requestId:684c3e4a9bb481.11878125.
Mu Zongsan’s acceptance and transformation of Kant’s concept of “things themselves”
Author: Sheng Ke (Department of Philosophy, Capital Master Fan)
Source: “Chinese Confucianism” No. 15, 2020
Content summary: “things themselves” is the main concept used by Mou Zongsan to describe Chinese philosophy through Kant’s philosophy. Mou Zongsan’s understanding and acceptance of “things themselves” showed differences with Kant from the very beginning. Kant’s logic in expressing “things themselves” is to publish “things themselves” by the intellectual, and to propose the direct perception of wisdom on this basis; while Mou Zongsan pronounces the direct perception of wisdom from the “true self”, and to verify the existence of “things themselves” by the direct perception of wisdom. Mou Zongsan went further and directly expressed the existence of “things themselves” as “value meaning”, which became the use of knowledge and understanding. This shows that Mou Zong’s focus and energy is completely derived from the traditional Song and Ming Philosophy. Only by taking Song and Ming Philosophy as the foundation can we better understand Mou Zong’s three Philosophy.
Keywords: Object itself/The True Self/The Intuition of Wisdom/The Intuition of Knowledge
Teacher Mou Zongsan learned a change in his understanding and development of Kant’s concept of “Object itself”. In “The Intuition of Wisdom and Chinese Philosophy”, “Object itself” is more expressed as an actual entity. As for “Photographies and Things themselves”, “Things themselves” is expressed in a more complex manner as the existence of “value meaning”. The 博官网 conversion between these two meanings highlights the difference between Mou Zongsan and Kant, and this difference comes from the difference between the subjectivity of Chinese philosophy held by Mou Zongsan and Kant’s philosophy system. It is precisely this difference彩票线VIP that highlights the unique meaning of Mou Zong’s three philosophical philosophical philosophical philosophical philosophical philosophical philosophical philosophical philosophical philosophical philosophical philosophical philosophical philosophical philosophical philosophical philosophical philosophical philosophical philosophical philosophical philosophical philosophical philosophical philosophical philosophical philosophical philosophical philosophical philosophical philosophical philosophical philosophical philosophical philosophical philosophical philosophical philosophical philosophical philos
1. The concept of “thing in itself” that eliminates the meaning of “thing in itself” has a main meaning for Kant, but it is a relatively vague concept. In Kant, we can see the division between appearance and “thing in itself”, and also the division between “phenomena” and the intrinsic body. In the first edition of “Pure Sensitive Criticism”, Kant also discussed a concept “transcendental object=X”. There is both a difference and connection between “things themselves”, the body and “extravagant object = X”. In this book, “extravagant object = X” was rejected by Kant, but in Kant’s discussion on the bodyIn fact, it still includes the meaning of “exceeded object = X”. In “Intuition of Wisdom and Chinese Philosophy”, Mr. Mou focused on the distinction between “extraordinary object = X” and “things themselves” because of Heidegger’s influence.
“Extra object=X” in the first edition of “Pure Sensual Criticism”, means the results obtained by the use of intellectual excess. Kant said:
All representations of ours are actually related to any object through intellectuality, and since phenomena are nothing but manifestations, intellectuals connect them to something that is the object of rationality and direct view: but this object is only an object of inclusive ppt. But the object beyond means something equal to X, which we know nothing about, and in ordinary terms (according to the existing structure of our intellectuality), it cannot be known. On the contrary, it can only be used as a correlation of the state of a state of unity, and intelligence can only decompose the concept of a subject in rational view. ①
It can be seen that in the first edition, the objects beyond were included in the appearance of intellectuality for Kant – “Intellect uses this sysfunction to decompose multiple objects into one object” – although its influence is extremely eliminated, it is not lacking in experience. However, in the second edition, Kant revoked this concept and directly concluded it as the concept of the original. In this way, on the one hand, the body contains “exceed object = X” and is the use of intellectual excess. However, its position in experience is cancelled here. On the other hand, the concept of intellectual intuition (intshort-term maintenanceelectual intuition) is proposed in relation to the body. That is, the excess use of intellectuality allows us to imagine that there is a corresponding body behind the phenomenon, and this body can be imagined as thinking through the concept of pure intellectuality.
But here it shows a certain kind of disagreement that can cause serious misunderstandings: since intellectuality calls an object in a certain relationship, and at the same time, it still has an appearance about the person who is leisurely outside of this relationship, so it (understanding)官网Imagine that it can also formulate some concepts for such an object, and since the intellect is nothing but a norm, the object must at most be able to think through these pure intellectual outlines, but this will make people think about an intellectual object (being of the Understanding) means an indeterminate concept of an ordinary thing outside of our rationality, as it is about an accurate concept of an existence that we can recognize through intellectuality in a certain way. ②
In this meaning, the concept of the body only has an absolute meaning, and is only an overreach of intellectuality. However, Kant also said, false If there is a direct viewing method other than rational direct viewing, the body can become an intrinsic intrinsic.
If we understand the body as a thing, because we have lost the method of our direct viewing, it is not an object of our rational direct viewing; then, this is an intrinsic intrinsic. But if we understand it as a irrational direct viewing object, then we assume a special direct viewing method, that is, intellectual direct viewing method, but it is not what we have, and we cannot even see its ability, and this will be an essential body in terms of significance. ③
In this meaning, as Li Mingxiu believed, Kant actually assumed that fundamentally similar meanings Using the concept of “things themselves” and the intrinsic concept, Mr. Mou did not divide the two words in “The Intuition of Wisdom and Chinese Philosophy”. ④
Here, we can see a difference between Mr. Mou and Kant in the relationship between “things themselves” and the Intuition of Wisdom. For Kant, the so-called “things themselves” is an intellectual transcendenceinclusive network dcard, on the one hand, as reminded by “exceed object = X”, for the comprehensive and unified effect of intellectuality, intellectuality must set the existence of an object that exceeds it, and on the other hand, this object that exceeds it will be understood to exist truly behind the phenomenon and affect our rational beings. In this way, it will appear The “thing itself” in the absolute meaning is eliminated. “thing itself” cannot become an object of rational intuition, and the concepts and paradigms of intellectuality cannot be imposed on it. If we want to understand “thing itself”, we must rely on some kind of straightforward view, which is beyond rational intuition. In Kant’s view, if there is a kind of wise intuition, we can grasp “thing itself”. Therefore, for Kant, it is first of all the intuition of intellectuality that is prejudice by intellectuality.The concept of “things themselves” was followed by the concept of wisdom and intuition.
2. Mou Zongsan understands the “thing itself” based on the wisdom of wisdom
For Mou Zongsan, because the confidant who is originally meant and kind, there is wisdom intuition, and wisdom intuition does not apply to conceptual patterns. The existence of wisdom intuition can ensure that we can present it as the original face of things. Therefore, for Mr. Mou, the logical development path of his theory is to first have wisdom and go from it to the discussion of “things themselves”. Mou Zongsan’s explanation of wisdom’s direct perception was started by his modification of Kant’s concept of “self”.
For Kant, all appearances are given in time, and time is composed of continuous giving in moments. “In Kant, time is a direct idea, an
發佈留言