This is probably my longest-lasting point of confusion re: Kant. True, he diagnoses the paralogism very well; but if time is unchanging, inherent in our subjectivity, and in that as constitutive of our sense of identity (over time!), then wouldn't the time-aspect of our minds be permanent?

My confusion is made worse by what I remember of the A edition of the first Critique, something about everyone having their own form of time in a way. If our pure temporal intuition exists so strongly in our particular lives, wouldn't this mean that we were individually immortal?

  • 2
    "Mortal/immortal", "permanent" are temporal categories, and time is merely an appearance (or rather a form of intuition that frames appearances). Noumena are presumably timeless, but transplanting noumenal point of view onto appearances is exactly what Kant calls "transcendental illusion" of old metaphysics. The true nature of time implies nothing about appearances, we are still mortal in appearance, and noumenally there is no point talking about mortality, it is nonsensical. Categories of experience (mortality, etc.) do not apply beyond any possible experience. – Conifold Sep 23 '20 at 21:07
  • 1
    Depending on your interpretation of Kant, the noumenal is a purely logical device kind of over exaggerated purely for the sake of (finding a place for) faith. To be more precise, there is nothing inherently wrong about calling only the phenomenon real in Kant, which is actually what he does throughout (with the noumenal gaining reality only as a derivative from the phenomenal). Thus, we really are mortal, since that's exactly what we experience. In my book, the second critique is outright contradicting the first one regarding metaphysics. – Philip Klöcking Sep 24 '20 at 4:40
  • See: Quantum Immortality blog.usejournal.com/… and also medium.com/@alexvikoulov/… – user47436 Sep 24 '20 at 9:11
  • There are two concept of Personal Time and External Time : Cody Gilmore, The Metaphysics of Mortals: Death, Immortality, and Personal Time – user47436 Sep 24 '20 at 9:24
  • Cyclical cosmology resolves this. Escathological cosmology stumbles here. See, [poincare recurrence. ](preposterousuniverse.com/blog/2009/02/10/…) And, >Time is nothing but the form of the internal sense, that is, of our intuition of ourselves, and of our internal state. Time cannot be a determination peculiar to external phenomena. It refers neither to their shape, nor their position, etc., it only determines the relation of representations in our internal state. And exactly because this internal intuition supplies no shape, we try to make good this defic – D J Sims Sep 25 '20 at 15:00

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.