“It is NOT the case that the sensible intuitions of space and time could be confused representations that they rather give rise to the most distinct cognitions of all, namely mathematical cognitions. And that they are the forms of sensible intuition makes it comprehensible how mathematical cognitions of things are possible a priori; which (1) would not occur if the objects of the senses were things in themselves; (2) also not if appearances were nothing other than indistinct representations of things; for in that case our cognition of appearances would always be derived merely a posteriori, since their form would not be in our sense but rather in the things.” (Reflexion 5876).
Give a detailed account of Kant’s argument in this note in terms of Kant’s account of the nature and possibility of mathematical knowledge. Pay particular attention to the “transcendental exposition” of the concept of space and §II and §IV.1 of the Introduction as well as the “Conclusions” after the Transcendental Exposition of Space. Two central features of Kant’s view might lead one to assume that the representations of space and time are “confused” rather than “distinct”: (1) that space and time are sensible rather than intellectual representations and (2) that space and time are, in some sense “ideal.” In formulating your account of the note, explain why Kant thinks that the representations of space and time are “distinct” rather than “confused”—and why one might think the contrary based on the two features of his view stated above.”
Could someone help me understand what is being asked of me here? What does it mean for representations to be confused and distinct?
Sample Solution
