29.01.2013 Views

The Doctrine of Self-positing and Receptivity in Kant's Late ...

The Doctrine of Self-positing and Receptivity in Kant's Late ...

The Doctrine of Self-positing and Receptivity in Kant's Late ...

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

simplex). <strong>The</strong> judgment I am th<strong>in</strong>k<strong>in</strong>g is not synthetic[,]<br />

that is to say not such that would go beyond the concept <strong>of</strong><br />

the representation <strong>of</strong> itself <strong>and</strong> beyond a determ<strong>in</strong>ation <strong>of</strong><br />

the subject… 209<br />

<strong>The</strong> logical ―I‖ found <strong>in</strong> pure apperception as the mark <strong>of</strong> the cause <strong>and</strong> bearer <strong>of</strong><br />

thoughts alone is <strong>in</strong>sufficient to posit itself as also <strong>in</strong>stantiated outside the concept <strong>of</strong><br />

itself. <strong>The</strong> logical act <strong>of</strong> tak<strong>in</strong>g itself as Object <strong>of</strong> its own th<strong>in</strong>k<strong>in</strong>g, says noth<strong>in</strong>g <strong>of</strong> the<br />

subject‘s existence <strong>in</strong> reality. In order for the latter to be possible, an entire field <strong>of</strong><br />

determ<strong>in</strong>ability must be given to it. Only as <strong>and</strong> upon it can the ―I‖ <strong>in</strong> its function <strong>of</strong><br />

Verbum posit itself: ―I am exist<strong>in</strong>g.‖<br />

<strong>The</strong> follow<strong>in</strong>g passages from the Selbstsetzungslehre exhibit a conceptual<br />

unfold<strong>in</strong>g between ―I am th<strong>in</strong>k<strong>in</strong>g‖ <strong>and</strong> ―I am exist<strong>in</strong>g:‖<br />

I am: is the logical act which precedes all representations<br />

<strong>of</strong> the Object[;] it is the verbum by which I posit myself. 210<br />

<strong>The</strong> logical consciousness <strong>of</strong> myself (sum) conta<strong>in</strong>s no<br />

determ<strong>in</strong>ation but the real consciousness <strong>of</strong> <strong>in</strong>tuition<br />

(apperceptio) [does]. 211<br />

209 Ak: 22:91. My translation (the passage is absent from Förster‘s translation). Orig<strong>in</strong>al:<br />

―Sum [ist] die Copula zu e<strong>in</strong>em möglichen Urtheil und noch ke<strong>in</strong> Urtheil selbst, als wozu<br />

noch e<strong>in</strong> Prädicat erforderlich wird (apprehensio simplex). Das Urtheil ich b<strong>in</strong> denkend<br />

ist ke<strong>in</strong> synthetisches, d.i. nich e<strong>in</strong> solches was über den Begriff der Vorstellung me<strong>in</strong>er<br />

selbst h<strong>in</strong>ausgeht und [also] über e<strong>in</strong>e Bestimmung des Subject h<strong>in</strong>ausgeht, und ich kann<br />

nicht sagen Ich denke darum b<strong>in</strong> ich (cogito ergo sum), welches schon e<strong>in</strong>en<br />

Vernunftschluβ enthalten würde: Wer da denkt der Existiert, nun denke ich, also existiere<br />

ich. Ich b<strong>in</strong> das denkende Subject aber nicht Object der Anschauung als noch nicht mich<br />

selbst erkennend.‖<br />

210 Ak: 22:85. Förster, 191 (punctuation modified). Orig<strong>in</strong>al: ―Ich b<strong>in</strong>: ist der logische Act<br />

der vor aller Vorstellung des Objects vorhergeht ist e<strong>in</strong> Verbum wodurch ich mich selbst<br />

setze.‖<br />

211 Ak: 22:85. Förster, 191. Orig<strong>in</strong>al: ―Das logische Bewustseyn me<strong>in</strong>er selbst Sum enthält<br />

ke<strong>in</strong>e Bestimmung aber das reale Bewustseyn der Anschauung (apperceptio).‖<br />

146

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!