Article/Publication Details
Views: 3383

THEORETICAL-TEXTOLOGICAL WORKSHOP
SCHELLING AND PHENOMENOLOGY
(24 June 2015, St. Petersburg State University, Institute of Philosophy)

Abstract
This publication is a transcript of the first meeting of the theoretical-textological workshop dedicated to the possibilities of the comparison of Schelling's idealism (as a kind of German idealism after Kant) and the phenomenological movement. It was held on June 24, 2015 at the Institute of Philosophy at St. Petersburg State University. To begin, the moderators of the workshop marked out several fields of future investigations. On the one hand, it could be the use of Schelling's transcendental theory of subjectivity in the framework of its phenomenological theory. One ought to mention the following main notions of Schelling's transcendental philosophy, which could be reinterpreted in the context of the phenomenological doctrine of the subjectivity: intellectual intuition (in connection with the phenomenological concept of intuition of essence), concept of teleology of subjectivity, concepts of transcendental history as well as transcendental past. On the other hand, Schelling's concepts of fact and facticity, immemorial being, existence, ecstasy, project could be of current relevance in building today's phenomenological theories of the world, even of a possible phenomenological theology. As a starting point for the workshop the modern Austrian researcher Wolfgang Fasching article Transzendentale und ästhetische Anschauung. Zur Selbstanschauung der konstituierenden Subjektivität bei Husserl und Schelling (Fasching, 2002) was chosen. During the discussion, the following topics and questions were examined: the problem of the similarity of Schelling's concept of the aesthetic intuition and Husserl's method of epoche, the peculiarity of the aesthetic conception by Schelling, and possibility of the aesthetic contemplation by Husserl, the legality of Fasching's interpretation of Husserl's notion of “epoche” as an aesthetic act, and the role of self-contemplation for the subject structure.

Key words
Transcendental idealism, phenomenology, epoche, reduction, intellectual intuition, esthetical intuition, intuition of essence, Schelling, Husserl, Heidegger.

References

• Apel', K.-O. (2001). Transformatsiya filosofii [The Transformation of the Philosophy]. Moscow: Logos. (in Russian).
• Basso, I. (2011). Schelling's Meontology and the Concept of Possibility in Kierkegaard. Ars Brevis, 17, 254–269.
• Bofre, Zh. (2007). Dialog s Khaideggerom. Kn. 1. Grecheskaya filosofiya [Dialogue with Heidegger. First Book: The Greek Philosophy]. Saint Petersburg: Vladimir Dal'. (in Russian).
• Brentano, F. (1968). Über die Zukunft der Philosophie. Hamburg: Felix Meiner.
• Fasching, W. (2002). Transzendentale und ästhetische Anschauung. Zur Selbstanschauung der konstituierenden Subjektivität bei Husserl und Schelling. In Esterbauer, R. (Ed.), Orte des Schönen: phänomenologische Annäherungen (95–124). Würzburg: Koenigshausen & Neumann.
• Fellmann, F. (1982). Phänomenologie und Expressionismus. Freiburg/München: K. Alber.
• Frank, M. (1992). Der unendliche Mangel an Sein. München: Wilhelm Fink.
• Gusserl', E. (2015). Pis‘mo k Gofmanshtalyu [The Husser's Letter to Hoffmannsthal]. In Ezhegodnik po fenomenologicheskoi filosofii [The Yearbook of Phenomenological Philosophy]. Moscow: RGGU Publ. (in Russian).
• Heidegger, M. (1991). Die Metaphysik des deutschen Idealismus. Zur erneuten Auslegung von Schelling: Philosophische Untersuchungen über das Wesen der menschlichen Freiheit und die damit zusammenhängenden Gegenstände (1809) (GA II). Frankfurt am Main: Vittorio Klostermann.
• Heidegger, M. (1988). Schelling: Vom Wesen der menschlichen Freiheit (1809) (GA II). Frankfurt am Main: Vittorio Klostermann.
• Hühn, L., & Jantzen, J. (Eds.). (2010). Heideggers Schelling-Seminar. (1927/1928). Die Protokolle von Martin Heideggers Seminar zu Schellings «Freiheitsschrift» (1927/1928) und die Akten des internationalen Schelling-Tags 2006. Stuttgart, Bad-Canstatt: Fromann-Holzbog.
• Husserl, E. (1956). Erste Philosophie (1923/4). Erste Teil: Kritische Ideengeschichte (Hua VII). Den Haag: Martinus Nijhoff.
• Husserl, E. (1994). Briefwechsel (Hua Dokumente, III/7). Dordrecht: Kluwer.
• Jaspers, K. (1955). Schelling. Grösse und Verhängnis. München: Piper.
• Kern, I. (1964). Husserl und Kant. Eine Untersuchung über Husserls Verhältnis zu Kant und zum Neukantianismus. Den Haag: Martinus Nijhoff.
• Kryukov, A. (2013). Problema vremeni i refleksii u Gusserlya [The Problem of Time and Reflexivity in Husserl]. Horizon. Fenomenologicheskie issledovaniya [Horizon. Studies in Phenomenology], 2(2), 57–70. (in Russian).
• Kryukov, A. (2014). «Voobrazhenie» i «fantaziya» u Kanta i Gusserlya kak esteticheskaya problema [«Imagination» and «Phantasy» in Kant and Husserl as an esthetical problem]. In Izvestiya Ural'skogo federal'nogo universiteta. Seriya 3. Obshchestvennye nauki [Izvestia. The Ural Federal University Journal. Series 3.Social and Political Sciences], 3 (131), 113– 124. (in Russian).
• Seel, M. (2000). Ästhetik des Erscheinens. München: Carl Hanser.
• Schelling, F. W. J. (1859). Sämmtliche Werke. I. Abteilung. Bd. IV. Stuttagert und Augsburg: J.G. Gotta'scher.
• Shelling, F. V. I. (1999). Sistema mirovykh epokh [The System of the Ages of the World]. Tomsk: Vodolei. (in Russian).
• Shelling, F. V. I. (1987). Sobranie sochinenii v dvukh tomakh. T. 1. [Collected Papers in Two Volumes. Vol. 1]. Moscow: Nauka. (in Russian).
• Shelling, F. V. I. (1989). Sobranie sochinenii v dvukh tomakh. T. 2. [Collected Papers in Two Volumes. Vol. 2]. Moscow: Nauka. (in Russian).
• Shelling, F. V. I. (2013). Traktat ob istochnike vechnykh istin [On the Source of Eternal Truths]. Einai. Voprosy filosofii i teologii [Einai. The Questions of Philosophy and Theology], 1/2, (3/4), 154–207. (in Russian).
• Shpigel'berg, G. (2002). Fenomenologicheskoe dvizhenie [The Phenomenological Movement]. Moscow: Logos. (in Russian).
• Tengeli, L. (2011). Neobkhodimost' fakticheskogo u Aristotelya i Gusserlya: dva osnovopolozheniya metafiziki [Necessity of the Factual: Two Grounds of the Metaphysics]. Mysl' [Thought], 11, 20–31. (in Russian).

Article/Publication Details
Views: 4806

FRIEDRICH WILHELM JOSEPH SCHELLING
PRESENTATION OF PHILOSOPHICAL EMPIRICISM
From the Introduction to Philosophy: Presented in Munich, most recently in 1836.
(From the Handwritten Remains)

Abstract
This publication is the translation of the first fragment of F. W. J Schelling's Presentation of Philosophical Empiricism accompanied by the analytical translator's preface. In his treatise, Schelling assesses the history of modern philosophy. Namely, he treats it as history of experiments, the goal of which was in the search for the primary fact in the world. In Schelling's opinion, this fact is in the growing over-weight of the subjective over the objective. Only his philosophy of nature was able to find this fact. However, it is not genuine fact but only pure fact, because it does not content in itself any ground for the over-weighting of the subjective over the objective. For resolve this problem, Schelling starts to use the concepts formed by Ancient philosophers, namely by Pythagoras and Plato. The concepts of the limitless and the limit are belonging to the series of the mentioned concepts. Accordantly, Schelling associates the notion of the objective with the one of the limitless being and the notion of the subjective with the one of the limit or limiting instance. His inquiry into the correlation between the limitless being and the limit, i.e. between the objective and the subjective leads him to the declaration of the existence of the free efficient cause, which determinates their interplay and the rise of that-what-should-be from that-what-should-not-be. Since the limitless is the objective and the limit is the subjective in accordance with Schelling, such efficient cause is also the cause of the progressive over-weighting of the subjective over the objective as well. It can explain the fact, which the Schelling's philosophy of nature has only found but not explained. The in his preface, the translator puts the question of the possibility as well as of a relevance of the Schelling's late philosophy to the phenomenological thought. In this context, he emphasizes few moments, by which the later Schelling' philosophy could be of interests for phenomenologists, namely the following ones: the concept of philosophical empiricism itself, the Schelling's division between the pure fact and the genuine fact, his treatment of history of philosophy as history of experiments. Moreover, he speaks about main difficulties connected with the translation of Schelling's text into Russian and gives a German-Russian glossary for utility of Russian readers. The translator gives also the commentaries by Arthur Drews, who reedited the Schelling's treatise in 1902, in their Russian translation.

Key words
Philosophical empiricism, genuine fact, over-weight of the subjective over the objective, subjection, the limitless, limit, substance, cause, German idealism.

References

• Aristotel'. (1976). Sochineniya v chetyrekh tomakh. T. 1. [Works in Four Volumes. Vol. 1]. Moscow: Mysl'. (in Russian).
• Aristotel'. (1981). Sochineniya v chetyrekh tomakh. T. 3. [Works in Four Volumes. Vol. 3]. Moscow: Mysl'. (in Russian).
• Berkli, Dzh. (1978). Sochinenniya [Works]. Moscow: Mysl'. (in Russian).
• Booth, E. (2000). Leibniz and Schelling. Studia Leibniziana, 32, 86-104.
• Dekart, R. (1994). Sochineniya v dvukh tomakh. T. 2. [Works in Two Volumes. Vol. 2]. Moscow: Mysl'. (in Russian).
• Drews, A. (1897). Das Ich als Grundproblem der Metaphysik. Freiburg im Breisgau, Leipzig, Tübingen: Mohr (Paul Siebeck).
• Galuzzo, G. (2012). The Medieval Reception of Book Zeta of Aristotle's Metaphysics. Leiden, Boston: Brill.
• Gippokrat. (1944). Sochineniya v trekh tomakh. T. 2. [Works in Three Volumes. Vol. 2]. Moscow: Medgiz. (in Russian).
• Goethe, J. W. (2005). Werke, Kommentare und Register. Bd. 14. Naturissenschaftliche Schriften II, Materialen, Register. München: C.H. Beck.
• Hartmann, E. V. (1896). Kategorienlehre. Leipzig: H. Haacke.
• Hegel, G. W. F. (1836). Vorlesungen über die Geschichte der Philosophie. Bd. 3. Berlin: Dunker und Humblot.
• Kant, I. (1964). Kritika chistogo razuma. Sochineniya v shesti tomakh. T. 3. [Critique of Pure Reason. Works in six volumes. Vol. 3]. Moscow: Mysl'. (in Russian).
• Lebedev, A. V. (Eds.). (1989). Fragmenty rannikh grecheskikh filosofov. Chast' I. Ot epicheskikh kosmogonii do vozniknoveniya atomistiki [The Fragments of Early Ancient Greek Philosophers. Part One. From the Epical Cosmogonies to the Rise of Atomistic]. Moscow: Nauka. (in Russian).
• Leibnits, G. V. (1982). Sochineniya v chetyrekh tomakh. T. 1. [Works in Four Volums. Vol. 1]. Moscow: Nauka. (in Russian).
• Leibnits, G. V. (1989). Sochineniya v chetyrekh tomakh. T. 4. [Works in Four Volums. Vol. 4]. Moscow: Nauka. (in Russian).
• Leinkauf, Th. (1998). Schelling als Interpret der philosophischen Tradition: Zur Rezeption und Transformation von Platon, Plotin, Aristoteles und Kant. Münster: Lit.
• Mal'bransh, N. (1999). Razyskaniya istiny [Investigations of the Truth]. Saint Petersburg: Nauka. (in Russian).
• Marquet, J.-F. (1985). Schelling et Descartes. Les Études philosophiques, 2, 237–250.
• Platon. (1993). Sobranie sochinenii v chetyrekh tomakh. T. 2. [Collected Papers in Four Volumes. Vol. 2]. Moscow: Mysl'. (in Russian).
• Platon. (1994). Sobranie sochinenii v chetyrekh tomakh. T. 3. [Collected Papers in Four Volumes. Vol. 3]. Moscow: Mysl'. (in Russian).
• Plutarch. (1895). Moralia. Leipzig: Teubner.
• Plutarkh. (2008). Sochineniya [Works]. Saint Petersburg: Saint Petersburg State University Publ. (in Russian).
• Rezvykh, P. V. (2003). Pozdnii Shelling i Kant [The Late Schelling and Kant]. In Istoriko-filosofskii ezhegodnik [Yearbook of History of Philosophy] (280-303). (in Russian).
• Rezvykh, P. V. (2004). Rannii Shelling i Kant [The Early Schelling and Kant]. In Istoriko-filosofskii ezhegodnik [Yearbook of History of Philosophy] (250-278). (in Russian).
• Schelling, F. W. J. (1861). Sämmtliche Werke. I. Abteilung. Bd. X. Stuttagert und Augsburg: J. G. Gotta'scher Verlag.
• Schelling, F. W. J. (1994). Timaeus. (1794). Stuttgart — Bad-Cannstatt: Frommann-Holzbog.
• Shelling, F. V. I. (1989). Sobranie sochinenii v dvukh tomakh. T. 2. [Collected Papers in Two Volumes. Vol. 2]. Moscow: Nauka. (in Russian).
• Shelling, F. V. I. (1998). Idei k filosofii prirody kak vvedenie v izuchenie etoi nauki [Ideas for a Philosophy of Nature as an Introduction into this Science]. Saint Petersburg: Nauka. (in Russian).
• Shelling, F. V. I. (1999). Sistema mirovykh epokh [The System of the Ages of the World]. Tomsk: Vodolei. (in Russian).
• Shelling, F. V. I. (2000). Filosofiya otkroveniya. T. 1. [Philosophy of Revelation. Vol. 1]. Saint Petersburg: Nauka. (in Russian).
• Shelling, F. V. I. (2014). Izlozhenie moei sistemy filosofii [Presentation of My System of Philosophy]. Saint Petersburg: Nauka. (in Russian).
• Shelling, F. V. I. (2013a). Traktat ob istochnike vechnykh istin [On the Source of Eternal Truths]. Einai. Voprosy filosofii i teologii [Einai. The Questions of Philosophy and Theology]. 1/2, (3/4), 154–207. (in Russian).
• Shelling, F. V. I. (2013b). Filosofiya mifologii. T. 1. [Philosophy of Mythology. Vol. 1]. Saint Petersburg: Saint Petersburg State University Publ. (in Russian).
• Spinoza, B. (1999). Sochineniya v dvukh tomakh. T. 1. [Collected papers in Two Volumes. Vol. 1]. Saint Petersburg: Nauka.

Article/Publication Details
Views: 4482

THE PREFACE TO THE TRANSLATION
F. W. J. SCHELLING. PRESENTATION OF PHILOSOPHICAL EMPIRICISM

Abstract
This publication is the translation of the first fragment of F. W. J Schelling's Presentation of Philosophical Empiricism accompanied by the analytical translator's preface. In his treatise, Schelling assesses the history of modern philosophy. Namely, he treats it as history of experiments, the goal of which was in the search for the primary fact in the world. In Schelling's opinion, this fact is in the growing over-weight of the subjective over the objective. Only his philosophy of nature was able to find this fact. However, it is not genuine fact but only pure fact, because it does not content in itself any ground for the over-weighting of the subjective over the objective. For resolve this problem, Schelling starts to use the concepts formed by Ancient philosophers, namely by Pythagoras and Plato. The concepts of the limitless and the limit are belonging to the series of the mentioned concepts. Accordantly, Schelling associates the notion of the objective with the one of the limitless being and the notion of the subjective with the one of the limit or limiting instance. His inquiry into the correlation between the limitless being and the limit, i.e. between the objective and the subjective leads him to the declaration of the existence of the free efficient cause, which determinates their interplay and the rise of that-what-should-be from that-what-should-not-be. Since the limitless is the objective and the limit is the subjective in accordance with Schelling, such efficient cause is also the cause of the progressive over-weighting of the subjective over the objective as well. It can explain the fact, which the Schelling's philosophy of nature has only found but not explained. The in his preface, the translator puts the question of the possibility as well as of a relevance of the Schelling's late philosophy to the phenomenological thought. In this context, he emphasizes few moments, by which the later Schelling' philosophy could be of interests for phenomenologists, namely the following ones: the concept of philosophical empiricism itself, the Schelling's division between the pure fact and the genuine fact, his treatment of history of philosophy as history of experiments. Moreover, he speaks about main difficulties connected with the translation of Schelling's text into Russian and gives a German-Russian glossary for utility of Russian readers. The translator gives also the commentaries by Arthur Drews, who reedited the Schelling's treatise in 1902, in their Russian translation.

Key words
Philosophical empiricism, genuine fact, over-weight of the subjective over the objective, subjection, the limitless, limit, substance, cause, German idealism.

References

• Apel', K.-O. (2001). Transformatsiya filosofii [The Transformation of the Philosophy]. Moscow: Logos. (in Russian).
• Bekker, O. (2014). O khrupkosti prekrasnogo i avantyurizme khudozhnika [The Vacuity of Art and the Daring of the Artist]. Horizon. Fenomenologicheskie issledovaniya [Horizon. Studies in Phenomenology], 3 (1), 140–164. (in Russian).
• Bofre, Zh. (2007). Dialog s Khaideggerom. Kn. 1. Grecheskaya filosofiya [Dialogue with Heidegger. First Book: The Greek Philosophy]. Saint Petersburg: Vladimir Dal'. (in Russian).
• Heidegger, M. (1989). Beiträge zur Philosophie (Vom Ereignis) (1936–1938) (GA 65). Frankfurt am Main: Vittorio Klostermann.
• Heidegger, M. (1991). Die Metaphysik des deutschen Idealismus. Zur erneuten Auslegung von Schelling: Philosophische Untersuchungen über das Wesen der menschlichen Freiheit und die damit zusammenhängenden Gegenstände (1809) (GA 49). Frankfurt am Main: Vittorio Klostermann.
• Heidegger, M. (2014). Überlegungen II-VI (“Schwarze Hefte” 1931–1938) (GA 94). Frankfurt am Main: Vittorio Klostermann.
• Husserl, E. (1956). Erste Philosophie (1923/4). Erste Teil: Kritische Ideengeschichte (Hua VII). Den Haag: Martinus Nijhoff.
• Knebel', S. (2012). Traditsiya kak arkheologicheskaya kategoriya [Tradition as Archeological Category]. Einai. Voprosy filosofii i teologii [Einai. Question of Philosophy and Theology], 2(2), 441–455. (in Russian).
• Krichevskii, A. V. (2011). Absolyutnyi dukh skvoz' liki triedinstva: Sravnitel'nyi analiz filosofskoteologicheskikh kontseptsii Gegelya i pozdnego Shellinga [The Absolute Spirit through the Faces of the Trinity. The Comparative Study of Hegel's and Late Schelling's Philosophical- Theological Conceptions]. Moscow: Institute of Philosophy of Russian Academy of Sciences. (in Russian).
• Krichevskii, A. V. (2009). Obraz Absolyuta v filosofii Gegelya i pozdnego Shellinga [The Shape of the Absolute in the Hegel's and Late Schelling's Philosophies]. Moscow: Institute of Philosophy of Russian Academy of Sciences. (in Russian).
• Norman, J., & Welchman, A. (Eds). (2004). The New Schelling. Bloomsbury Academic.
• Platon (1994). Sobranie sochinenii v chetyrekh tomakh. T. 3. [Collected Papers in Four Volumes. Vol. 3]. Moscow: Mysl'. (in Russian).
• Rezvykh, P. V. (2003). Pozdnii Shelling i Kant [The Late Schelling and Kant]. In Istoriko-filosofskii ezhegodnik [Yearbook of History of Philosophy] (280–303). (in Russian).
• Rishir, M. (2014). Epokhe, mertsanie i reduktsiya v fenomenologii [Epoche, Glimmer and Reduction in Phenomenology]. In Sholokhova, S. A., & Yampol'skaya, A. V. (Eds.), (Post)fenomenologiya: novaya fenomenologiya vo Frantsii i za ee predelami [The (Post)phenomenology: the New Phenomenology in France and Abroad] (209–226). Moscow: Akademicheskii proekt. Gaudeamus. (in Russian).
• Schelling, F. W. J. (1902). Münchener Vorlesungen: Zur Geschichte der neueren Philosophie und Darstellung des philosophischen Empirismus. Leipzig: Dürr'schen Buchhandlund.
• Schelling, F. W. J. (1861). Sämmtliche Werke. I. Abteilung. Bd X. Stuttgart und Augsburg: J.G. Gotta'scher.
• Shelling, F. V. I. (1999). Sistema mirovykh epokh [The System of the Ages of the World]. Tomsk: Vodolei. (in Russian).
• Shelling, F. V. I. (2000). Filosofiya otkroveniya. T. 1. [Philosophy of Revelation. Vol. 1]. Saint Petersburg: Nauka. (in Russian).
• Shelling, F. V. I. (2013). Filosofiya mifologii. T. 2. [Philosophy of Mythology. Vol. 2]. Saint Petersburg: Saint Petersburg State University Publishing. (in Russian).
• Shelling, F. V. I. (1989). Sobranie sochinenii v dvukh tomakh. T. 2. [Collected Papers in Two Volumes. Vol. 2]. Moscow: Nauka. (in Russian).
• Schulz, W. (1975). Die Vollendung des Deutschen Idealismus in der Spätphilosophie Schellings. Pfullingen: Günter Neske.

Article/Publication Details
Views: 4418

SOME REMARKS ON EUGEN FINK'S INTERPRETATION OF PHENOMENOLOGY OF SPIRIT AND HEGEL'S INFLUENCE ON THE PHILOSOPHY OF THE WORLD

Abstract
Phenomenology of Spirit and Hegel's conception of the absolute had a decisive role in the genesis and development of Eugen Fink's philosophy. While Husserl and Heidegger showed Fink two different and fruitful ways to interpret phenomenology, Hegel suggested and offered him the conceptual means with which to combine these theoretical models and elaborate a third phenomenological paradigm, based on the concept of world. This is not only valid for Fink's early interpretation of Husserl's thought, but also (and especially) for the version of phenomenology that Husserl's last research assistant developed after World War II and the death of the old professor. Two goals characterize this second phase of Fink's philosophy: on the one hand, the purpose to pose the fundamental question of Being anew, without mistaking it for the «ontic» question referred to beings and things (in accord with Heidegger's indications and with the concept of «ontological difference»); on the other hand, the purpose to combine ontology, so interpreted, with genetic phenomenology and its rigorous method. The aim of the paper is to highlight how and to what extent the realization of this philosophical project is based on the interpretation of both Hegel's idealism and of the experience of consciousness Hegel describes in Phenomenology of Spirit. Assuming that Fink is looking for an ontological ground coinciding with the genesis of the structure of the world (in accord with the concept of phenomenological reduction), Hegel appears as the Western philosopher whose system of thought offers a conceptual model in accordance with such a requirement.

Key words
World, being, phenomenology, metaphysics, self-consciousness, ontological experience, phenomena.

References

• Böhmer, A. (Ed.). (2006). Eugen Fink. Sozialphilosophie, Anthropologie, Kosmologie, Pädagogik, Methodik. Würzburg: Königshausen & Neumann.
• Bruzina, R. (2004). Edmund Husserl and Eugen Fink. Beginnings and Ends in Phenomenology, 1928–1938. New Haven, London: Yale University Press.
• Dai, T. (2006). Sein und Welt. Das Problem des Lebens bei Eugen Fink. In H. R. Sepp, & I. Yamaguchi (Eds.), Leben als Phänomen. Die Freiburger Phänomenologie im Ost-West-Dialog (121–128). Würzburg: Königshausen & Neumann.
• Nielsen C., & Sepp H. R. (Eds.). (2006). Die Philosophie Hegels. 150 FA (1948–1949). In Nachlass Eugen Fink. Laufzeit: 1925–1975. Freiburg: Universitätsarchiv der Albert-Ludwigs-Universität.
• Fink, E. (1958). Sein, Wahrheit, Welt. Vor-Fragen zum Problem des Phänomen-Begriffs. Den Haag: Nijhoff.
• Fink, E. (1966). Studien zur Phänomenologie 1930–1939. Den Haag: Nijhoff.
• Fink, E. (1976). Phänomenologie und Dialektik. In E. Fink, Nähe und Distanz. Phänomenologische Vorträge und Aufsätze (228–249). Freiburg, München: Karl Alber.
• Fink, E. (1988a). VI. Cartesianische Meditation. Teil I: Die Idee einer transzendentalen Methodenlehre (Hua II/1). Dordrecht: Kluwer.
• Fink, E. (1988b). VI. Cartesianische Meditation. Teil II: Ergänzungsband (Hua II/2). Dordrecht: Kluwer.
• Fink, E. (1990). Welt und Endlichkeit. Würzburg: Königshausen & Neumann.
• Fink, E. (1994). Philosophie des Geistes. Würzburg: Königshausen & Neumann.
• Fink, E. (2004). Sein und Mensch. Vom Wesen der ontologischen Erfahrung. Freiburg, München: Karl Alber.
• Fink, E. (2006). Die Doktorarbeit und erste Assistenzjahre bei Husserl (GA 3/1). Freiburg, München: Karl Alber.
• Fink, E. (2007). Hegel. Phänomenologische Interpretationen der Phänomenologie des Geistes. Frankfurt a. M.: V. Klostermann.
• Fink, E. (2008). Die Bernauer Zeitmanuskripte, Cartesianische Meditationen und System der phänomenologischen Philosophie (GA 3/2). Freiburg, München: Karl Alber.
• Hegel, G. W. F. (1980). Phänomenologie des Geistes (GW 9). Hamburg: Felix Meiner.
• Heidegger, M., & Fink, E. (1970). Heraklit. Seminar Wintersemester 1966/67. Frankfurt a. M.: V. Klostermann.
• Heidegger, M. (2003). Hegels Begriff der Erfahrung. In M. Heidegger, Holzwege. (GA 5) (115–208). Frankfurt a. M.: V. Klostermann.
• Kerckhoven, G. van (2010). Vorfragen zum Phänomen-Begriff bei Eugen Fink. In H. R. Sepp, & A. Wildermuth (Eds.), Konzepte des Phänomenalen. Heinrich Barth — Eugen Fink — Jan Patočka (113–129). Würzburg: Königshausen & Neumann.
• Ossenkop, A., Kerckhoven. G. van, & Fink. R. (2015). Eugen Fink (1905–1975). Lebensbild des Freiburger Phänomenologen. Freiburg, München: Karl Alber.

Article/Publication Details
Views: 4596

SOME REMARKS ON HEIDEGGER'S INTERPRETATION OF KANT

Abstract
Among Heidegger's works his Kant book, «Kant and the Problem of Metaphysics» (1929), takes a special place. Planned by Heidegger as one of the sections of the second part of «Being and Time», it was intended to show the importance of the problem of substantiation. In «Being and Time» Heidegger recognized the achievements of Kant, but at the same time he added that the penetration into the problem of temporality was beyond Kant's scope. Despite the fact that Kant has come very close to the problem of time, his investigations remained, according to Heidegger, within the framework of the traditional ontology. Taking into account the aforementioned features of the interpretation of Kant in «Being and Time», it looks astonishing, that in his Kant book of 1929 Heidegger intended to demonstrate the idea of the fundamental ontology of Dasein (which he developed in «Being and Time») with the example of the interpretation of «Critique of Pure Reason» as the foundation of metaphysics. Heidegger discovered «clarification of transcendence» in Kant's transcendental deduction of the categories and Kant's subjective deduction seemed to be a transcendental disclosure of the nature of subjectivity of the subject. However, it is important to note that in the book «Kant and the Problem of Metaphysics» it is a question not so much of the historical-philological interpretation of Kant, as of clarifying Heidegger's internal directional of the fundamental ontology by means of this interpretation. We will try to give a critical analysis of Heidegger's interpretation, taking into account that Heidegger's analysis of the Kantian heritage is the sample not of historical, but rather systematic and methodical debate. It is also one reason why this critical analysis can serve as a reliable support for a more accurate determination of the essence of the transcendental-phenomenological issues not only in Heidegger's works, but also in Kant's works.

Key words
Heidegger, Kant, transcendence, fundamental ontology, Dasein, temporality, subjectivity of the subject, objectivity, synthesis.

References

• Cassirer, Е. (1931). Kant und das Problem der Metaphysik. Bemerkungen zu Martin Heideggers Kant-Interpretationen. Kant-Studien, 36, 1–26.
• Heidegger, M. (1973). Kant und das Problem der Metaphysik. Frankfurt a. M.: V. Klostermann.
• Heidegger, M. (1976a). Logik. Die Frage nach der Wahrheit (GA 21). Frankfurt a. M: V. Klostermann.
• Heidegger, M. (1976b). Vom Wesen des Grundes. Frankfurt a. M.: Wegmarken.
• Heidegger, M. (1977). Phänomenologische Interpretation von Kants Kritik der reinen Vernunft (GA 25). Frankfurt a. M.: V. Klostermann.
• Heidegger, M. (1986). Sein und Zeit. Tübingen: Max Niemeyer.
• Kant, I. (1998). Kritik der reinen Vernunft . Hamburg: Felix Meiner.
• Levy, H. (1932). Heideggers Kant-Interpretation. Zu Heideggers Buch «Kant und das Problem der Metaphysik». Logos, 31, 1–43.