What is your answer?
For Kant, mathematical propositions,
{ 1 } - may be other than arithmetic or geometric.
{ 2 } - can be explained without the theory that space and time are a priori intuitions.
{ 3 } - do not have concept of the predicate contained in the concept of the subject but derive it from the forms, pure intuitions, of space and time.
{ 4 } - have the concept of the predicate contained in the concept of the subject.
{ 5 } - do not have the concept of the predicate contained in the concept of the subject but derive it from experience.
<= back | menu | forward =>
Directions: Click on a number from 1 to 5.
1 is wrong. Please try again.
For Kant, mathematical propositions,
{ 1 } - may be other than arithmetic or geometric.
{ 2 } - can be explained without the theory that space and time are a priori intuitions.
{ 3 } - do not have concept of the predicate contained in the concept of the subject but derive it from the forms, pure intuitions, of space and time.
{ 4 } - have the concept of the predicate contained in the concept of the subject.
{ 5 } - do not have the concept of the predicate contained in the concept of the subject but derive it from experience.
No, those are the only types for him. Is he right?
<= back | menu | forward =>
2 is wrong. Please try again.
For Kant, mathematical propositions,
{ 1 } - may be other than arithmetic or geometric.
{ 2 } - can be explained without the theory that space and time are a priori intuitions.
{ 3 } - do not have concept of the predicate contained in the concept of the subject but derive it from the forms, pure intuitions, of space and time.
{ 4 } - have the concept of the predicate contained in the concept of the subject.
{ 5 } - do not have the concept of the predicate contained in the concept of the subject but derive it from experience.
No, they cannot. See p. 242.
<= back | menu | forward =>
3 is correct!
For Kant, mathematical propositions,
{ 1 } - may be other than arithmetic or geometric.
{ 2 } - can be explained without the theory that space and time are a priori intuitions.
{ 3 } - do not have concept of the predicate contained in the concept of the subject but derive it from the forms, pure intuitions, of space and time.
{ 4 } - have the concept of the predicate contained in the concept of the subject.
{ 5 } - do not have the concept of the predicate contained in the concept of the subject but derive it from experience.
See p. 242.
<= back | menu | forward =>
Before continuing, you might try some wrong answers.
4 is wrong. Please try again.
For Kant, mathematical propositions,
{ 1 } - may be other than arithmetic or geometric.
{ 2 } - can be explained without the theory that space and time are a priori intuitions.
{ 3 } - do not have concept of the predicate contained in the concept of the subject but derive it from the forms, pure intuitions, of space and time.
{ 4 } - have the concept of the predicate contained in the concept of the subject.
{ 5 } - do not have the concept of the predicate contained in the concept of the subject but derive it from experience.
No, that would be an analytic proposition.
<= back | menu | forward =>
5 is wrong. Please try again.
For Kant, mathematical propositions,
{ 1 } - may be other than arithmetic or geometric.
{ 2 } - can be explained without the theory that space and time are a priori intuitions.
{ 3 } - do not have concept of the predicate contained in the concept of the subject but derive it from the forms, pure intuitions, of space and time.
{ 4 } - have the concept of the predicate contained in the concept of the subject.
{ 5 } - do not have the concept of the predicate contained in the concept of the subject but derive it from experience.
No, that would be a synthetic a posteriori proposition.
<= back | menu | forward =>
the end