On the question of autonomy in Kant's ability to contemplate: a review of the arguments M. Heidegger

The article provides a cataloging direct and indirect arguments in favor of autonomy M.Heidegger ability of contemplation in the Kant's "Critique of Pure Reason". The analysis is based on the early lectures M.Heidegger «Kant und das Problem der Metaphusik» and «Phanomenologische Interpretation von Kants Kritik der reinen Vernunft», as well as the text of the famous "Davos debate between E.Kassirer and M.Heidegger." All of Heidegger's arguments regarding the autonomous nature of contemplation in Kant divided into 2 groups: Arguments regarding the contemplation of itself without regard to its relationship with other powers; Arguments concerning the interaction of contemplation with the imagination and thinking. These direct argument added an indirect, arising from the understanding of being, recorded in the early work of Kant "The only possible basis for proving the existence of God," and in the "Critique of Pure Reason," refutes the ontological proof of God's existence. The four arguments regarding the contemplation of itself: 1) distinguish the phenomenon and the "thing in it self" as intuitio originarius and intuitio derivativus (key to Kant's distinction in the world of phenomena and the world of noumena is possible only on the basis of intuition); 2) non-discursive character of representations of space and time, a demonstration of an incorrect interpretation of space and time as categories, that is, general, not singular representations; 3) the comprehensibility of a movement based on the idea of time; paradoxes as a consequence of attempts to interpret the movement horizon of thinking; 4) specific a priori intuition. There are three arguments concerning the interaction with other faculties of contemplation:1) the inability of the analytical content of the concepts of origin (contemplation as the only source of content concepts); 2) the scheme as a priori definition of time (schemes as product of imagination can not work if there is defined, that is, time as a stand-alone instance); 3) the need to distinguish between the form of contemplation and formal contemplation (this argument is directed against the attempt to interpret the Marburg school space and time as a category). Additionally the argument stemming from Kant's thesis about the existence and the refutation of the ontological proof of God's existence.

Keywords

Authors

References