here is why kant thinks space is a form of intiution, argue against it In order to grasp what exactly makes space a form of intuition for Kant, we must first comprehend what he means by the term “form of intuition”. An intuition, to Kant, is an immediate representation of an object, which is  Kant denotes formality with things that are a priori, which suggests that a from of intuition is an intuition that does not come to us by experience or empirically. This suggests that it is an innate mental structure that shapes our experiences before and independently of empirical knowledge. Kant classifies space along with time as being the only forms of intuition, which he believes are essential to the cognising human mind. 

Kant provides two arguments for the a priori nature of space. First, he observes that our perceiving of several things as distinct from one another does not give rise to the representation of space. According to him, the very possibility of perceiving objects as distinct and separate from one another presupposes a preexisting representation of space. Therefore, space is necessary as a precondition to experience objects separate from one another, and is a priori.This spatial framework cannot be an empirical acquisition since one must already conceive of space to differentiate between objects.  Secondly, Kant highlights our incapacity to conceive the non-existence of space, though we can picture an empty space devoid of objects.  This suggests that space transcends empirical reality; it is innately intuited by the mind, not inductively aggregated from sensory input. Space, therefore, is not contingent on experience - a tenet fundamental to the Kantian view. Therefore , space is the backdrop for our representations and appearances, and is not dependent on these appearances. Thus, space is not an incidental byproduct of experience but an a priori necessity pivotal to the formation of perception.

A critical aspect of Kant’s philosophy in the Critique of Pure Reason is his distinguishing of concepts from intuitions. Whereas intuitions are singular, immediate representations, concepts refer to generalised representations that encompass potentially many things. Kant holds that space is an intuition. Kant asserts that only one singular space can be represented at a time, which holds in it all other ‘spaces’ as subdivisions. To illustrate this, take a human’s field of view. What you see out of you left eye and what you see out of your right eye are, speaking ontologically, not two separate spaces but rather a division of the same space. These segments exist within the space, rather than make it up. By proving that we experience a unified space rather than an amalgamation of discrete segments, Kant fortifies his claim that space, as encompassing singularity, qualifies as an intuition and not a concept.

Furthermore, Kant’s reflections on the infinitude of space also support its intuitiveness. He argues that concepts are constructed by adding properties together. For example, *** If space was a concept, it would have to be created using this method. However, when adding different ‘spaces’ together, we could only reach a potential infinite, not actual infinite space. Tallying up finite spaces serially is an impossibility. Instead, we perceive space as inherently infinite, which is something a concept cannot accommodate. Finite concepts cannot embody infinity, yet our perception of space does, and so it follows that space is an intuition. 

The Kantian framework does acknowledge the 'concept of space’, which may superficially appear to be a contradiction. However, Kant draws a crucial distinction: just as a specific entity like ‘Immanuel Kant’ can be subsumed under broader concepts like ‘philosopher’ or ‘human,’ the concept of space can be employed to reflect on the intuition of space without contradicting its innate singular character. This recognition enables us to engage theoretically with space without compromising our intuitive grasp of it.

Kant’s insights presume a Euclidean view of space, the prevailing understanding in his time. Today, we recognise the validity of non-Euclidean geometries and contemplate spaces with more than three dimensions. While such theoretical explorations extend our conceptual repertoire, Kant’s argument suggests that our basic sensory apprehension of space remains three-dimensional and Euclidean, as these represent the intuitive conditions of human sensibility. Kant isn't investigating either theoretical questions of geometry nor of space & time - he's more concerned about our immediate perception of space & time. He's specifically interested in where consciousness meets space and time.