167
comes to us through our experience
of the world. They opposed the
views of rationalist philosophers,
such as Descartes or Gottfried
Leibniz, who argued that the
mind’s ability to reason and deal
with concepts is more important
for knowledge than experience.
The empiricists claimed that
the recent success of science
was due to scientists being much
more careful in their observations
of the world than they had been
previously, and making fewer
unjustified assumptions based
on reason alone. Kant argues that
although this is no doubt partly
true, it could not be the whole
answer, as it is simply false to say
that there was no detailed and
careful empirical observation in
science before the 16th century.
The real issue, Kant argues, is
that a new scientific method arose
that made empirical observations
valuable. This method involves
two elements. First, it asserts that
concepts such as force or movement
can be perfectly described by
mathematics. Second, it tests its
own conceptions of the world by
asking specific questions about
nature and observing the answers. ❯❯
See also: René Descartes 116–23 ■ John Locke 130–33 ■ George Berkeley 138–41 ■ David Hume 148–53 ■
Johann Gottlieb Fichte 176 ■ Georg Hegel 178–85 ■ Friedrich Schelling 335 ■ Arthur Schopenhauer 186–88
THE AGE OF REVOLUTION
There are two
worlds: the world of
experience sensed
by our bodies and
the world as it
is in itself.A “thing-in-itself”
(something considered exterior
to our minds) may have nothing
to do with space,time,
or any of our concepts.Space and time
cannot be learned
about through experience;
they are intuitions
of the mind.Oursensibility is the
ability to sense things
in the world.Our understanding
is the ability to think
about things.So a thing appears
in space and time only
insofar as it is sensed
by our minds.Concepts only apply
to things insofar
as they are sensed
by our minds.“Things-in-themselves”
are unknowable.It is precisely in
knowing its limits that
philosophy exists.
Immanuel Kant