Questions on Kant_ Critique of Pure Reason
Transcendental Aesthetics
Short Questions
Q. What is Intuition?
Q.What is Conception?
Q. What is the distinction between the two?
Q. What is Sensibility?
Q. What is Understanding?
Q. What is Sensation?
Q. What is the distinction between Sensation and Sensibility?
Q. What are empirical intuitions?
Q. What is Appearance? Distinguish between Form and Matter of Appearance.
Q. What is apriori intuition?
QWhat are the forms of empirical intuition.?
Q. What are pure intuitions? (The last 3 questions are virtually the same)
Q. What is the difference between Transcendental Aesthetics and Transcendental Logic?
Broader Questions
Q. Explain fully the significance of the term ‘Transcendental Aesthetics’
Q. What is the meaning of the term transcendental’? Distinguish between ‘transcendental’
and ‘transcendent’.
Q. Explain whether physics, history, and psychology will be transcendental.
[Hint: You have to examine from two aspects – whether they give knowledge of knowledge,
and whether they give knowledge of apriori knowledge ]
Q.Why is a separate discipline required for finding the apriori functioning of the empirical
intuitions?
[Hint: Explain why psychology can only give us a posteriori laws of empirical intuition, not
apriori forms…]
Q. Explain the metaphysical exposition that space is apriori (not a posteriori)
Q. Explain the metaphysical exposition that space is intuition (not concept)
Q Explain the transcendental exposition that space is a priori
1
[Hint: Geometrical propositions are necessary or apriori propositions, the subject matter is
space, hence space itself has to be a priori…]
Q. Explain the transcendental exposition that space is intuition
[Hint: Geometrical propositions are synthetic, not analytic, they require synthesis of concepts
with intuition. Analytic propositions like - All bachelors are unmarried - are only based on
one concept being contained in another, do not require any synthesis of concepts with given
intuitions. But the proposition - that all triangles have the sum of three angles equal to 180
degrees – requires that the triangle is drawn in productive imagination whereby space itself is
created..Hence space - the subject matter of geometry – has to be an intuition - not a
concept.]
Q. What is the distinction between Kant and Leibnitz regarding the nature of space?
[Hint: For both Leibnitz and Kant space is not substantive ontological container. But for
Leibnitz space is a relation of representations, and these relations are real. That is, when a
cluster of monads synthesises certain representations with a degree of clarity – that extent of
synthesis and clarity constitutes space for that cluster of monads. So for Leibnitz space is
spread out as a relation of representations or activities – activities that are real. But for Kant –
space is not laid out there as even as relations - they are forms for receiving intuitions, and
are present only in the cognising mind. For Leibnitz there is no possibility of representations
being carried out in a non-spatial form. But for Kant there is… ]
Q. What will be the difference in the respective approach of Leibnitz and Kant – with respect
of the distinction between space and time?
Hint: For Leibnitz there will be no difference inner sense and outer sense – i.e. between mind
and body. To say that bodies are spatial is to say that they are passive or confused
representations. What Kant calls form of outer sense or space (the form whereby the subject
is - as if - affected by something external - is merely confused or passive representation
according to Leibnitz. What Kant calls the form of inner sense or time is clearer
representation for Leibnitz.
Transcendental Analytic
Deduction of Pure Concepts of the Understanding (2nd Edition)
Introductory write-up on the notions of unity and combination
• Combination cannot be given by the object , combination or synthesis is
an act of self-activity of the subject
• When unity is added to the manifold - it is not by a product of
combination
2
• Just as space and time are not added to non-spatial and non-temporal
objects – like adding colour to a colourless object or adding tune to mere
lyrics, or adding a piece of cloth to an already existing piece of cloth
• This is what Locke and Hume did not realise - in so far as they claimed
that understanding can never add any new element to what is given to the
senses – it can only combine, add, diminish, etc. …
• Kant is suggesting that understanding or reason cannot add a structure or
unity to what is un-combined – by way of combination
• This is what we have already realised with respect to space and time –
experience cannot add space and time-structures to something non-spatial
and non-temporal – it can at most add more fine-tuned orders to
disarranged objects
• Disarrangement is also a form of arrangement
• Adding empirical information about spatial geography or calenders -
What it is to add time to a timeless existence, to add space to a person
who has lost his sense of exact geographical location….? This kind of
addition may be a posteriori additions of specific information, but not
addition of space and time itself.
• We have now to understand in a more expansive way - not only with
respect to space and time – but more generally – that unity cannot be
added by way of combination. Combination presupposes a self-
identical unifying principle.
• Unity was derived as an apriori category. (See the list of 12 Categories)
But this Unity was one mode of unification in individual judgements vis a
vis the other modes of synthesis in Plurality (Particular) and Totality
(Universal)
• This unity ( as one of the catergories ) is subsumed under the broadest
principle of unification
• This Unity that Kant is now speaking of - is what makes understanding
possible – so cannot be a product of understanding
• Hierarchy in principles of unification – …
• This highest principle of unification or highest unity is the unity of self
consciousness.
Q. Explain the significance of Kant’s comment that unity cannot be a product of
combination but must lies at the basis of combination itself.
Q. Explain Kant’s claim that the unity of self-consciousness is the highest unity
.
3
[Hint: Explain the hierarchy of unifications –
Representations or manifold has to be synthesised - ultimately as belonging to
one consciousness
To combine patches of colour, whiffs of smell as belonging to substance quality
model , to belong to a table - all these presuppose that the manifold is
synthesised under the supreme principle of I]
Q. Explain Kant’s notion of ‘original synthetic unity of apperception’ or ‘pure
apperception’ or ‘transcendental unity of apperception’.
[ Include the significance of the terms ‘pure’ and ‘original’ – that is the highest
principle, and that this consciousness cannot itself be made the object of
consciousness. It is transcendental – for the pure subject of representations is
always a priori, once it is made the object of consciousness it becomes a
posteriori]
Q. Explain the distinction between empirical consciousness and pure unity of
consciousness
Q. Will the cases of split personalities violate Kant’s demand for the original
unity of apperception?
[Hint: The variant content of empirical consciousness can be forgotten, doubted,
or one stream of unification may be split up into two strands - in case of
schitzophrenia, but for split personalities to be possible the original unity of
apperception is presupposed…To say ‘I am not Dr Jekyll – presupposes that one
conceives this non-identity under the unity of apperception]
Q. Distinguish between analytic unity of apperception and synthetic unity of
apperception.
Q. What is the distinction between subjective unity of consciousness and
objective unity of consciousness.
Q. Explain the significance of Kant’s claim that the objective unity of
apperception consists all the logical form of judgements.
Or
What is the crux of transcendental deduction of categories?
[Hint: The manifold has to be synthesised under the original unity of
apperception has to ne synthesised in productive imagination - and this
productive imagination constitutes the schema for the categories of
understanding. ]
4
Q. Explain the significance of Kant’s comment that categories have no other
application than to objects of intuition.
Q. Can transcendental unity of apperception be given in intuition?
Schematism of Pure Concepts of Understanding
Q.Elucidate the problem of subsuming the intuitions under pure concepts of
understanding (categories).
[Hint: The two faculties of sensibility and understanding fundamentally
opposed – since there is no receptive character in understanding how can it
receive the manifold to apply its categories on the intuition?...]
Q. Explain after Kant the need for a third something or bridge between the
categories and intuitions.
Q. What is ‘transcendental schemata’?
Q. How does Kant show time to be the universal form of synthesis of all
intuitions?
Q.How does Kant show that every category must contain a special schema?
Q. How does Kant show that though sensibility and understanding opposed to
each other ultimately turn out to be one containing the other?
Q. Explain fully the distinction between ‘image’ and ‘schemata’ with adequate
examples.
Q. Explain the schema of Quantity (Explain the variations of schema under
Quantity)
Q. Explain the schema of Qualiity (Same as Above)
Q. Explain the schema of Relation (Same as Above)
Q. Explain the schema of Modality (Same as Above)
Q. Explain how under each category time itself is generated in a special mould.
(B 185)
Q. ‘What the schematism of understanding effects by means of the
transcendental synthesis of imagination is simply the unity of all the manifold
of intuition in inner sense, and so indirectly the unity of apperception which as a
function corresponds to the receptivity of inner sense.’ (B 185) Explain .
5
Q. ‘Although the schema of sensibility first realise the categories they at the
same time restrict them to conditions which lie outside understanding.’- Explain
Q. The categories without schemata are merely functions of the understanding
for concepts; and represent no object. (B 187) Explain
