1. In the preface to the second edition of "Critique of Pure Reason" (page B xvi) Kant says: "Thus far it has been assumed that all our cognition must conform to objects. On that presupposition, however, all our attempts to establish something about them a priori, by means of concepts through which our cognition would be expanded, have come to nothing. Let us, therefore, try to find out by experiment whether we shall not make better progress in the problems of metaphysics if we assume that objects must conform to our cognition." How are we to understand this?
Our cognition comes from the mind, everything we perceive is our minds representation of the physical world. When Kant is saying that all our cognition must conform to objects and that we might do better progress in problems of metaphysics if objects conformed to our mind instead. I think Kant is saying that our cognitive comes from within, from our minds, not form the physical world. As he is explaining on page B xx, that we should try not to see objects as a thing in itself, instead we should see their appearances as representations of our mind. With experience we may arise our representation and we might perceive things differently.
I believe this Kants argue has a lot in common with the second question, to answer that question we need to have this in mind.
2. At the end of the discussion of the definition "Knowledge is perception", Socrates argues that we do not see and hear "with" the eyes and the ears, but "through" the eyes and the ears. How are we to understand this? And in what way is it correct to say that Socrates argument is directed towards what we in modern terms call ”empiricism"?
I understand Socrates argues in a way where the eyes and ears are working as ”tools” to our brains that helps the brain to perceive impressions. We do not look with our eyes but through them which means that we creates the images in our minds, not in our eyes. If we look at Socrates argues together with Kants argues I understand it as, whatever we experiencing in the physical world, it goes through our senses, where we in our minds creates representations of what we have perceived. This is also why I believe we can say that Socrates argument is directed towards what we today is calling ”empiricism”.
I am not sure whether you are right when you state that Kant wants to express 'we should try not to see objects as a thing in itself, instead we should see their appearances as representations of our mind.‘ I do not think that he goes that far as saying that objects are just representations of our mind. I rather believe that he wants people to adjust the sensation of an object according to concepts they have made up in their minds before. He still wants people to see objects as real world objects not just as representations constructed by the human mind. But he wants them to build concepts of the objects before investigating them. That is the way mathematicians try to gain knowledge and do research.
SvaraRadera