Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

How does the mind exist as a specific mind on Kantian idealism?

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • How does the mind exist as a specific mind on Kantian idealism?

    I think transcendental idealism is fascinating, and reading Raymond Tallis' Logos has reignited my interest in it. It's a curious synthesis (forgive the pun) of a rationalist and empiricist epistemology. Does Kant ever explain how the mind actually exists as a spatio-temporally individuated thing? The mind, being a reality, belongs to the noumenon which is bereft of any perceptual features like space and time. So the mind must be logically prior to space and time. But how, then, can we account for the mind's conscious experience as an individual thing operating within a specific time at a specific place?

  • #2
    It's been a long while since my Schopenhauer days, but he makes this same critique. The mind doesn't exist as an object, but the brain does. Unfortunately, as Nietzsche points out, it's ridiculous to posit that the brain produces space and time when the brain is itself an object in space and time.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by Brian View Post
      It's been a long while since my Schopenhauer days, but he makes this same critique. The mind doesn't exist as an object, but the brain does. Unfortunately, as Nietzsche points out, it's ridiculous to posit that the brain produces space and time when the brain is itself an object in space and time.
      It would require the conscious agent to slip into a strange dual identity where he simultaneously is part of the featureless noumenon and also an entity that produces perceptual categories.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by RomanJoe View Post

        It would require the conscious agent to slip into a strange dual identity where he simultaneously is part of the featureless noumenon and also an entity that produces perceptual categories.
        Yes, that is precisely Schopenhauer's position. We are simultaneously Will (noumena) and Representation (an object whose capacity for perception "filters" the world through space, time, and causality, what he poetically calls the Veil of Maya).

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Brian View Post

          Yes, that is precisely Schopenhauer's position. We are simultaneously Will (noumena) and Representation (an object whose capacity for perception "filters" the world through space, time, and causality, what he poetically calls the Veil of Maya).
          According to Kant, what does the synthesis of category and noumenon with regards to the mind? From what I can parse out from his philosophy, the mind harbors the a priori categories that act as the mental soil for human experience when said categories undergo synthesis with the noumenon. But, as I we seem to both be getting at, the mind--being a real thing--must exist also in a noumenal sense. That is, the mind is also a product of noumenon and a priori categoies. Then what synthesizes the mind? What produces the mind?

          Comment

          Working...
          X