Peak 174 causal relationship

It's very different, don't think it's necessary for Westerners to go around like this. These two abilities, one is causality, which actually stems from such an ability, and the other is Hume. These are two different abilities, the former being logical effort and normative ability, while the latter is purely experiential. These two abilities are completely different, they are not the same ability.

In Kant's view, this ability is the condition of experience. Because this ability is a rule for us to organize experience, synthesize experience, and combine the appearances of experience together. Without rules, experience cannot arise, and we cannot have experience.

This ability, according to Kant, is a necessary condition for experience, which means that without him, there can be no experience. Experience must have already permeated with such an ability, which is not a psychological ability, but a logical ability possessed by our prior subjectivity. This must be clarified.

Hume, on the other hand, relied on the ability of human psychological association, which are two completely different levels of abilities. On the surface, they seem very similar because psychological association also connects two things together. However, this is not the same kind of connection in the same sense, and Kant would say that only after this connection, can you have the following experiential connection.

Think about the truth behind it. You only have one ability, and the following ability is possible: Hume's association of two things, one before and one after, and the causal relationship between them.

Last time I talked to you about the second fallacy of reasoning, Hume said that when we see a ship, for example, sailing from Chongqing to Yichang, it goes from upstream to downstream. The ship was still on board just now, but even if it has come down after a day or half a day, it will arrive at Baidi City or somewhere, and then go to Yichang. Yes, but Kant said, you should know that in the so-called top-down approach, we have a feeling of returning a thousand miles of Jiangling in a day. Yesterday in Chongqing, today in Yichang, we have this feeling. In fact, there is a connection that has already entered. Kang De talked about the chronological relationship of time. Without order, it would be impossible to have such a connection from upstream to downstream in the past, and ships would not have such a connection.

This ship departed from Chongqing yesterday and is now docked at Yichang Port. In fact, it appears to be two ships on the surface. Hume would think that because people can see these two ships with their eyes, they are related to the ship from yesterday. Kant would say right or wrong. I can admit that if you see the ship, it is the same ship from yesterday. However, the reason why you can consider it as a ship from yesterday is that there is already a time frame in it, and there is no need to talk about it without a time frame. You, this is actually the previous ship, and the order of the previous ship is in it.

Pay attention to why I should spend more time talking about it, because we Chinese people are especially unfamiliar with this kind of thinking. In fact, I personally think that it has nothing to do with the Chinese and Germans. Everyone experiences the world in this way. In fact, it's just that we don't have Kant's clear idea of what is in it. We have already felt it. On the contrary, we don't know it. We have caused ourselves a lot of trouble, and we don't know what the problem is.

Kant's greatness is here. In fact, when we think about the Chinese people, if there is no time frame in advance, how can we say that you arrive before me and I arrive later than you, or even take my last lesson as an example. There is a teacher in front of me. When you say this sentence, you can form a judgment. In fact, you have a combination principle between you and me, which has already been in it. It links us together. It is a judgment, but the judgment can be formed. There is a combination rule in him. The rule that combines me with you is the context, and the context is It has something to do with the order of time.

It has nothing to do with whether you are Chinese or German. We are human, and our experience is formed in this way. Kant believed that as for why we must imagine things as causally connected, because if we do not do so, we cannot combine our sensory experience in any way. Only by believing that there is a causal relationship between things can we judge them and they are known.

Without such a combination, without structuring our experience into a complex and unified representation of the objective world arranged according to causal clues, the entire spiritual life of a person is pitch black and can gain nothing. Kant believed that we cannot break the sand pot and ask why causality is necessary instead of other types of sex. Can we have other rules of combination. Kant said you shouldn't ask anymore, because asking like this is meaningless.

If we were to talk now, Kant would say to answer you with Wittgenstein. You must remember that the world is like this, it's not why he is like this, the world is like this. Don't ask anymore.

Later, Kant stated in the First Critique that this is a rational fact. The fact that it is rational means that our rationality is like this, and you must accept it. You cannot ask anymore, you cannot ask why I cannot do anything else, you cannot ask again. Of course, pure reason or reason applied by experience cannot establish any experience about appearances like God, because the only innate comprehensive proof we humans can have is not related to the definitions of mathematics and geometry, but to the possible conditions of our self-awareness.

So, the immortal soul of God is neither a possible condition for our self-awareness relationship nor related to the background of geometry and mathematics. He is unknowable to us.

Here is another very difficult question posed by Kant in his First Critique. People will definitely ask such a question. We have no problem with it here, but we need to ask a question: why can the concept of intellect, which is a category, be used for the complexity of sensibility?

Also, working behind closed doors is a crucial issue. Because the diversity of experience is varied, why can such an abstract rule be applied to all kinds of diversity? This truth cannot be answered in an unreasonable way. When asked, there must still be an explanation. Why can diversity be manifested in tangible forms, while rules only have these few rules? Why can these 12 categories of rules be applied to all diversity? The problem is still really tricky.

Because the complexity of emotions and the rules of reason are two completely different types of things, if you want to say that these two types of things can be combined, we call it official philosophy in our classroom. The questions are easy to answer because it reflects the objective nature of things, and of course, it can be used to solve problems easily.

Moreover, Kant's problem cannot be easily solved here. These two completely different types of things, how can they be applied to all different varieties in one?

Kant himself admitted that in his Second Critique, he accepted the concept of intellect as being based on empirical intuition, which is completely heterogeneous in comparison. These two types of things are fundamentally different, and they can never be found in any intuition, such as identity, contradiction, causality, or probability. We cannot feel them based on our feelings, and we cannot find these things in our sensory experience.

We cannot find these abstract concepts, while our intuition is very concrete. Red, hard, triangular, cylindrical. Irregular, always very intuitive and specific. How is it possible for Kant to apply categories to phenomena by attributing intuition to those concepts?

The problem arises where two completely different types of things, one abstract and the other rich, colorful, and concrete, cannot be applied to each other. And it's very different, diverse, how can you use it here?

This is indeed a very big question, Kant proposed an important concept here, and important conceptualists have had a great influence, such as Heidegger. What concept?

He proposed that in addition to our emotional and intellectual abilities, he proposed our third ability, which is imagination. In addition to sensibility and intellect, there is a third ability that humans possess, which is imagination. The function of imagination is to combine concepts and intuitions to match each other, which requires imagination.

In other words, imagination is the bridge that connects sensibility and intellect. Kant's imagination is not our usual imagination. Kant distinguishes between two types of imagination, one called experiential imagination and postnatal imagination. The postnatal imagination, for example, when I go home now and imagine my father picking me up at the train station, is postnatal imagination. Of course, everyone has this kind of imagination. For example, we can also imagine that I have grown up, or that I have become a child again, or something like that, which is the imagination of the day after tomorrow.

Kant's imagination is a priori imagination, but Kant is not referring to empirical imagination. Empirical imagination means that you can think whatever you want, and he is talking about a crucial concept of priori imagination. A priori imagination, why is it called that?

Because Kant's concept is the possibility condition of our experience, with him there is experience, without him there is no experience, but he himself does not rely on experience, we call him a priori. In principle, it is not something we can discover through psychological introspection, but rather my own inner self. It is impossible for me to reflect on my own inner self and see if I can have such an imagination.