Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Kant aims to avoid the conclusion that spatial representa... — Carmelics
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Perception
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Supports→Representing empirical objects in space is not illusory.

    Kant aims to avoid the conclusion that spatial representation of empirical objects is illusory.

    PerceptionTruth & Knowledge
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.

    No one has weighed in yet. Be the first to share reasons for or against this statement.

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Topics

    PerceptionTruth & Knowledge

    Connections

    1 topic

    Skepticism1 linked

    Related

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Browse more in Perception
    Related propositions within the same area of thought.
    If an epistemic condition E does not accurately represent its objects, then repr...Representing empirical objects in space is not illusory.Space is a genuine epistemic condition of our cognition, so empirical objects co...

    Similar

    Representing empirical objects in space is not illusory.84%If an epistemic condition E does not accurately represent its objects,...81%Space is a genuine epistemic condition of our cognition, so empirical ...80%Representations that empirical objects 'are' are not always self-repre...80%

    Source

    AI-extracted
    SEP: kant-transcendental-idealism
    View source passageHide passage
    This grounds a distinction between two ways of considering the objects of our cognition. When we consider objects qua objects of our cognition, we consider them as falling under the relevant epistemic conditions. If E is an epistemic condition of cognition of objects, then objects must fall under E (i.e., be accurately represented by E); otherwise, in representing them with E, I would not be cognizing objects but misrepresenting them. My representation of objects with E would be an illusion, the

    Details

    Type
    premise
    Perspectives
    0 (0 for, 0 against)
    Edits
    1 edit

    Open for perspectives

    This idea is waiting for its first supporting or challenging perspective.

    Share the first perspective