimensional 2.9 Continuum’.
‘Determine’ In: (bestimmen):
V. Fano, cause to be
F. Orilia & G. is, or specify 7
as itMacchia, eds., Space
Categories; likewise their use is informed by those formal aspects of judging Kant andreference.
Time: A Priori2.10 and A A Posteriori Studies (Berlin,misleading
de Gruyter), 137–170. ‘analytic truth’ 7
5identifies
MODALITY SENSORY EXPERIENCE &isPERCEPTUAL fifth systematically expression: 7
in his IN Table of Judgments. This but a brief Jindication
UDGMENT, of IN Bhow .
RIEFKant, 99in 2.11 Two
Baum, distinct,1986.
Manfred, distinctive
Deduktionroles of
und sensory
Beweis intuition
in Kants and intellect.
Transzendentalphilosophie.
2.11 Kant’s Deduction concerns cognitive semantics, humanly possible König- 8
the ‘Analytic of Principles’, articulates and justifies a host of constraints upon spatio- 2.12stein/Ts., Hain bei
Kant’s Deduction Athenäum.
focuses
singular on the key intellectual conditions required to think
reference 8
temporal particulars required so that we can at all perceive and identify any of them Beck,anyLewis White,
specific, 1978. ‘A
determinate
2.12 Two Prussian
thought.
distinct, Hume and a roles
distinctive Scottish Kant’. In:
of sensory idem., Essays
intuition on8
and intellect 8
(KCE, Pt. 2). Kant’s ‘Refutation of Idealism’ fulfills the aim already anticipated in the 2.13Kant and Hume
Kant’s (New
Deduction2.13 ofHaven,
the
Kant’s Yale
categoriesUniversity
Deduction parallels Press), 111–129.
the transcendental
focuses on Deduction
the key intellectual of
conditions required to
‘Deduction’, that only if we do successfully identify some particulars by perceiving Bernecker, Sven, 2012.
the a priori concepts
‘Kant
ofthink on
‘space’
anyandSpatial Orientation’.
determinateEuropean
of ‘time’.
specific, thought Journal of Philosophy9 9
them (thus affording any instance of a synthetic unity of apperception), can any of us 2.1420.4:519–533.
Two senses of the 2.14 ‘constitution’
Kant’s Deduction of objects ofofthe categories parallels the transcendental
experience. 9 Deduction
finite, dependent homo sapiens be sufficiently sapientes ever to think ‘I think …’ about Bird, Graham, 2006a. The Revolutionary
of the arequires Kant:
priori A Commentary
concepts of ‘space’ on the
andCritique
ofcan of Pure Reason.
‘time’ 9
2.15 Whether Kant’s Deduction transcendental idealism be ascer-
anything, on any occasion (KTPR, esp. §§62, 63). Chicago, Open Court. 10
tained 2.15 Two the
only ‘Kant’s
by scrutinising senses of thethat
prospect ‘constitution’ of required
objects of experience 10
Consider, then, how different might have been 20th-century Anglophone philoso- ———, 2006b. Analytical Apparatus’. In:itidem.,
may not ed.,beA Companion at all.
to Kant (Ox-
2.16 Whether Kant’s Deduction requires transcendental idealism can be
phy, if not for Berkeley Russell (1912) had instead opted for Reid? Pace Quine (1969, 3 ford,TEXTBlackwell), 125–139.
, TRANSLATION
(verso) & ELUCIDATIONS
ascertained only by (recto). the prospect that it may 12
scrutinising not be required at all 11
Boulter,
3.1 §13:Stephen, 2002. ‘Hume
Of the Principles of aon Induction: A Deduction
Transcendental Genuine Problem as such. or Theology’s Tro- 14
72, cf. 74, 76), the Humean predicament is not the human predicament. This was dem-
onstrated by Reid (1764). There may have been no occasion for Rorty (1979); Reid 3.2 jan§14:
Horse?’ Philosophy
Transition 3 to the
77.1:67–86.
TTranscendental
ext , TIncongruence.
ranslation
Deduction(verso)of &the Categories. (recto) 12
Elucidations
24
Buroker, Jill Vance, 1981,
3.3 §15: Of the Possibility§13: Space and
of a OfCombination Dordrecht,
as such. Reidel. 30
(1764) is much more perceptive, also about the metaphor of our ‘mirror’ of nature ———, 2006. Kant’s3.1 the Principles of a Transcendental Deduction as
Critique of Pure
3.4 §16: Of the Original-Synthetic
Reason:
Unity
An Introduction.
of Apperception.
Cambridge, Cambridge 34such
Uni- 14
(6.6, 146). For his part, Kant did not neglect our embodied, perceptual-motor dis- versity Press. 3.2 §14: Transition to the Transcendental Deduction of the Categories 24
3.5 §17: The Principle 3.3 of§15:
the Of Synthetic
the der Unity ofofApperception
Possibility is the Highest
criminations, nor their material preconditions, though Humean ego-centric proclivi- Carnap, Rudolf, 1928. Der logische Aufbau Welt. Berlin,a Weltkreis.
Combination as such
42
30
ties have occluded Kant’s incisive achievements. ———, 1969. Principle of
3.4 the Structure
The Logical Use
§16: ofOf the Understanding.
of the
the Original-Synthetic
World. R.A. George,Unity of Apperception
tr. Berkeley, University of 34
3.6 California
§18: What is Objective Unity 48
Press. (Translation
3.5 §17: of of
The Self-Consciousness.
previous
Principle item.)
of the Synthetic Unity of Apperception is the Highest
3.7 §19:Martin,
Carrier, The Logical
1992.
Form
‘Kant’s of Principle
all Judgments
Relational ofTheory
theconsists
Useofofin theUnderstanding
Absolute
the Objective
Space’.Unity of
Kant-Studien 42
the Concepts they Contain. 48
83.4:399–416. 3.6 §18: What is Objective Unity of Self-Consciousness 48
Copenhaver,
3.8 §20: AllRebecca,
sensory 3.7 2010.§19:
Intuitions ‘Thomas Reid
standLogical
The underonFormAcquired
the of allPerception’.
Categories Pacific
as Conditions
Judgments Philosophical
under
consists in the Objective Unity
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS: I am grateful to anonymous readers for Helsinki University Press Quarterlywhich
91:285–312. 52
alone
their Manifold of thecan coalescethey
Concepts in one Consciousness.
Contain 48
for useful suggestions and their keen interest, and to the press for their support and pro- de 54
3.9Bary,
§21:Philip,
Remark. 2002.3.8 Thomas ReidAlland
§20: Scepticism:
sensory His Reliabilist
Intuitions stand Response.
under theLondon & New
Categories as Conditions
fessionalism. This research was supported in part by the Boğaziçi Üniversitesi Research York, Routlege.
104Fund (BAP; grant code: 18B02P3). under which alone their Manifold can coalesce in one Consciousness 52
Descartes, René, 1964–. Œvres de Descartes, 13 vols., rev. ed., C. Adam & P. Tannery, 105

106 107
104 105
3.9 §21: Remark 54
3.10 §22: The Category has no other Use for Cognition of Things than their
Application to Objects of Experience 58
3.11 §23: [untitled] 62
3.12 §24: Of the Application of the Categories to Objects of the Senses as such 66
3.13 §25: [untitled] 72
3.14 §26: Transcendental Deduction of the Universally Possible Experiential Use
of the Pure Concepts of the Understanding 76
3.15 §27: Result of this Deduction of the Concepts of the Understanding 86
3.16 [no §] Brief Concept of this Deduction 90
4 The Concepts ‘Space’, ‘Time’ & the Categories 92
4.1 Does such perceptual use of the category ‘quantity’ (§26) obviate any role
for the concept ‘space’? 92
4.2 Empiricism about meaning & first-order predicate calculus 94
5 Modality in Sensory Experience & Perceptual Judgment, in Brief 99
106 107
7 References
Allison, Henry, 1983. Kant’s Transcendental Idealism; An Interpretation and Defense, 1st ed.
New Haven, Yale.
Arsenijević, Miloš, 2003. ‘Generalized Concepts of Syntactically and Semantically Triv-
ial Differences and Instant-Based and Period-Based Time Ontologies’. The Journal of
Applied Logic 1:1–12.
Arsenijević, Miloš, & Miodrag Kapetanović, 2008a. ‘The “Great Struggle” Between
Cantorians and Neo-Aristotelians: Much Ado About Nothing’. Grazer Philosophische
Studien 76.1:79–90.
———, 2008b. ‘An Lω1ω1 Axiomatization of the Linear Archimedean Continua as
Merely Relational Structures’. WSEAS Transactions on Mathematics 2.7:39–47.
Arsenijević, Miloš, & Miloš Adažić, 2014. ‘Gunkology and Pointilism: Two Mutually
Supervening Models of the Region-Based and the Point-Based Theory of the In-
finite Two-Dimensional Continuum’. In: V. Fano, F. Orilia & G. Macchia, eds., Space
and Time: A Priori and A Posteriori Studies (Berlin, de Gruyter), 137–170.
Baum, Manfred, 1986. Deduktion und Beweis in Kants Transzendentalphilosophie. Königstein/
Ts., Hain bei Athenäum.
Beck, Lewis White, 1978. ‘A Prussian Hume and a Scottish Kant’. In: idem., Essays on
Kant and Hume (New Haven, Yale University Press), 111–129.
Bernecker, Sven, 2012. ‘Kant on Spatial Orientation’. European Journal of Philosophy
20.4:519–533.
Bird, Graham, 2006a. The Revolutionary Kant: A Commentary on the Critique of Pure Reason.
Chicago, Open Court.
———, 2006b. ‘Kant’s Analytical Apparatus’. In: idem., ed., A Companion to Kant (Ox-
ford, Blackwell), 125–139.
Boulter, Stephen, 2002. ‘Hume on Induction: A Genuine Problem or Theology’s Tro-
jan Horse?’ Philosophy 77.1:67–86.
Buroker, Jill Vance, 1981, Space and Incongruence. Dordrecht, Reidel.
———, 2006. Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason: An Introduction. Cambridge, Cambridge Uni-
versity Press.
Carnap, Rudolf, 1928. Der logische Aufbau der Welt. Berlin, Weltkreis.
———, 1969. The Logical Structure of the World. R.A. George, tr. Berkeley, University of
California Press. (Translation of previous item.)
Carrier, Martin, 1992. ‘Kant’s Relational Theory of Absolute Space’. Kant-Studien
83.4:399–416.
Copenhaver, Rebecca, 2010. ‘Thomas Reid on Acquired Perception’. Pacific Philosophical
Quarterly 91:285–312.
de Bary, Philip, 2002. Thomas Reid and Scepticism: His Reliabilist Response. London & New
York, Routlege.
Descartes, René, 1964–. Œvres de Descartes, 13 vols., rev. ed., C. Adam & P. Tannery,
eds. Paris: Vrin/C.N.R.S., 1964–. Cited as ‘AT’ by vol.:p.
———, 1984, 1991. The Philosophical Writings of Descartes, 3 vols., J. Cottingham, R.
Stoothoff, D. Murdoch & A. Kenney, trs.. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
(Cited as ‘CSM’ by vol.:p.; provides vol.:p. references to AT.)
———, 2001. Œuvres complètes de René Descartes, A. Gombay, et al., eds.; Connaught
Descartes Project, University of Toronto. Charlottesville, Va: InteLex Corp, 2001.
(Provides vol.:p. references to AT.)
de Vleeschauwer, Herman J. de, 1934–37. La Déduction Transcendentale dans l’Oevre de
Kant, 3 vols. Antwerp, De Sikkel, Paris, Champion, ‘S Gravenhage, Nijhoff.
Dretske, Frederick, 1969. Seeing and Knowing. London, Routledge & Kegan Paul.
———, 1981. Knowledge and the Flow of Information. Cambridge, Mass., M.I.T./Bradford
Books.
Dretske, Frederick I., 1998. ‘An Interview with Fred Dretske’. The Dualist 5.1:81–88;
URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10427/000441. (Answers to questions by Ned Block,
Tyler Burge, Daniel C. Dennett, Jerry Fodor, Keith Lehrer and Ernest Sosa, pub-
lished in the Stanford University undergraduate philosophy journal.)
Erdmann, Benno, ed., 1881. Nachträge zu Kants Kritik der reinen Vernunft. Kiel, Lipsius &
Fischer.
Evans, Gareth, 1975. ‘Identity and Predication’. Journal of Philosophy 72.13:343–363; rpt.
in: idem. (1985), 25–48.
———, 1985. Collected Papers. Oxford, The Clarendon Press.
Falkenstein, Lorne, 1995. Kant’s Intuitionism: A Commentary on the Transcendental Aesthetic.
Toronto, University of Toronto Press.
Ferrini, Cinzia, 2015. L’invenzione di Cartesio. La disembodied mind negli studi contempora-
nei: eredità o mito? Trieste, Edizioni dell’Università di Trieste.
Förster, Eckart, 1989a. ‘Kant’s Notion of Philosophy’. Monist 72.2:285–304.
———, 1989b ‘How are Transcendental Arguments Possible?’ In: E. Schaper & W.
Vossenkuhl, eds., Reading Kant: New Perspectives on Transcendental Arguments and Critical
Philosophy (London, Blackwell), 3–20.
Frege, Gottlob, 1879. Begriffschrift, eine der arithemetischen Nachgebildete Formelsprache des rein-
en Denkens. Halle (Saale), Nebert.
———, 1884. Die Grundlagen der Arithmetik. Breslau, Koebner.
George, Rolf, 1981. ‘Kant’s Sensationism’. Synthese 47.2:229–55.
Guyer, Paul, 1987. Kant and the Claims of Knowledge. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
———, 1992. ‘The Transcendental Deduction of the Categories’. In: idem., ed., The
Cambridge Companion to Kant (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press), 123–160.
108 109
Haag, Johannes, 2007. Erfahrung und Gegenstand. Frankfurt am Main, Klostermann.
Howell, Robert, 1992. Kant’s Transcendental Deduction. Dordrecht, Kluwer.
Hume, David, 1748. An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding, so titled: 1756; critical
ed.: T. Beauchamp (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1999), cited as ‘En.1’ by §.
Immendörfer, Nora, 1938. Johann Georg Hamann und seine Bücherei. Königsberg & Berlin,
Ost-Europa Verlag.
Ingarden, Roman, 1968. E. Husserl, Briefe an Roman Ingarden. Mit Erläuterungen und Erin-
nerungen an Husserl. Den Haag, Nijhof.
———, 1975. On the Motives which led Husserl to Transcendental Idealism. A. Hannibalsson,
tr. Den Haag, Nijhof.
Kant, Immanuel, 1787. Critik der reinen Vernunft, 2nd rev. ed. Riga, Hartnoch.
———, 1926. Kritik der reinen Vernunft, 6th ed. B. Erdmann, ed. Berlin, de Gruyter.
———, 1998. Kritik der reinen Vernunft, nach der ersten und zweiten Originalausgabe. J.
Timmerman, Hg., Bibliographie von H. Klemme. Hamburg, Meiner.
———, 1996. Critique of Pure Reason. Unified edition, W. Pluhar, ed. Cambridge, Mass.,
Hackett Publishing Co.
Kuehn, Manfred, 1987. Scottish Common Sense in Germany, 1768–1800. Montreal, Mc-
Gill-Queen’s University Press.
Laymon, Ronald, 1978. ‘Newton’s Bucket Experiment’. Journal of the History of Philosophy
16.4:399–413.
Longuenesse, Beatrice, 1998, Kant and the Capacity to Judge. C.T. Wolfe, tr.. Princeton,
Princeton University Press.
Mach, Ernst, 1922. Die Analyse der Empfindungen und das Verhälntnis des Phyischen tum Psy-
chischen, 9th ed. Jena, Fischer.
Moran, Dermot, 2014. ‘Descartes on the Formal Reality, Objective Reality, and Material
Falsity of Ideas: Realism through Constructivism?’ In: K.R. Westphal, ed., Realism,
Science & Pragmatism (New York & London, Routledge), 67–92.
Motta, Giuseppe, Denis Schulting & Udo Thiel, eds., 2021. Kants transzendentale Deduk-
tion und seine Apperzeptionstheorie: Neue Interpretationen/Kant’s Transcendental Deduction and
his Theory of Apperception: New Interpretations. Berlin, de Gruyter.
Newton, Sir Isacc, 1962. Unpublished Scientific Papers of Isaac Newton. A.R. Hall & M.B.
Hall, eds. & trs. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
———, 2007. Philosophical Writings. A. Janiak, ed. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
Nichols, Ryan, 2007. Thomas Reid’s Theory of Perception. Oxford, The Clarendon Press.
Parrini, Paolo, 2018. ‘Quine su analiticità e olismo. Una valutazione critica in dialogo
con Sandro Nannini’. In: C. Lumer & G. Romano, eds., Dalla filosofia dell’azione alla
filosofia della mente. Riflessioni in onore di Sandro Nannini (Roma & Messina, Corisco
Edizion Marchi Editoriale), 95–116. (English tr.: idem., 2021.)
———, 2021. ‘Quine on Analyticity and Holism. A critical appraisal in dialogue with
Sandro Nannini’. Philosophical Inquiries 9.1:95–112.
Parsons, Terrence, 2015. ‘The Traditional Square of Opposition’. In: E.N. Zalta, ed., The
Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy; url: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/square/.
Paton, Herbert (H.J.), 1936. Kant’s Metaphysic of Experience, 2 vols. London, George Allen
& Unwin; New York, Humanities.
Quine, W.V.O., 1961. From a Logical Point of View, 2nd rev. ed. Cambridge, Mass., Har-
vard University Press.
———, 1969. Ontological Relativity and Other Essays. New York, Columbia University
Press.
Reid, Thomas, 1764. An Inquiry into the Human Mind, on the Prinicples of Common Sense.
Edinburgh: Kincaid & Bell; London: A. Millar; 2nd cor. ed.: 1765.
———, 1768. Recherches sur L’entendement humain, 2 vols. Amsterdam, Jean Meyer.
———, 1785. Essays on the Intellectual Powers of Man, 3 vols. Dublin, White.
———, 1788. Essays on the Active Powers of Man. Edinburgh, Bell; London, Robinson.
Rorty, Richard, 1979. Philosophy and the Mirror of Nature. Princeton, Princeton University
Press.
Rukgaber, Matthew, 2009. ‘“The Key to Transcendental Philosophy”: Space, Time and
the Body in Kant’. Kant-Studien 100.2:166–186.
———, 2020. Space, Time, and the Origins of Transcendental Idealism: Immanuel Kant’s Philoso-
phy from 1747 to 1770. Cham (Switzerland), Palgrave (Springer Nature).
Russell, Bertrand, 1912. The Problems of Philosophy. London, Oxford University Press.
Ryle, Gilbert, 1949. The Concept of Mind. London, Hutchinson; rpt. with critical intro-
duction by Julia Tanney: Oxon: Routledge, 2009.
———, 2009. Collected Papers, vol. 2: Collected Essays 1929–1968. J. Tanney, ed. Oxon,
Routledge.
Schluze, Gottlob Ernst (anon.), 1803. „Aphorismen über das Absolute“. In: F. Bouter-
wek, ed., Neues Museum der Philosophie und Literatur (Leipzig) 1,2:107–148.
———, 2020. ‘Aphorisms on the Absolute’. K.R. Westphal, ed. & tr., with James Sares
& Caleb Faul, trs. Owl of Minerva. (Annotated translation of previous item.)
Stein, Howard, 1967. ‘Newtonian Space-Time’. The Texas Quarterly 10.3:174–200; rpt. in:
R. Palter, ed., The Annus Mirabilis of Sir lsaac Newton, 1666–1966 (Cambridge, Mass.:
M.I.T. Press, 1970), 258–284.
Strawson, Peter F., 1966. The Bounds of Sense. London, Methuen.
Sutherland, Daniel, 2004a. ‘Kant’s Philosophy of Mathematics and the Greek Mathe-
matical Tradition’. The Philosophical Review 113.2:157–201.
———, 2004b. ‘The Role of Magnitude in Kant’s Critical Philosophy’. Canadian Journal
of Philosophy 34.3:411–442.
110 111
Tetens, Johann N., 1775. Über die allgemeine speculativische Philosophie. Bützow & Wismar,
Boedner.
———, 1777. Philosophische Versuche über die menschliche Natur und ihre Entwicklung, 2 vols.
Leipzig, M.G. Weidmanns Erben & Reich.
———, 1913. W. Uebele, ed., Über die allgemeine speculativische Philosophie – Philosophische
Versuche über die menschliche Natur und ihre Entwicklung, vol. 1. Berlin, Reuther & Re-
ichard.
Travis, Charles, 2004. ‘The Silence of the Senses’. Mind 113.449:57–94; rev. ed: 2011.
Turnbull, Robert, 1959. ‘Empirical and A Priori Elements in Broad’s Theory of Knowl-
edge’. In: P.A. Schilpp, ed., The Philosophy of C.D. Broad (New York, Tudor), 197–
231.
Watkins, Eric, ed., 2009. Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason: Background Source Materials. Cam-
bridge, Cambridge University Press.
Westphal, Kenneth R., 1989. Hegel’s Epistemological Realism. Dordrecht, Kluwer.
———, 1998. Hegel, Hume und die Identität wahrnehmbarer Dinge. Historisch-kritische Analyse
zum Kapitel „Wahrnehmung“ in der Phänomenologie von 1807. Frankfurt am Main, Klos-
termann.
———, 2004. Kant’s Transcendental Proof of Realism. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
———, 2013. ‘Hume, Empiricism & the Generality of Thought’. Dialogue: Canadian
Journal of Philosophy/Revue canadienne de philosophie 52.2:233–270.
———, 2015. ‘Conventionalism & the Impoverishment of the Space of Reasons:
Carnap, Quine & Sellars’. Journal for the History of Analytic Philosophy 3.8:1–66;
http://jhaponline.org; doi: https://doi.org/10.15173/jhap.v3i8.42.
———, 2017. „Qualia, Gemütsphilosophie & Methodologie; oder Wie wird aristotelische
Scientia zu cartesianischer Unfehlbarkeit? Zum heutigen Widerstreit des Naturalismus
und Cartesianismus“. Zeitschrift für philosohische Forschung 71,4:457– 494.
———, 2020. Kant’s Critical Epistemology. Oxon & New York, Routledge.
Williams, Donald, 1953. ‘On the Elements of Being’, 2 parts. The Review of Metaphysics
7.1:3–18, 7.2:171–192.
 Kenneth R. Westphal

Kenneth R. Westphal
I Kant’s
mmanuel Kant’s ‘Transcendental Deduction of the Categories’ addresses
issues centrally debated today in philosophy and in cognitive sciences,
especially in epistemology, and in theory of perception. Kant’s insights

Transcendental
into these issues are clouded by pervasive misunderstandings of Kant’s
‘Deduction’ and its actual aims, scope, and argument. The present edition
with its fresh and accurate translation and concise commentary aims to

Kant’s Transcendental Deduction of the Categories

serve these contemporary debates as well as continuing intensive and

Deduction of the
extensive scholarship on Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason. Two surprising
results are that ‘Transcendental Deduction’ is valid and sound, and it holds
independently of Kant’s transcendental idealism. This lucid volume is
interesting and useful to students, yet sufficiently detailed to be

Categories
informative to specialists.

Kenneth R. Westphal is Professor of Philosophy at Boğaziçi University,

İstanbul. His research focuses on the character and scope of rational
justification in non-formal, substantive domains, both moral and
theoretical. His books include several volumes on Kant. Critical Re-Examination,
Elucidation and Corroboration