Kant presented in his famous criticism of pure reason a torrent of unnecessarily complex arguments against the concept of causality in Hume, but almost combines Kant's and Walderson's explanation that his research into causality, and indeed his whole critical philosophy, was the result of his thinking in the...
In his famous critique of pure reason, Kant presented a torrent of needlessly complex arguments against Hume's notion of causality; he almost lumped together Kant's and Walderson's thesis that his research into causality, and indeed his entire critical philosophy, was the result of his thinking in Hume's position on causality.
We can put a constructional formulation of his argument in which he tried to expel the psychological idea of causality and replace it with objectivity as follows:
“When I perceive something (say, a house) in the order of my perceptual perceptions, I can observe first the surface and then the basement, but I can also observe these elements in another inverted way, but when I perceive an incident (say, crossing a boat in a river), the manifestations are not invertible either; I can see the various elements only in a special order (not invertible), and now this order is not subjective, it belongs to the phenomena themselves.”
Kant tries in this argument to find a criterion for distinguishing between the subjective succession of intuitions and the objective succession of events abroad, and he finds what he wants in the idea of reflection, what is inconceivable is objective succession, i.e. it is necessary to keep the order of the former and the latter as I have received it and what is inconceivable is subjective succession, i.e. I can perceive it as I want, there is no particular order that I have to perceive part of the house before the other part.
- Reza Zeidan.
—
Source: Published on Facebook's "Braheen Center" page
https://www.facebook.com/braheen.org/posts/pfbid021hw5Ds9W1pHQSEE6eqWicxvxkiReNydEfTEEm5wgNWbqYA5JvAt7SCACuYjDFPcl