A Response to Kant’s First Analogy of Experience
Leibniz, one of the famous philosophers, once wrote, “I believe that the consideration of a substance is one of the most important and fruitful points in philosophy. ” Kant expressed his agreement for this statement in the way he presented the “First Analogy of Experience”. In this analogy, he proposed the schema of substance beyond physical appearance. In this part, Kant’s primary objective is to explain the conditions for the applicability of a category to appearances: the schema of substance cannot be determined without considering the relevance between its appearance and criteria for a certain category.
Therefore, Descartes’ representation of a ball of wax as a substance as perceived by the mind alone is not sufficient for Kant. In contrast, he believed that the ball of wax, before it should be considered as a substance, must meet certain criteria set by a sensible perception. Thus, the schema of substance defines the fact that all changes occur in some substance. To illustrate it further, there are two instances mention below.
In a certain situation which occurs in the workplace, employment process has criteria to come across whether an applicant is qualified or not. Furthermore, the qualification of a person may not be suitable for every job description. It is a proof that one substance’s representation varies and not consistent. Another specific example is the fact that an individual person is more describable if put in comparison or a specific category. X is smarter than Y.
However, Y is more engaged in sports than X. There are lots of categories to consider. In every category, it is possible that the capacity of an individual is different from each category. In the present time, Kant’s philosophy towards substance is undoubtedly discernible. It has a great impact in today’s time. In fact, it is more applicable to the modern world than any other conflicting philosophies. The outcome of his belief provides evidence of how strong it is.
