Metaphysical Necessity logical certainty we cannot prove metaphysical ideas does the concept of a perfect island mean that

perfect island must exist? top pg 7 empiricists say metaphysical ideas are never provable no :/ plato would say that the idea must prove its existence as a form prg3 pg 7 reason rationalists- experience is still useful, but not as fundamental as rational kno wledge clear and distinct ideas may be culturally altered subjectivity stage setting, religion etc may also affect "clear and distinct" id eas psuedo-profundity, something that sounds profound, but upon closer inspection is largely BS deep down, we are all children knowledge is another form of ignorance why dont we all get along Plato would say this is all bullshit (Y) cf: incapable of demonstarting anything that is metaphysical pg 20 habit forms many expectation habit forms projection hume says these things ^^^^ kant: "Critique of pure reason" 1787 - trancendental idealism PAGE 25 we are prestructuring our experiences our minds actively structure our experiences kant: "the first is the capacity of receiving representations ... the second is the power of knowing an object through these representations you need intuition to understand things "thoughts without content are empty, intuitions without concepts are blind" empiricism was right to insist that idea must be somehow grounded in sense exper ience rationalism right to insist that a priori knowledge possible ,the anatomy (or no umenon), but the structure of their experience of things must have (phenomenon) PHENOMENON = KNOWABLE (STRUCTURE OF EXPERIENCE ITSELF) NOUMENON = UNKNOWABLE (THE "THING-IN ITSELF) the structure of experience will limit what we experience the categories of understanding are:

space, time, causation, sense of self, logic, number , matter and sensibility to matter/particular objects Critique of Pure Reason kapernicus discovered the mathematics behind the sun being the key to our solar system kant argued that as percievers of the world, we impose certain features on what we are percieving. these spectales we wear alter everything kant- metaphysics is worthless unless grounded in experience ^ similar to hume "what happened before the big bang" watch the synthetic a priori (the thing that makes advances theory such as string theo ry possible) fundamental science/maths combine to make string throey etc possibl e -> kant relations of ideas and matters of fact synthetic a priori = judgements which are neccesisarily true and can be known t o be true independant of experience for example string theory 7+5=11 = necessarily true underlying reality / noumenon= we have no access to = will always be mysterious = all metaphysical statements invalid because they claim to understand underly ing reality need to recognise and re-recognise things to understand concepts space + time = forms of intuition you need a perception of time and space to understand things you see every day contribution of the perciever to the experience condition before experience