• Albert
    1
    Can I ask a really hard question?
    about logic
    What is the difference between these two sentences?
    1.This flower is non-blue.
    2.This flower is not blue.

    My understanding is that infinite judgment provides knowledge, while negative judgment does not provide knowledge.
    But according to formal logic, they are the same
    But I still don't understand why Kant wants to distinguish between the two.
  • Terrapin Station
    5.2k
    I'm no Kant expert, and I'm not a fan, but per my memory of this, Kant's negative/infinite distinction is about a contingent/necessary or accidental/analytic distinction, normally re classes.

    In other words, it's about some set of Fs and whether we can predicate Gness of Fs.

    A "negative judgment" here refers to a contingent or accidental fact that no Fs happen to be Gs.
    An "infinite judgment" here refers to a necessary or analytic fact that no Fs are Gs.

    We could extend that to particulars if we think of a particular as either contingently or necessarily having some property. So (1)--the flower necessarily isn't blue, or (2) the flower contingently isn't blue.

    I don't recall the "provides knowledge" part so well, but if that's right, it would probably be based on something like "knowledge" providing information that's universally applicable rather than just a contingent fact.
bold
italic
underline
strike
code
quote
ulist
image
url
mention
reveal
youtube
tweet
Add a Comment

Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!

Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.