Pure Intuition, By Immanuel Kant

In this paper, I will argue Kant’s categorical imperative's through a condensed summation of his Grounding for the Metaphysics of Morals with specific regard for the need for categorical imperative and how it's flaws can disband the efficacy of his claim.

Intuition is being able have understanding without proof, evidence, or conscious reasoning. From this much knowledge can be gained. In his works Emerson speaks for us to “trust thyself,” meaning one should trust their instinct and what they think is right. Emerson also says “Absolve you to yourself…” This means one should set themselves free of guilt and shame and trust in what their becoming. Thoreau also speaks to this idea and says, “However mean your life is, meet it and live it…. It looks poorest when you are richest.” He is saying one should live there life no matter what other people think of it, because only that person may look different or weird but they are filled with a rich knowledge and and

There is very little question as to what action a strict deontologist would do in the scenario for this assignment he or she would unequivocally adhere to his or her duty. The more pressing question, of course, revolves around just where that duty lies. For a deontologist, that duty would lie with the job at hand and its responsibilities. As one who took an oath to only program software in accordance to the company that he or she works for which is essentially operating as an extension of the government that wishes the programmer to 'push the button' and destroy millions of innocent lives in World War II it would strongly appear that such an individuals would consider it his or her duty to effectively start World War III.

Kant’s intuitions are representations given by sensation that provide the beginning for all cognition. Essentially, it is the way in which we receive representations which relate immediately to the object. The distinctions between intuitions and pure intuitions lies in the method of affection. Intuitions spur from the input of sensation whereas with pure intuitions there is no mingling of sensation. Pure sensations are transcendentally ideal meaning they are necessary forms of cognition. In virtue of reason, a transcendental truth cannot be denied and it is not necessary to test since it must be real. Pure intuitions determine exactly how we receive sensory input; they are not empirical and can be viewed more as a process where intuitions are passive experiences that happen to a person.

He states that the power of judgment has a inspirational structure. Kant argues that there are a number of principles that must necessarily be true of experience in order for judgment to be possible. Lastly, Kant argues that the role of the mind in making nature is not limited to space, time, and the categories. In the Analytic of Principles, Kant argues that even the necessary consistency of objects to natural law arises from the mind. Thus far, Kant's divine method has permitted him to reveal the a priori components of sensations. He believes that there are a priori judgments that have to govern all appearances of objects. Kant went as far as saying that  a priori judgments not only are possible but they can actually offer the basis for the majority of human knowledge. He believes that there is a form of intelligence that is considered a priori which requires synthetic judgments in order to be obtained. Therefore, Kant believes that synthetic a priori judgment makes it possible to understand things that we

Through Kant’s views of reasoning, I believe that the ideal relationship shared between humans is based off of our unique ability to be able to decipher between information shared to us by others, though reasoning. There has to be a healthy balance between people that allows for communication. If you are used to having a higher power looking over you making your decisions, that no longer is a two sided relationship but a one sided relationship. Kant says that “it is difficult for any individual man to work himself out to the immaturity that has all but become his nature” (Kant 1). That immaturity that man faces, is the familiarization one feels when having others think for himself. The ideal relationship between other humans should work equally

“Sapere aude!” is the rallying call for Kant’s enlightenment. Translated, it roughly means dare to be wise. Plato, through the voice of Socrates in the dialogues The Euthyphro and The Crito, demonstrates the ultimate example of Kant’s definition of enlightenment. Socrates fearlessly dares to be wise.

Perception is everything. People never know what is going on with the another race or side. In Toni Morrison’s “Recitatif” she brings up racism and the societal normal. She never reveals the race of either of the girls in this story. Never knowing the race of the girls other than they are two different races shows how one race never knows that the other is thinking about or where they are coming from. In this story, two girls meet from very different back grounds and different races and become friends, then go separate directions. They continue to meet throughout their lives and try to rekindle the childhood friendship as adults. This shows how children do not know the differences or the color lines that society has put into place. As children, gender, race, and religion is never an issue. Racism is something that society has created. Society has made racism one of the main barriers throughout the world. In the story, the two girls are friends and live in a group home. The girls are witnesses to some bad things carried out by the older girls in the home. They end up separating and going different ways in life. When they meet up later, while rekindling their relationship they begin to reminisce about their childhood. They come to find out that their perception and memories do not exactly match up. The way things are perceived can change an outlook on life; after finding out how others see the same situation, it might change who you are and what you

Immanuel Kant I can understand his saying do what you can the same time let it be a universal law. So therefore whatever you do let it make sense and be fair that everyone could do and most likely be legal. Like helping people homeless people for instance I think if everyone offers a homeless person a hand with clothes and food that would be fair. Like you wouldn’t have to go out your way to help them you could give them a shirt that you no longer want, or of food item anything inside your cabin, a roll of toilet paper and that wouldn’t be too much on your end unless its your last. However, if everyone would do that would could it would help a person in need many of us waste money on a daily basis on things we really don’t need. It would be

Kant argues that synthetic a priori judgements are possible because they are made up of both mathematics and pure natural science.

Applying Kant’s Categorical Imperative, acting “on the maxim whereby thou canst at the same time will it should become universal law,” to Larry and Rhonda’s scenario, the right thing to do is for Rhonda to take responsibility for her actions. To illustrate, if Rhonda were to ask Larry to take the blame so that she may avoid trouble for herself, the maxim in this case, she should imagine a world where everyone asks a friend to cover for them when faced with unfortunate circumstances. The idea of a world like this is ridiculous. By the “universal law” of Rhonda’s maxim Larry should also ask someone to take the blame for him, in order to avoid certain failures. The only other person in this situation is Rhonda and we have reached a

Kant’s theory explains about the morality of the actions of a man is judged in terms of the consequences or the results of the action.

The origin of the distinction between analytic and synthetic Quine traces back through Kant to Hume and Leibniz, but their accounts are imprecise Laudan writes. The first attempt is to argue something like, “Statement S is analytic if and only if a denial of that statement results in a contradiction.” Quine's argument here is straightforward: what does this mean? Does this presuppose analyticity? He thinks it does, so he moves on to other problems with Kant's definition these include: (a) it is restricted to statements of subject/predicate form (are all analytic truths of the form "X is P"?) (b) Kant relies on a metaphorical notion of "conceptual containment" that is unexplained Lastly, Quine notes, Kant says that analytic propositions are

In his Metaphysical Exposition of Space, Kant attempts to show that the experience of space is just a form of intuition. Kant defines space as that of which we sense out side of us, in comparison to our mind, which is

Kant believed that there are different concepts and intuitions in which intuitions are put under concepts. Kant refers these intuitions into what he calls the three-fold synthesis. Kant describes the three fold synthesis as “the capacities in the understanding to compare, connect, and unify the fragmentary manifold items in intuition” (A97). To put it in different terms, the three fold synthesis describes the necessary components for intuition of what is happening in the outside world. It allows us to Kant believed that the three fold synthesis is divided into three different types of synthesis. According to Kant, it is required that all of the synthesis work in unison in order for experience to happen. Experience is what makes possible the synthesis of apprehension, in return makes the possibility of the synthesis of reproduction, which creates the possibility of the synthesis of recondition. Therefore, Kant argues, the synthesis of recondition is contingent on experience. Kant also stated that for each of the three fold synthesis, there are both empirical and pure levels. In other words, each of the three fold synthesis have two ways of being interpreted in the mind, one based on our intellects because it is gathered through experience, and another based upon the fact that the manifold works in unison with the others and are dependent on each other for experience to happen.