KANT'S ANALOGIES OF EXPERIENCE

I interpret Kant’s Analogies of Experience as an ensemble of mutually sustaining principles that jointly make possible the constitution of unitary temporal experience. Given the three modi of time (persistence – succession – simultaneity), the principles to be established are three independent but interconnected rules. Chapters 1-3 consider how these three rules are respectively transcendentally proved. I argue that Kant fails to achieve this goal because although the Analogies of Experience are supposed to demonstrate the applicability of these three rules, his arguments for it are impotent and require metaphysical supplements. My point is that in order to instantiate the schemata of relation and thereby to give all them objective validity/objective reality, spatial outer intuitions or intuitions in space of matter are called for, and that it is with the Metaphysical Foundations that Kant copes with this critical (objective validity/objective reality) demand. Given this logic, the move from the Analogies of Experience of the Critique to the Metaphysical Foundations may reflect his extended critical response to the dynamic of the Analogies of Experience, but all his metaphysical efforts prove fruitless because his attempt to construct the concept of matter and thereby to instantiate the schemata of relation results in failure. I intend to conclude by making this proposal: even Kant’s best critical (transcendental plus metaphysical) initiative cannot successfully settle the aforementioned (objective validity/objective reality) problem, although he himself continuously attempts to rework it through postcritical reflections