This is one possible answer:
"Königsberg professor presents in this passage, summarizes the conclusions obtained after his criticism or analysis of pure speculative reason.
notes, first, that space and time are only a priori forms of empirical intuition and pure concepts or categories, only provide knowledge as they enter summary with sensible intuitions. It then argues that no one can know the thing itself, which Kant called noumenon, but only the thing in me, "as an object of empirical intuition" or phenomenon. This portion of the text is descriptive and in it the author does not stop to justify their claims, and believes that based on " analytical part of the criticism. "
From the above premises, the Prussian philosopher draws two conclusions in a deductive manner. The first is that theoretical knowledge of reason is always contained within the limits of experience. And second, that the noumenon can be thought of, but not known, because the thing itself is precisely the consideration of objects located beyond the experience. "
Note:
As can be seen, has not explained the relationship between the ideas of the text in a specific paragraph dedicated to it, but have explained the main ideas and, simultaneously, the relationship between them. It is advised that, as far as possible, students try to make the comment in this way.
0 comments:
Post a Comment