Theory of knowledge and theory of science, part 1

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?

In this phrase, Kant starts off in an empirical manner by saying that if our understandings of things and the world forms after objects, we will fail to establish knowledge about them a priori, “from the earlier”. My understandings are that Kant wants to highlight a rationalistic approach in expanding our knowledge by understanding objects thru our human cognition. Even though Kant accentuate a rationalistic approach in this phrase, I understand that Kant both take a rationalistic and empirical approach to knowledge theory.

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 Soctrates argument is directed towards what we in modern terms call "empiricism"?

I understand this argument in the way that our ears and eyes are just tools to take in information from the world around us. It is when the information gets to the brain and get processed and interpreted that the real meaning of what we see takes form. Our earlier experiences, attitudes and believes works as a filter on the information we get from our eyes and ears, creating unique understandings of the world.