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
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Kant's 'things in themselves' (Dinge an sich) are distinc... — Carmelics
    Home
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Supports→Kant's account of affection by objects in space leads to a contradiction.

    Kant's 'things in themselves' (Dinge an sich) are distinct from appearances and serve as the genuine source of affection, not spatial objects.

    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    1 reason for
    1 reason against

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Kant must posit things-in-themselves to explain why our representations aren't arbitrary: they're constrained by external non-spatial causes.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Space and time are forms of human intuition, not features of reality itself, so the source of affection must transcend spatial existence.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Without noumena distinct from phenomena, we cannot account for the regularity and necessity we experience in empirical knowledge.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.If things-in-themselves are utterly unknowable, Kant's claim about them as 'affective sources' lacks justifiable content or coherence.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Positing non-spatial causes of spatial intuitions creates an explanatory gap: how causation works across the phenomenon-noumenon boundary remains obscure.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The distinction may be conceptually confused: calling noumena non-spatial while claiming they affect us spatially-bound minds seems self-contradictory.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

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

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.

    Connections

    2 topics

    Truth & Knowledge1 linkedCausation1 linked

    Related

    If things-in-themselves are utterly unknowable, Kant's claim about them as 'affe...Kant must posit things-in-themselves to explain why our representations aren't a...Kant's account of affection by objects in space leads to a contradiction.Positing non-spatial causes of spatial intuitions creates an explanatory gap: ho...
    +3 moreShow less
    Space and time are forms of human intuition, not features of reality itself, so ...The distinction may be conceptually confused: calling noumena non-spatial while ...Without noumena distinct from phenomena, we cannot account for the regularity an...

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    2 (1 for, 1 against)
    Edits
    1 edit