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.

spontaneous nature. Or perhaps it refers to a more primitive activity, as a mere act <strong>of</strong><br />

plac<strong>in</strong>g, tak<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong>, or susta<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g given representations with<strong>in</strong> temporal relations without<br />

concept or determ<strong>in</strong>ation. In other words, what is the cognitive orig<strong>in</strong> <strong>of</strong> the act <strong>posit<strong>in</strong>g</strong><br />

the m<strong>in</strong>d? What is the status <strong>of</strong> what is posited? And, what function does its outcome<br />

play with<strong>in</strong> the whole?<br />

<strong>The</strong> concept <strong>of</strong> setzen appears aga<strong>in</strong> with<strong>in</strong> a discussion <strong>of</strong> self-affection <strong>of</strong> the<br />

m<strong>in</strong>d, but this time with regards to space qua form. Despite the fact that <strong>in</strong> this example<br />

the outcome <strong>of</strong> the m<strong>in</strong>d‘s activity is a consciousness <strong>of</strong> synthetic determ<strong>in</strong>ation <strong>of</strong> space<br />

(i.e., a geometrical one), the former can still be thought <strong>of</strong> as an act <strong>of</strong> self-affection<br />

<strong>in</strong>ternal to the m<strong>in</strong>d alone, for what is determ<strong>in</strong>able by it is the form <strong>of</strong> <strong>in</strong>tuition alone –<br />

available to thought a priori <strong>and</strong> with no determ<strong>in</strong>ations <strong>of</strong> its own.<br />

In §24 <strong>of</strong> the ―Transcendental Deduction‖ <strong>of</strong> the second edition <strong>of</strong> the KrV, Kant<br />

uses three different concepts to describe different <strong>in</strong>stances by which a transcendental<br />

synthesis <strong>of</strong> the manifold <strong>of</strong> relations <strong>in</strong> space are carried out. <strong>The</strong>se examples are:<br />

draw<strong>in</strong>g [Ziehen], construction [beschreiben], <strong>and</strong> <strong>posit<strong>in</strong>g</strong> [setzen]. <strong>The</strong> first two – the<br />

draw<strong>in</strong>g <strong>of</strong> a l<strong>in</strong>e <strong>and</strong> the construction <strong>of</strong> a circle – concern what one may call secondary<br />

limitations upon space, for even if their possibilities are immanent to the form <strong>of</strong> space,<br />

the outcome <strong>of</strong> the syntheses do not <strong>in</strong>stantiate any essential aspect <strong>of</strong> its form. In<br />

contrast, Kant uses setzen to refer to a transcendental synthesis that results <strong>in</strong> a<br />

representation <strong>of</strong> a key aspect <strong>of</strong> the form <strong>of</strong> space itself. Echo<strong>in</strong>g what he said about<br />

time, Kant writes: ―We cannot represent the three dimensions <strong>of</strong> space at all without<br />

<strong>posit<strong>in</strong>g</strong> three l<strong>in</strong>es perpendicular to each other at the same po<strong>in</strong>t.‖ 80 As a result, what is<br />

80 KrV, B155/6.<br />

57

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

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!