PhilArchive
open access
Kant and the Explanatory Role of Experience
We are able to think of empirical objects as capable of existing unperceived. What explains our grasp of this conception of objects? In this paper I examine the claim that experience explains our understanding of objects as capable of existing unperceived with reference to Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason. I argue that standard accounts of experience’s explanatory role are unsatisfactory, but that an alternative account can be extracted from the first Critique – one which relies on Kant’s transcendental idealism.
Conceptio Open Archive
Analyze & explore related research in Conceptio
Connect this record directly into your research workflow or AI agent. Explore citations across open repositories, query full text, and export structured proof bundles.
This document is indexed with metadata only: full text is not available in the archive for this record. Open the official source ↗
Related documents
- The Transcendental Object, Experience, and the Thing in Itself#757647
- A Missing Step In Kant’s Refutation of Idealism#757679
- Kant and the Non-Conceptual De Se: Apperception, Identity and the Second Step of the B-Deduction#693782
- Kantian Sublimity and Supersensible Comfort: A Case for the Mathematical Sublime#733164
- Kant's Doctrine of Transcendental Idealism#84275
Record · ID 737004
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Bring this data into your agent: Connect via MCP or API · 20 free credits to start · no card required
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive