To
prepare for the first blogpost I spend a lot of time reading Kant's Critique of
Pure Reason and Plato's Theaetetus and figuring out which one are the most
important thoughts in it. Furthermore I read some summaries of both texts to
really get what the main points are. After the reading I was a bit confused
about what they actually tried to say, especially when it came to Kant's a
priori and a posteriori concept. By looking them up on google I thought that I
understood what Kant meant. During the lecture I had to think a lot about what
I read and what we were discussing. I figured out that I might have mixed up
the understanding from Kant's a priori and a posteriori concept, but the
seminar was supposed to help me clarify my confusion about that.
While discussing the for me most confusing part of the two texts (the a priori and a posteriori concept), it appeared that I was not the only one having problem with the understanding of them. We tried to figure out a "right" answer about it, by giving examples like E.T. showing up on the earth for the first time and pointing on something and using another word for it than we would. The most important progress I made in the last week was to get to know a better understanding of the difference between a priori and a posteriori knowledge and Kant's point of view on it. I also learned that knowledge about the world is always structured according to time and space, which made no sense at all to me in the beginning, but the seminar really helped me to understand it better. It says that objects need to be defined and structured and not only described. One of the most interesting relations, I already noticed while reading the texts the first time, was that the terms perception and experience are often used in context of Kant's sayings, but for me they refer more to Plato, because he was the one discussing the meaning of seeing and hearing "trough" our eyes and ears. That points out the close relation the two theories or point of views have.
While discussing the for me most confusing part of the two texts (the a priori and a posteriori concept), it appeared that I was not the only one having problem with the understanding of them. We tried to figure out a "right" answer about it, by giving examples like E.T. showing up on the earth for the first time and pointing on something and using another word for it than we would. The most important progress I made in the last week was to get to know a better understanding of the difference between a priori and a posteriori knowledge and Kant's point of view on it. I also learned that knowledge about the world is always structured according to time and space, which made no sense at all to me in the beginning, but the seminar really helped me to understand it better. It says that objects need to be defined and structured and not only described. One of the most interesting relations, I already noticed while reading the texts the first time, was that the terms perception and experience are often used in context of Kant's sayings, but for me they refer more to Plato, because he was the one discussing the meaning of seeing and hearing "trough" our eyes and ears. That points out the close relation the two theories or point of views have.
I see that the seminar helped you understand both texts much better, when I compare your pre and post blog. What made me understand the a priori /posteriori concept better was the sentence "All bachelors are unmarried", which is an a priori synthetic judgement, because the word bachelor itself already states the marital status. But I also like the E.T. reference!
AntwortenLöschenI also had problem understanding the texts, and I think I got the terms wrong the first time XD But the seminar and lecture helped clear it up for me as well, and judging from what you and most others say, I think we're supposed to be confused in the beginning! Your E.T example is awesome, I haven't really thought about that before, really illustrates that there is so much more to objects and people than their names!
AntwortenLöschenI didn't catch on to the close relation between Kant and Plato as far as their views on perception and experience, neither in the texts nor the seminars/lectures, so that's certainly an interesting point of view. The concepts of a priori and a posteriori always seem to pose a problem for most people, especially when combined with the somewhat similar concept of synthetic and analytical knowledge. Still, I too thought the idea of E.T. landing on earth and trying to describe a rabbit was a helpful way of illustrating that very hypothetical idea, as well as being a moderately amusing mental image.
AntwortenLöschenI like your blog design and the fact that your reflection is easy to follow. It sounds like you had an interesting example to explain a priori and a posteriori knowledge. Before reading your blog post I had only heard explanations in the form of “bachelors” and “pupils”. It would have been interesting to hear how the discussion about “E.T.” and a “rabbit” discussion went and how it helped you in order to understand the two concepts :).
AntwortenLöschenYou keep it all very nice and clean so that the reader can follow you thoughts, good!
AntwortenLöschenI would've liked to see how you understand the concepts more post theme 1 though, and maybe see if there are still some things that make you scratch your head!
Perhaps talk a little about actual concepts more as well, like the categories of knowledge, because I find it interesting to see peoples' thoughts about them.
Keep it up!