Immanuel Kant and Judgment

In his famous treatise, Critique of Pure Reason, Kant peels back a layer on judgment based on experience. Kant writes,

     "All our judgments are at first mere judgments based on perception; they are valid simply for ourselves, as subject. Only subsequently do we give them a new reference, namely to an object, and insist that they shall always be valid for ourselves as well as everyone else. For when a judgment agrees with an object , all judgments concerning the same object must agree with one another; hence the objective validity of judgment based on experience means nothing more than its necessary general validity."

This is how Kant separates judgments based on perception from those based on experience, which he refers to as empirical judgments. These empirical judgments have objective validity - generally referring to objects of sense and experience. Interestingly, Kant stops us from jumping to associate direct knowledge with empirical judgments when he cautions that objective validity, necessary for empirical judgments, is not deduced from direct knowledge, but instead, deduced from objective validity which is deduced from general conditions of validity. According to Kant, before a judgment of perception can become a judgment of experience, the perception must be "subsumed under intellectual concepts."

Why am I referencing Kant's views on judgment? Well, it just seems to me that judgments today do not mature, but instead, they are often quick, perception-rooted and wrong. Yet, even wrong, there is often no apology, correction or acknowledgment. Leaders, reporters, and public figures ( I reference these because their judgments are public and viewed by all, but we are all guilty.) today make poor judgments, jump to conclusion and express opinion as fact, and no one seems to be concerned. Reading Kant tonight, it suddenly struck me that what we are seeing are judgments based on perception. They are made so quickly that they never mature and move to empirical and gain objective validity.

Remember, objective validity is not direct knowledge but a sense of universal rightness (my term). Kant references that a judgment of experience (empirical), once it becomes experience-oriented, reverses back to the original perception and determines (or converts) the original perception to an empirical one that is universally right if it is right. If the perception is wrong then it never becomes universal or right because there is no experience to reinforce it as right.

In my opinion, the second part of this process has become extinct; therefore, if it is extinct then there is no way to instill in the universal (collective masses) the sense of rightness (my term). This condition reduces perception-oriented judgments to equal status with empirical judgments and makes it difficult for anyone to determine the difference between the two, which is where we find ourselves today. And, in this condition, the loudest and most repeated judgments are perceived and received as empirical (and true) even if they are only perception-oriented. 

Why do so many people believe so many different things? Please see above. Blessings!