The Critique of Pure Reason, Part 2, Section I: samenvatting

Wat er gebeurt

1. The speaker uses legal proof to distinguish a concept’s rightful use from the mere fact that people possess it.
2. A transcendental deduction justifies a priori application to objects, whereas an empirical deduction explains acquisition through experience.
3. Sensations prompt cognition into activity, but this account of its development cannot justify pure concepts.
4. Geometry relies on sensible intuition, while pure concepts of understanding raise questions about their validity and limits.
5. Space and time condition appearances, but the categories do not obviously condition how objects are given in intuition.
6. Causation requires necessity and strict universality, neither of which observation or induction can establish.

In deze sectie

Waar je op kunt letten

The sentence separates observed regularity from necessary connection. This distinction explains why experience cannot justify the pure concept of cause.

Korte controle