Citing the Pinkard reading and Kant if you have it, explain the relationship between representation and the object of representation in Kant’s thinking. In Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason he expresses how empiricism and rationalism are both flawed, and establishes a new approach to metaphysics. Kant’s new claim expresses that metaphysics should exclusively be applied to the realm in which access is possible. Humans can only have knowledge of what they are capable of experiencing or through concepts that can be accessed through mathematics. Humans experience the world by taking in representations of objects. Kant states that there is a relationship between representation and the object of representation, however this relationship is only due to the synthesis of all experience within an individual.
The relationship between representation and the object of representation is created by the unity in which humans experience the world. The object itself is a separate entity from the way in which it is perceived, but due to experience being formed out of a multiplicity of representations there becomes a transformation of all these experiences into one. Kant defines two types of representations that are “passively received
…show more content…
Due to experience being continuously developed humans are only aware “of a single, complex experience of the world,” (Pinkard 27). Representation and the object of representation are viewed as the same until there is a separation of the two within one’s own experience. The distinction must happen within individual experience, because it is not possible to “jump outside our own experience to examine the objects of the world in order to see if they match up to our representations of them,” (Pinkard 28). Just as we only have access to knowledge within our realm, we can only apply judgement to what we already have experience