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

fascicle written by Kant between 1800 and 1803. Kant‘s reflections in these pages are,
one could say, at the macro level; one finds here formulations of his system of
transcendental philosophy as a whole. Because fascicle i is in its character the most
scattered, incomplete, and schematic (e.g., there are what appear as possible titles for
either the Op or perhaps his philosophical position in general; one finds the names of
other thinkers – such as Spinoza, Schelling, Lichtenberg – as placeholders for
philosophical positions through which Kant appears to be situating his own; etc..) it has
proven to be a fecund source for provocative interpretations of the ultimate significance
of the Op. For instance, some have claimed that Kant situates his work within
Schelling‘s ―System of Transcendental Idealism‖ (e.g., Tüschling) or, more broadly
speaking, within a kind of ―Spinozism‖ (e.g., Edwards), both of which would challenge
some of the most important tenets of Kant's earlier vision of his critical and
transcendental philosophy.
However, although not always found contained in a single book, more holistic
approaches to the interpretation of the Op can be pieced together in the literature written
in other languages; for instance in Spanish (e.g., Duque, Pietro), Italian (e.g., Matheau),
French (e.g., Ferrero) and German (e.g., Förster). References to the Op can also be found
in the works of now canonical authors of the 20 th Century, such as Heidegger and
Foucault on the topics of being, finitude and subjectivity, or Deleuze on the change in the
status of space over time as forms of intuition. Ultimately, the differences in
interpretative paths may suggest that the source of the asymmetry in the English language
literature and the tendencies and uses elsewhere result from different philosophical
traditions and cultural specificities (e.g., a preference for epistemology in Anglo tradition
15