A mere stream of unconnected representations could not be called Essay

A mere stream of unconnected representations could not be called knowledge. As Kant puts it These perceptions would not then - Essay Example Therefore, Immanuel Kant implied that all posteriori judgments are because experience alone cannot be used to comprehend the meaning of something. It only means some judgments but not all synthetic judgments can be said to be posteriori since geometrical and mathematical judgments cannot be based on experience. This is because, they could not have been known from senses or experience. Kant consents that it is right for rationalists to argue that we know what we know or about things in this world with reason or certainty while empiricists are also correct by stating that such knowledge attained by certainty cannot be limited to truths by definitions nor cannot it be offered by experience. Instead, Kant argues that we know and understand about the world as we experience it in accordance with the unchanging and universally shared frame of mind. We reason or think about the world in terms of space, categories (like cause and effect), time, possibility, reality, and substance. That is to say that whatever people think or reason, they ought to think about it in certain manner (For instance, as having existing or not existing), not because that is the manner in which the world is, but instead that is the way that our brain or mind command experience. (Dicker, 2004). In sum, Kant argued that we cannot claim to have knowledge without sensation but sense alone cannot offer knowledge either. People cannot clam to know things about the world not because we go outside our mind to compare and contrast what we experience with reality outside it but instead, the world we know is already structured and organized according to certain innate pattern that is the human brain or mind. Knowledge is possible due to the fact that it is about how things appear to us in this world and not about how things are made. Therefore, reason offers us the form or structure of what we know while the senses on the other hand, offer the content or information. Kant arguments were that we can claim t o know about things we experience and structure in terms of mind’s form. For instance, soul or God and metaphysics cannot be claimed to known because we have not experienced them. In addition, Kant’s philosophies on theory of knowledge were that we would not be in a position to know if our concepts about the world are real or true. Further, it implies that we have to redefine what is true as that which we experience instead of that which senses or experience presents (Ameriks, 2003). In simple terms, Kant meant that human beings are limited to things as they appear thus either we will never at one particular point know if our concepts are real or true or if we ought to redefine what truth means. Kant argued that space and time are pure intuitions of human senses while ideas of physics such as inertia and causations are pure intuitions of human understanding. According to Kant, sensory experience is meaningful because the faculty of human sensibility evaluates and analy zes it thus organizing it in a coherent manner of space and time. These intuitions are the where human beings obtain mathematical knowledge (Gardner, 1999). Events that occur in time and space would have no meaning if it were not for human comprehension that asses and organizes perceptions and experiences according to notions such as causation which make the tenets of natural science. If space and time are the activities of the mind, then people might wonder what is