more from this thinker     |     more from this text


Single Idea 5554

[filed under theme 7. Existence / E. Categories / 1. Categories ]

Full Idea

If one proposed a middle way, that categories are subjective predispositions for thinking, implanted in us so that their use would agree exactly with the laws of nature,..then the categories would lack the necessity which is essential to their concept.

Gist of Idea

Categories are necessary, so can't be implanted in us to agree with natural laws

Source

Immanuel Kant (Critique of Pure Reason [1781], B167)

Book Ref

Kant,Immanuel: 'Critique of Pure Reason', ed/tr. Guyer,P /Wood,A W [CUO 1998], p.265


A Reaction

Kant might want to rethink this once he got the hang of the theory of evolution. If we have innate categories, they must have some survival value. I don't understand Kant's claim that the categories are necessary. They just reflect nature.


The 21 ideas with the same theme [general ideas about how to group what exists]:

There are two sorts of category - referring to things, and to circumstances of things [Boethius]
Categories are general concepts of objects, which determine the way in which they are experienced [Kant]
Categories are necessary, so can't be implanted in us to agree with natural laws [Kant]
Even simple propositions about sensations are filled with categories [Hegel]
Thought about particulars is done entirely through categories [Hegel]
No need for a priori categories, since sufficient reason shows the interrelations [Schopenhauer, by Lewis,PB]
In formal terms, a category is the range of some style of variables [Quine]
Categories can't overlap; they are either disjoint, or inclusive [Sommers, by Westerhoff]
The category of Venus is not 'object', or even 'planet', but a particular class of good-sized object [Jubien]
All descriptive language is classificatory [Dupré]
Ontological categories are not natural kinds: the latter can only be distinguished using the former [Lowe]
Categories are base-sets which are used to construct states of affairs [Westerhoff]
How far down before we are too specialised to have a category? [Westerhoff]
Maybe objects in the same category have the same criteria of identity [Westerhoff]
Categories can be ordered by both containment and generality [Westerhoff]
Categories are held to explain why some substitutions give falsehood, and others meaninglessness [Westerhoff]
Categories systematize our intuitions about generality, substitutability, and identity [Westerhoff]
Categories as generalities don't give a criterion for a low-level cut-off point [Westerhoff]
Monothetic categories have fixed defining features, and polythetic categories do not [Ellen]
In symbolic classification, the categories are linked to rules [Ellen]
Do categories store causal knowledge, or typical properties, or knowledge of individuals? [Machery]