Talk:Schema (Kant)

Philosophy Low‑importance

	Philosophy portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophy articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

poor description[edit]

the page says: In Kantian philosophy, a transcendental schema (plural: schemata) is the procedural rule by which a category or pure, non-empirical concept is associated with a mental image of an object. It is supposedly produced by the imagination in relation to time.

this is a very technical definition which should be followed with a more lay explanation of what is meant here. Ie. "In Kantian philosophy, a transcendental schema (plural: schemata) is the procedural rule by which a category or pure, non-empirical concept is associated with a mental image of an object. In other words... . It is supposedly produced by the imagination in relation to time." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 146.90.178.104 (talk) 19:00, 31 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

strange disposition[edit]

The section in the article by July 20, 2010 on the obscurity of Kant's schema, relating Schopenhauers critique is interesting but malplaced in my opinion. Would it not be more proper to place it in the end of the article. I find that it produces an unnecessary preconception at such an early stage. The discourse on schema has come to prominence within semiotics, beyond doubt. Let the reader make her/his own judgements first and then take the discourses of consequence thereafter. Therefor I attempt to move it further down into the article. --Xact (talk) 03:22, 20 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Good suggestion. I don't trust myself to do it without damaging the article.Lestrade (talk) 02:36, 3 March 2023 (UTC)Lestrade[reply]

Is there a reason for the Schema(Kant) link at the very beginning of the article? It links to Schemata(Kant), which doesn't exist, and, in any event, it doesn't make much sense for there to be a link to the current page. --NigelStepp 03:10, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Importance[edit]

One reason that Kant's writings on schemata are important is that they are one of his weakest areas. As such, schemata exhibit Kant at his worst. Even today, centuries later, both Kant's detractors and supporters pass over this concept with mysterious or obscure explanations. For some, this merely increases his status as a profound thinker, much as Hegel's works appeal to careerist academics. For others, who are in search of enlightenment, the passages on schemata are frustrating and uninformative.Lestrade (talk) 20:56, 5 January 2010 (UTC)Lestrade[reply]

Euclidean geometry[edit]

Shouldn't the sentence "This is similar to a Euclidean geometrical diagram" link to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euclidean_geometry rather than http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euclid and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geometry ?? 90.204.183.52 (talk) 09:49, 31 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Small Compass[edit]

After reading this long article, it may be possible to epitomize the concept of the Kantian Schema in three dozen words. “An empirical concept can be verified through sense perception. A pure (non-empirical) concept, if it exists, can be verified through the use of temporal succession in such activities as counting, establishing gradations, apprehending sequences, and knowing existences.”108.24.200.163 (talk) 00:53, 26 March 2019 (UTC)D’Antay Flax[reply]