1. "Everything is wide" is an innate judgment, and "Everything has a cause" is a comprehensive judgment, which is beyond doubt. Because, in the judgment that "all objects are malleable", the definition of "object" contains the connotation of ductility. You can learn about Descartes' definition of an object, or just look it up in a reliable dictionary, and you will know that the so-called object is a malleable entity composed of matter, and the connotation of extensibility is contained in the main item of "object", so the main item of "everything" does not contain the content of "cause", so judgment is comprehensive judgment.

2. As far as your words are concerned, the reason why you have this problem is because you have never figured out what innate judgment and comprehensive judgment are. Simply put, innate judgment means that the predicate of judgment has been included in the subject, such as "all cold patients are human", and the predicate of "human" has been included in the subject meaning of "cold patients", which is inevitable; However, the main item does not include the predicates of "cold patients need to take Bupleurum" and "need to take Bupleurum", so the judgment is comprehensive. It is not so much that you will "inevitably think" the predicate from the subject, but rather that judgment is innate judgment. Because "inevitable thought" can also be attributed to what empiricists call "habitual association", whether empirical or not.

3. My suggestion is that it is not enough to look at second-hand materials to really understand what innate judgment and comprehensive judgment are all about. It is better to read Kant's original works, or at least read Critique of Pure Reason and Introduction to Future Metaphysics. It is unrealistic to read only a little second-hand information without reading the original.

I am also a senior two student, and I like philosophy very much. QQ378 147278, welcome to communicate.