Mar 8, 2011

Elegi Menggapai 'Kant’s Concepts of Mathematics'

By Marsigit,
Department of Mathematics Education, Faculty of Mathematics and Science,
Yogyakarta State University,


A.How Is Pure Mathematics Possible?



Kant argued that mathematics is a pure product of reason, and moreover is thoroughly synthetical.1

Next, the question arises:

Does not this faculty, which produces mathematics, as it neither is nor can be based upon experience, presuppose some ground of cognition a priori, 2 which lies deeply hidden, but which might reveal itself by these its effects, if their first beginnings were but diligently ferreted out? 3

However, Kant found that all mathematical cognition has this peculiarity: it must first exhibit its concept in a visual intuition and indeed a priori, therefore in an intuition which is not empirical, but pure.

Without this mathematics cannot take a single step; hence its judgments are always visual, viz., intuitive; whereas philosophy must be satisfied with discursive judgments from mere concepts, and though it may illustrate its doctrines through a visual figure, can never derive them from it. 4

On the other hand, Kant claimed that empirical intuition enables us without difficulty to enlarge the concept which we frame of an object of intuition, by new predicates, which intuition itself presents synthetically in experience; while pure intuition does so likewise, only with this difference, that in the latter case the synthetical judgment is a priori certain and apodeictical, in the former, only a posteriori and empirically certain; because this latter contains only that which occurs in contingent empirical intuition, but the former, that which must necessarily be discovered in pure intuition. 5

The next step, Kant questioned: "How is then it possible to intuit [in a visual form] anything a priori?" ; however, according to Kant, as an intuition is such a representation as immediately depends upon the presence of the object, it seems impossible to intuit from the outset a priori, because intuition would in that event take place without either a former or a present object to refer to, and by consequence could not be intuition.6

Kant then argued that the intuitions which pure mathematics lays at the foundation of all its cognitions and judgments which appear at once apodictic and necessary are Space and Time. 7

Accordingly, because mathematics must first have all its concepts in intuition, and pure mathematics in pure intuition, hence, mathematics must construct them. 8

Geometry is based upon the pure intuition of space; and, arithmetic accomplishes its concept of number by the successive addition of units in time; and pure mechanics especially cannot attain its concepts of motion without employing the representation of time.

Kant stressed that both representations, however, are only intuitions; for if we omit from the empirical intuitions of bodies and their alterations (motion) everything empirical, or belonging to sensation, space and time still remain, which are therefore pure intuitions that lie a priori at the basis of the empirical. 9

Therefore, Kant concluded that pure mathematics, as synthetical cognition a priori, is only possible by referring to no other objects than those of the senses, in which, at the basis of their empirical intuition lies a pure intuition (of space and of time) which is a priori.

Kant claimed that this is possible, because the latter intuition is nothing but the mere form of sensibility, which precedes the actual appearance of the objects, in that it, in fact, makes them possible; and yet this faculty of intuiting a priori affects not the matter of the phenomenon 10

Kant illustrated that in ordinary and necessary procedure of geometers, all proofs of the complete congruence of two given figures come ultimately to this that they may be made to coincide; which is evidently nothing else than a synthetical proposition resting upon immediate intuition, and this intuition must be pure, or given a priori, otherwise the proposition could not rank as apodictically certain, but would have empirical certainty only. 11

Kant further claimed that everywhere space has three dimensions, and that space cannot in any way have more, is based on the proposition that not more than three lines can intersect at right angles in one point.

Kant argued that drawing the line to infinity and representing the series of changes e.g. spaces travers by motion can only attach to intuition, then he concluded that the basis of mathematics actually are pure intuitions; while the transcendental deduction of the notions of space and of time explains, at the same time, the possibility of pure mathematics. 12

In the Remark I, Kant elaborated that pure mathematics, and especially pure geometry, can only have objective reality on condition that they refer to objects of sense.

But in regard to the latter the principle holds good, that our sense representation is not a representation of things in themselves but of the way in which they appear to us.

Hence it follows, that the propositions of geometry are not the results of a mere creation of our poetic imagination, and that therefore they cannot be referred with assurance to actual objects; but rather that they are necessarily valid of space, and consequently of all that may be found in space, because space is nothing else than the form of all external appearances, and it is this form alone in which objects of sense can be given. (Immanuel Kant Prolegomena To Any Future Metaphysics , First Part Of The Transcendental Problem: How Is Pure Mathematics Possible? Remark 1, 287)

Sensibility, the form of which is the basis of geometry, is that upon which the possibility of external appearance depends.

Therefore these appearances can never contain anything but what geometry prescribes to them.

The space of the geometer would be considered a mere fiction, and it would not be credited with objective validity, because we cannot see how things must of necessity agree with an image of them, which we make spontaneously and previous to our acquaintance with them. 13

But if this image, or rather this formal intuition, is the essential property of our sensibility, by means of which alone objects are given to us, and if this sensibility represents not things in themselves, but their appearances: we shall easily comprehend, and at the same time indisputably prove, that all external objects of our world of sense must necessarily coincide in the most rigorous way with the propositions of geometry; because sensibility by means of its form of external intuition, viz., by space, the same with which the geometer is occupied, makes those objects at all possible as mere appearances. 14

Because the space of the geometer is exactly the form of sensuous intuition which we find a priori in us, and contains the ground of the possibility of all external appearances (according to their form), and the latter must necessarily and most rigidly agree with the propositions of the geometer, which he draws not from any fictitious concept, but from the subjective basis of all external phenomena, which is sensibility itself. 15

B.Mathematical Judgment

Because it would be absurd to base an analytical judgment on experience, as our concept suffices for the purpose without requiring any testimony from experience, Kant concluded that Empirical judgments are always synthetical, e.g. “That body is extended” is a judgment established a priori, and not an empirical judgment.

And also, for before appealing to experience, we already have all the conditions of the judgment in the concept, from which we have but to elicit the predicate according to the law of contradiction, and thereby to become conscious of the necessity of the judgment, Kant concluded that which experience could not even teach us.16

According to Kant, Mathematical judgments are all synthetical and he argued that this fact seems hitherto to have altogether escaped the observation of those who have analyzed human reason; it even seems directly opposed to all their conjectures, though incontestably certain, and most important in its consequences.

Further he claimed that for as it was found that the conclusions of mathematicians all proceed according to the law of contradiction (as is demanded by all apodictic certainty), men persuaded themselves that the fundamental principles were known from the same law. “This was a great mistake”, he said.

He then delivered the reason that for a synthetical proposition can indeed be comprehended according to the law of contradiction, but only by presupposing another synthetical proposition from which it follows, but never in itself.17

To support this argument, Kant started to examined the case of addition 7 + 5 = 12. According to him, it might at first be thought that the proposition 7 + 5 = 12 is a mere analytical judgment, following from the concept of the sum of seven and five, according to the law of contradiction.

However, accordingly, if we closely examine the operation, it appears that the concept of the sum of 7+5 contains merely their union in a single number, without its being at all thought what the particular number is that unites them.

Therefore, he concluded that the concept of twelve is by no means thought by merely thinking of the combination of seven and five; and analyze this possible sum as we may, we shall not discover twelve in the concept.

Kant suggested that first of all, we must observe that all proper mathematical judgments are a priori, and not empirical.

According to him, mathematical judgments carry with them necessity, which cannot be obtained from experience, therefore, it implies that it contains pure a priori and not empirical cognitions.18

We, then, must go beyond these concepts, by calling to our aid some concrete image [Anschauung], i.e., either our five fingers, or five points (as Segner has it in his Arithmetic), and we must add successively the units of the five, given in some concrete image [Anschauung], to the concept of seven; hence our concept is really amplified by the proposition 7 + 5 = I 2, and we add to the first a second, not thought in it.

Ultimately, Kant concluded that arithmetical judgments are therefore synthetical, and the more plainly according as we take larger numbers; for in such cases it is clear that, however closely we analyze our concepts without calling visual images (Anscliauung) to our aid, we can never find the sum by such mere dissection. 19

Similarly, Kant argued that all principles of geometry are no less analytical.

He illustrated that the proposition “a straight line is the shortest path between two points”, is a synthetical proposition because the concept of straight contains nothing of quantity, but only a quality.

He claimed that the attribute of shortness is therefore altogether additional, and cannot be obtained by any analysis of the concept; and its visualization [Anschauung] must come to aid us; and therefore, it alone makes the synthesis possible. 20

Kant confronted the previous geometers assumption which claimed that other mathematical principles are indeed actually analytical and depend on the law of contradiction.

However, he strived to show that in the case of identical propositions, as a method of concatenation, and not as principles, e. g., a=a, the whole is equal to itself, or a + b > a, the whole is greater than its part.

He then claimed that although they are recognized as valid from mere concepts, they are only admitted in mathematics, because they can be represented in some visual form [Anschauung].21


Notes

1.A synthetic proposition is a proposition that is capable of being true or untrue based on facts about the world - in contrast to an analytic proposition which is true by definition. (From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia)
2.A priori knowledge is propositional knowledge that can be had without experience. It is usually contrasted with a posteriori knowledge, which requires experience. Mathematics and logic are usually considered a priori disciplines. The natural and social sciences are usually considered a posteriori disciplines (From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia)
3.Immanuel Kant, Prolegomena to Any Future Metaphysics , First Part Of The Transcendental Problem: How Is Pure Mathematics Possible?) Sect. 6.
4.This observation on the nature of mathematics gives us a clue to the first and highest condition of its possibility, which is, that some pure intuition [reine Anschauung] must form its basis, in which all its concepts can be exhibited or constructed, in concreto and yet a priori. If we can locate this pure intuition and its possibility, we may thence easily explain how synthetical propositions a priori are possible in pure mathematics, and consequently how this science itself is possible. (Immanuel Kant Prolegomena to Any Future Metaphysics , First Part Of The Transcendental Problem: How Is Pure Mathematics Possible?) Sec.7. para. 281
5.Pure intuition [viz., the visualization of forms in our imagination, from which every thing sensual, i.e., every thought of material qualities, is excluded]. Here intuition, being an intuition a priori, is before all experience, viz., before any perception of particular objects, inseparably conjoined with its concept. (Immanuel Kant Prolegomena to Any Future Metaphysics , First Part Of The Transcendental Problem: How Is Pure Mathematics Possible?) Sect. 7. para. 281
6.Hence it follows: that propositions, which concern this form of sensuous intuition only, are possible and valid for objects of the senses; as also, conversely, that intuitions which are possible a priori can never concern any other things than objects of our senses. (Immanuel Kant Prolegomena to Any Future Metaphysics , First Part Of The Transcendental Problem: How Is Pure Mathematics Possible?) sec.9 para. 282
7. Space is the form of the external intuition of this sensibility, and the internal determination of every space is only possible by the determination of its external relation to the whole space, of which it is a part (in other words, by its relation to the external sense).
8.If it proceeded in any other way, it would be impossible to make any headway, for mathematics proceeds, not analytically by dissection of concepts, but synthetically, and if pure intuition be wanting, there is nothing in which the matter for synthetical judgments a priori can be given. Immanuel Kant Prolegomena to Any Future Metaphysics , First Part Of The Transcendental Problem: How Is Pure Mathematics Possible? Sect.10 para. 283
9.Hence they can never be omitted, but at the same time, by their being pure intuitions a priori, they prove that they are mere forms of our sensibility, which must precede all empirical intuition, or perception of actual objects, and conformably to which objects can be known a priori, but only as they appear to us. (Immanuel Kant Prolegomena to Any Future Metaphysics , First Part Of The Transcendental Problem: How Is Pure Mathematics Possible?) Sec.10 para. 283.
10.Phenomenon is the sense-element in it, for this constitutes that which is empirical), but its form, viz., space and time. (Immanuel Kant Prolegomena to Any Future Metaphysics , First Part Of The Transcendental Problem: How Is Pure Mathematics Possible?) Sect.11 para 284
11.In that case, it could only be said that it is always found to be so, and holds good only as far as our perception reaches. (Immanuel Kant Prolegomena to Any Future Metaphysics , First Part Of The Transcendental Problem: How Is Pure Mathematics Possible?) Sect. 12 para 285
12.Without some such deduction its truth may be granted, but its existence could by no means be understood, and we must assume "that everything which can be given to our senses (to the external senses in space, to the internal one in time) is intuited by us as it appears to us, not as it is in itself." (Immanuel Kant Prolegomena to Any Future Metaphysics , First Part Of The Transcendental Problem: How Is Pure Mathematics Possible?) Sect.12 para. 285
13.It would be quite otherwise if the senses were so constituted as to represent objects as they are in themselves. (Immanuel Kant Prolegomena to Any Future Metaphysics , First Part Of The Transcendental Problem: How Is Pure Mathematics Possible?) Remark I, para 287
14.Immanuel Kant Prolegomena to Any Future Metaphysics , First Part Of The Transcendental Problem: How Is Pure Mathematics Possible?) Remark 1 , para. 287
15.In this and no other way can geometry be made secure as to the undoubted objective reality of its propositions against all the intrigues of a shallow Metaphysics, which is surprised at them [the geometrical propositions], because it has not traced them to the sources of their concepts. (Immanuel Kant Prolegomena To Any Future Metaphysics , First Part Of The Transcendental Problem: How Is Pure Mathematics Possible?) Remark I, para. 288
16.Existence and Reality(Kant e-text reading I) Texts For Discussion Page: Prolegomena to Any Future Metaphysics Preamble, Section 2): Kant's argument in support of his view that all properly mathematical judgments are synthetic a priori judgments )
17.Kant suggested that first of all, we must observe that all proper mathematical judgments are a priori, and not empirical. According to him, mathematical judgments carry with them necessity, which cannot be obtained from experience, therefore, it implies that it contains pure a priori and not empirical cognitions. (Existence and Reality(Kant e-text reading I) Texts For Discussion Page: Prolegomena to Any Future Metaphysics Preamble, Section 2): Kant's argument in support of his view that all properly mathematical judgments are synthetic a priori judgments )
18.Existence and Reality(Kant e-text reading I: Texts For Discussion Page: Prolegomena to Any Future Metaphysics Preamble, Section 2: Kant's argument in support of his view that all properly mathematical judgments are synthetic a priori judgments )
19.ibid.
20.ibid.
21.What usually makes us believe that the predicate of such apodictic judgments is already contained in our concept, and that the judgment is therefore analytical, is the duplicity of the expression, requesting us to think a certain predicate as of necessity implied in the thought of a given concept, which necessity attaches to the concept. But the question is not what we are requested to join in thought to the given concept, but what we actually think together with and in it, though obscurely; and so it appears that the predicate belongs to these concepts necessarily indeed, yet not directly but indirectly by an added visualization [Anschauung]. (Existence and Reality(Kant e-text reading I) Texts For Discussion Page: Prolegomena to Any Future Metaphysics Preamble, Section 2): Kant's argument in support of his view that all properly mathematical judgments are synthetic a priori judgments )

12 comments:

  1. ULFA LU'LUILMAKNUN
    16709251022
    S2 Pendidikan Matematika 2016 Kelas B

    Assalamualaikum Wr.Wb.

    Menurut Immanuel Kant, matematika harus dipahami dan dikonstruksikan menggunakan intuisi ruang dan waktu, misalnya intuisi pengindraan. Mengkonstruksi matematika diperoleh dengan cara menemukan intuisi murni pada pikiran kita terlebih dahulu. Intuisi murni adalah pemikiran sebelum adanya pengalaman atau pengetahuan sebelumnya tentang obyek yang akan dipelajari. Kant mengatakan matematika bersifat sintetik a priori. Jika kita dapat menemukan intuisi murni, kita akan dengan mudah menjelaskan bagaimana proposisi sintetik a priori yang mungkin dalam matematika murni, sehingga bagaimana memungkinkan adanya penjelasan suatu obyek tertentu.

    Wassalamualikum Wr.Wb.

    ReplyDelete
  2. ROFI AMIYANI
    S2 P.MAT A 2016
    16709251004

    Menurut Imanuel Kant bahwa pengetahuan merupakan gabungan dari dua unsur yaitu analitik a priori dan sintetik a posteriori. Analitik a priori yaitu lebih mengutamakan logika dan penalaran dalam mempelajari matematika. Sedangkan sintetik a posteriori maksudnya pengalaman yang kita dapatkan dapat menjadi pembelajaran yang penting. Sehingga, kita harus bisa mengkombinasikan antara analitik a priori dan sintetik a posteriori ketika kita mempelajari suatu ilmu.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Nilza Humaira Salsabila
    16709251026
    Pendidikan Matematika kelas B PPs 2016

    Assalamu’alaikum Wr. Wb.
    Berdasarkan elegi di atas, matematika merupakan hasil dari pemikiran dan sintesis. Matematika sendiri menunjukkan konsep melalui intuisi visual dan apriori yang mendalam, intuisi yang tidak empiris melainkan murni. Matematika harus terlebih dahulu terdapat konsepnya di dalam intuisi, dan matematika murni di intuisi murni, maka matematika mengkonstruknya. Contohnya geometri didsarkan pada intuisi murni dari ruang.
    Wassalamu’alaikum Wr. Wb.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Muh. Faathir Husain M.
    16701251030
    PPs PEP B 2016

    Dan bahwa matematika adalah sintetik a priori menurut Kant. Sifat-sifat dari matematika sendiri mendukung matematika itu sintetik a priori. Ia mencontohkan bahwa dalam geometri tidak semuaya bersifat analitik. Ketika ia menarik satu garis dari dua buah titik yang saling berjauhan. Menurutnya itu adalah proposisi sintetik. garis itiu tidak selalu berisi kuantitas, melainkan ada kualitas didalamnya.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Taofan Ali Achmadi
    16701251001
    PPs PEP B 2016

    Menurut Kant pemahaman maupun konstruksi matematika diperoleh dengan cara terlebih dulu menemukan “intuisi murni” pada akal atau pikiran kita. Matematika yang bersifat “sintetik a priori” dapat dikonstruksi melalui 3 tahap intuisi yaitu “intuisi penginderaan”, “intuisi akal”, dan “intuisi budi”. Intuisi penginderaan terkait dengan obyek matematika yang dapat diserap sebagai unsur a posteriori. Intuisi akal (Verstand) mensintetiskan hasil intuisi penginderan ke dalam intuisi “ruang” dan “waktu”. Dengan intuisi budi “Vernuft”, rasio kita dihadapkan pada putusan-putusan argumentasi matematika. Menurut Kant matematika merupakan suatu penalaran yang berifat mengkonstruksi konsep-konsep secara synthetic a priori dalam konsep ruang dan waktu. Intuisi keruangan dan waktu secara umum yang pada akhirnya dianggap mendasari matematika. Minsalnya Matematika murni khususnya geometri dapat menjadi kenyataan obyektif jika berkaitan dengan obyek-obyek penginderaan. Konsep-konsep geometri tidak hanya dihasilkan oleh intuisi murni, tetapi juga berkaitan dengan konsep ruang di mana obyek-obyek geometri direpresentasikan.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Wan Denny Pramana Putra
    16709251010
    PPs Pendidikan Matematika A

    Immanuel Kant membangun pengertian intuisi dengan membedakan antara pertimbangan analitik dan pertimbangan sintetik. Pertimbangan analitik membutuhkan konfirmasi logis serta bersifat a priori atau tidak membutuhkan konfirmasi empiris untuk menjelaskan mengapa sesuatu hal benar.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Budi Yanto
    16709251024
    P. Mat S2 Kelas B 2016
    Kant berpendapat bahwa intuisi matematika murni yang meletakkan pada dasar dari semua kognisi dan penilaian yang muncul sekaligus apodiktis dan diperlukan adalah Ruang dan Waktu, karena matematika harus terlebih dahulu memiliki semua konsep dalam intuisi, dan matematika murni intuisi murni, maka, matematika harus membangun mereka.
    Geometri didasarkan pada intuisi murni ruang, dan, aritmatika menyelesaikan konsep angka dengan penambahan berurutan dari unit dalam waktu

    ReplyDelete
  8. Fitri Ayu Ningtiyas
    16709251037
    S2 P.Mat B UNY 2016

    Menurut Kant kita harus mengamati bahwa semua keputusan matematika yang tepat yang berupa a priori, dan tidak empiris. Selanjutnya menurut Kant, penilaian matematika tidak dapat diperoleh dari pengalaman. Hingga pada akhirnya, argumen Kant menegaskan dukung pandangannya bahwa semua keputusan benar dalam matematika berupa sintetik penilaian apriori.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Erlinda Rahma Dewi
    16709251006
    S2 PPs Pendidikan Matematika A 2016

    Kant mengklaim bahwa intuisi empiris memungkinkan kita tanpa kesulitan untuk memperbesar konsep yang kita rancang dari obyek intuisi. Intuisi sendiri menyajikan sintetis dalam pengalaman ; sementara intuisi murni juga melakukannya, hanya dengan perbedaan, bahwa dalam kasus terakhir penghakiman kimis adalah apriori dan apodeictical tertentu.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Aprisal
    16709251019
    PPs S2 Pendidikan Matematika Kelas A 2016

    Assalamu alaikum

    Pada hakekatnya pemikiran manusia itu dimulai dari kategori, sedang kategori dimulai dari intuisi. Menurut Kant matematika dikatakan sebagai ilmu jika konsep matematika dikontruksi berdasarkan intuisi keruangan dan waktu. Kontruksi konsep matematika berdasarkan intuisi ruang dan waktu akan menghasilkan matematika sebagai ilmu yang bersifat sintetik a priori yang diantitesiskan dengan metode analitik dan konsep a priori diantitesisikan dengan “a posteriori”. Jika matematika dikembangkan hanya dengan metode “analitik” maka tidak akan dihasilkan konsep baru, dan yang demikian akan menyebabkan matematika hanya bersifat sebagai mitos. Selanjutnya menurut Kant, matematika tidak dikembangkan hanya dengan konsep “a posteriori” sebab jika demikian matematika akan bersifat empiris. Namun data- data empiris yang diperoleh dari pengalaman penginderaan diperlukan untuk menggali konsep-konsep matematika yang bersifat “a priori”.

    Waalaikum salam wr.wb

    ReplyDelete
  11. Ressy Rustanuarsi
    16709251033
    PPs PMAT Kelas B 2016

    Pandangan Immanuel Kant tentang matematika dilihat dari filsafat matematika memandang penting peranan intuisi dan konstruksi konsep matematika. Menurutnya matematika harus dipahami dan dikonstruksi menggunakan intuisi ruang dan waktu. Matematika dapat dipahami melalui intuisi penginderaan dan hasilnya dapat disesuaikan dengan intuisi murni kita. Pandangan tentang peran intuisi ini menggambarkan betapa pentingnya intusi dalam pembelajaran matematika siswa.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Misnasanti
    16709251011
    PPs PMAT A 2016

    Kant menemukan bahwa semua kognisi matematika memiliki keanehan. Pertama harus menunjukkan konsep ini dalam intutition visual oleh karena itu dalam intutition suatu yang tidak empiris, tetapi murni, tanpa ini matematika tidak dapat mengambil satu langkah.

    ReplyDelete

marsigitina@yahoo.com, marsigitina@gmail.com, marsigit@uny.ac.id