3 Sexy Analogies

The first:

"In all change of appearances substance persists, and its quantum is neither increased nor diminished in nature." We can determine changes in objects of our perception, and not just a change in the way we are perceiving them, only by viewing our perceptions as successive states of persisting substances. Because we can never know the origination or cessation of substances themselves, but only changes in their states, Kant believes that the sum of all substances is permanent and unchanging. This means that substance remains and doesn’t change, while substance has particular ways for it to exist, called accidents (or determinations). Kant offers the analogy of a philosopher asking how much smoke weighs. The philosopher replies: “If you take away form the weight of the wood that was burnt the weight of the ashes that are left over, you will have the weight of the smoke.” Therefore, the philosopher is recognizing that the substance itself has not changed, merely its appearance. Kant also offers the proposition “Nothing comes form nothing” for another proof that persistence, or the existence of the proper “substance” in appearances.

The second:

“All alterations occur in accordance with the law of the connection of cause and effect.” Here in the second analogy Kant is arguing that in order to grasp a succession of appearances (i.e. the wood becoming smoke and ash) we must observe causality and understand that what is left later in time (smoke and ash) is a consequence of what occurred previously (burning wood). However, Kant goes on to say that the manifold of the appearance of the house, which we have just determined to be successive, might be successive in itself (the manifold), and therefore is merely an appearance and not a transcendental object. “…I must therefore derive the subjective sequence of apprehension from the objective sequence of appearances, for otherwise the former would be entirely undetermined and no appearance would be distinguished form any other.” The subjective sequence, however, proves nothing unless the manifold of appearances in the apprehension of one thing that follows another thing adheres to the rule of causality.

The third:

“All substances, insofar as they can be perceived in space as simultaneous, are in thoroughgoing interaction.” In his third analogy Kant tackles another attribute of time, simultaneity. In order to argue a co-existence of objects simultaneously Kant argues for a “community” of objects, which by co-existing, also interact to allow for empirical perception of any place, by using the relation of the surrounding matter to determine it. Without this community all perception is broken off from all other perception, and can no longer combine or be synthesized together to form a more whole picture.