Kantian Vocabulary

After experience or examination; reasoning from effects to causes; not problematic for philosophy

Prior to experience or examination; reasoning from causes to effects; those things – judgments and elements of knowledge that are pure, universal and necessary; independent of experience;

Propositions in which the subject contains the predicates that describe them; tautologies and a priori, e.g. all bachelors are married; the negation of the proposition is a contradiction

Propositions, statements, judgments that are demonstrably necessary or impossible (A=A or A=~A). These propositions are not merely ‘probable’ (“It is likely that when it rains it pours in South Georgia”) nor are they statements that reflect something is or is not the case (“New York is larger than Chicago”).

The process or function in which one makes one’s own representations into objects of one’s thoughts BUT only according to the categories; it unifies concepts and intuitions in judgment; unity is a presupposition of all self-knowledge

‘…pure forms of judgment under which all possible objects of judgment are included…; The categories are ‘innate’ within the mind and as such are a priori; The categories include quantity (unity, plurality, totality and axioms of intuition), quality (reality, negation, limitation and anticipants of perception), relation (substance, cause, community and analogies of experience), and modality (possibility, existence, necessity and postulates of empirical thought).

Concepts, unlike intuitions, do not relate to any particular object but at best, represent objects in general by re-presenting some feature or features that several objects have in common; concepts, in essence are very much like predicates – they require application to a subject

Dependent upon a preceding cause or event; that which could have been otherwise;

For Kant dialectic occurs when the use or function of a faculty – ability of the mind in brief – is thought to be more general than it actually is; dialectic often occurs when we apply our analyses, judgments and even critiques to noumenal concepts – thing is themselves

The mind can come to possess knowledge of extended objects in space and time

For something to be perceived it must be situated in space and time but that we perceive objects at all with colors and other ‘accidents’ constitutes the empirically subjective; however, to be subjective empirically and object must necessarily be located in space and time – the characteristic of transcendent subjectivity

The judgment, statement or position of some feature of an objective reality; “What I am seeing is a chair.”

Ability; the mind has faculties intrinsically that contain internal structures – like categories – and automatically synthesizing sensory inputs according to special rules that directly reflect the internal structures (e.g. We see or experience and horse and because of theses innate structures of categories we are able – have the faculty – to synthesize its quantity, qualities, modalities and relations to determine, “That is a horse!”

Just those features or characteristics that are necessary and universal for and determinative of something being of “that” type AND the sensuous feature(s) of our experience taken merely as presenting a particular object; the direct presentation to the mind, through the senses, of something particular that we can think of as that; the presentation to experience of a particular; necessary and universal features of an intuition

A representation of experiences in the material world; concepts that arise from our knowledge of the empirical world and point beyond themselves to the noumenal or transcendent realm (see the generality of concept)