Final answer:
Option D is answer. Kant's critique on existence claims indicates that existential conditionals are analytically knowable, but actual existence requires empirical evidence beyond mere conceptual analysis.
Step-by-step explanation:
According to Immanuel Kant's system, existential conditionals are analytically knowable (d), meaning that while we can understand certain aspects about existence through logic and reasoning, we cannot confirm the actual existence of something merely through analytic knowledge. For Kant, existence is not an attribute that can be deduced from the definition of a concept. Instead, concepts like causation, substance, self, identity, space, and time arise from our experiences and are formed by the mind's innate categories of understanding.
This is in contrast to Anselm, who believed that the predicate of existence could be attached to the concept of God, for example. Kant, however, argues that no meaningful information is provided by such an assertion about existence; rather, independent confirmation through experience is necessary. The knowability of existence claims does not rely on mere thought or concept, but on empirical evidence within the sensory world where application of the mind's concepts yields knowledge.