Space

by Kant

3 minutes • 507 words

Table of contents

2. Metaphysical Exposition of this Conception

Superphysics Note

We replace Trascendental with Metaphysical

2. Metaphysical Exposition of this Conception

Our external senses give our minds the representation of external objects as being in space.

These give us their shape, dimensions, and relations to each other

The mind uses the internal sense to contemplates itself or its internal state.

Yet the contemplation of our internal state gives a determinate form which relates the inward determinations of the mind to time.

We cannot have any external intuition of time and of space.

What then are time and space? Are they real existences?

Space is not an idea derived from outward experiences*

This is because the idea of space must already exist as a foundation so that my sensations can relate to something outside of me, as being in a different location than me.

Consequently, the idea of space cannot come from external phenomena through experience.

On the contrary, this external experience of space is only possible through my inherent idea of space.

Superphysics Note

This is totally wrong. Space is an inferior Element to the Aether in the 5 Elements model. Kant is merely siding with the idea of abstract space versus the phenomena of physical space. This is to empower his arbitrary transcendental system. This is proven when he uses abstract geometry as the basis of space

Space then is a necessary withn-the-mind idea.

It serves as the foundation of all external intuitions.

We never can imagine the non-existence of space.*

Superphysics Note

This is alredy possible with point-particles. It is possible to imagine spacelessness. But it is impossible to think of non-identity because doing so with lead to non-existence i.e. the point-particle has identity, but no space

Space is no discursive or general conception of the relations of things, but a pure intuition.

For, in the first place, we can only represent to ourselves one space, and, when we talk of divers spaces, we mean only parts of one and the same space. Moreover, these parts cannot antecede this one all-embracing space, as the component parts from which the aggregate can be made up, but can be cogitated only as existing in it.

Space is essentially one, and multiplicity in it, consequently the general notion of spaces, of this or that space, depends solely upon limitations. Hence it follows that an a priori intuition (which is not empirical) lies at the root of all our conceptions of space.

Thus, moreover, the principles of geometry—for example, that “in a triangle, two sides together are greater than the third,” are never deduced from general conceptions of line and triangle, but from intuition, and this a priori, with apodeictic certainty.

Space is represented as an infinite given quantity.

Every idea is a representation contained in an infinite multitude of different possible representations.

But an idea cannot have within itself an infinite multitude of representations.

Nevertheless, space is so conceived of, for all parts of space are equally capable of being produced to infinity.

Consequently, the original representation of space is passive-knowing within the mind, not active-knowing.