[Note that the first question is worth two points because it is more difficult than the others.]
1. Kant claims that objects of experience (e.g., a dog) can be imagined and have "objective validity" (i.e., refer to real things) because our intuitions are united as possible experiences through the "transcendental schema" of time. What does this mean? [Worth two points.]
2. Even though our intuitions (or representations) change from moment to moment, we can say (as Hume did about different perceptions of the "same" thing) that they resemble or are analogous to one another. How does Kant use this idea of analogy to resurrect the notion of substance?
3. How does Kant appeal to the rule-governed character of our experience of events to argue (against Hume) for the necessary, objective order of nature?
4. Why does Kant think that consciousness of my own existence is intelligible only if external objects exist? And why does he think that this refutes idealism?
5. What is the difference between phenomena and noumena? And how is the difference between the negative, positive, and problematic senses of noumena highlight how the concept of a noumenon is merely a limiting concept?
6. What are pure ideas or concepts of reason?
7. Kant says there are three transcendental ideas: the self or subject, the world, and God. What similar role does each play?
8. How is the confusion of the determining self (i.e., the unity of consciousness) with the determinable self (i.e., the consciousness of a unity) an example of a paralogism?
9. Why can't the transcendental concept of the self, soul, or "I" (ego) be known empirically as an object of experience (i.e., as a simple substance)?