按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！
other reason than that it demands that we should go beyond the mere representation of the
relation in which the I stands to the understanding； or notions stand to a thing and its properties
and accidents； and advance to the thought of that relation。 An object； says Kant； is that in the
notion of which the manifold of a given intuition is unified。 But all unifying of representations
demands a unity of consciousness in the synthesis of them。 Consequently it is this unity of
consciousness which alone constitutes the connection of the representations with the object and
therewith their objective validity and on which rests even the possibility of the understanding。
Kant distinguishes this unity from the subjective unity of consciousness； the unity of
representation whereby I am conscious of a manifold as either simultaneous or successive； this
being dependent on empirical conditions。 On the other hand； the principles of the objective
determination of notions are； he says； to be derived solely from the principle of the
transcendental unity of apperception。 Through the categories which are these objective
determinations； the manifold of given representations is so determined as to be brought into the
unity of consciousness。 According to this exposition； the unity of the notion is that whereby
something is not a mere mode of feeling； an intuition； or even a mere representation； but is an
object； and this objective unity is the unity of the ego with itself。 In point of fact； the
comprehension of an object consists in nothing else than that the ego makes it its own； pervades
it and brings it into its own form； that is； into the universality that is immediately a
determinateness； or a determinateness that is immediately universality。 As intuited or even in
ordinary conception； the object is still something external and alien。 When it is comprehended；
the being…in…and…for…self which it possesses in intuition and pictorial thought is transformed into a
positedness； the I in thinking it pervades it。
But it is only as it is in thought that the object is truly in and for itself； in intuition or ordinary
conception it is only an Appearance。 Thought sublates the immediacy with which the object at
first confronts us and thus converts the object into a positedness； but this its positedness is its
being…in…and…for…self； or its objectivity。 The object therefore has its objectivity in the Notion and
this is the unity of self…consciousness into which it has been received； consequently its objectivity；
or the Notion； is itself none other than the nature of self…consciousness； has no other moments or
determinations than the I itself。
Thus we are justified by a cardinal principle of the Kantian philosophy in referring to the nature of
the I in order to learn what the Notion is。 But conversely； it is necessary for this purpose to have
grasped the Notion of the I as stated above。 If we cling to the mere representation of the I as it
floats before our ordinary consciousness； then the I is only the simple thing； also called soul； in
which the Notion inheres as a possession or property。 This representation which makes no
attempt to comprehend either the I or the Notion cannot serve to facilitate or bring nearer the
comprehension of the Notion。
The Kantian exposition cited above contains two other features which concern the Notion and
necessitate some further observations In the first place； the stage of the understanding is supposed
to be preceded by the stages of feeling and intuition； and it is an essential proposition of the
Kantian transcendental philosophy that without intuitions notions are empty and are valid solely
as relations of the manifold given by intuition。 Secondly； the Notion has been declared to be the
objective element of knowledge； and as such； the truth。 But on the other hand； the Notion is
taken as something merely subjective from which we cannot extract reality； by which is to be
understood objectivity； since reality is contrasted with subjectivity； and； in general； the Notion and
the logical element are declared to be something merely formal which； since it abstracts from the
content； does not contain truth。
Now； in the first place； as regards the relation of the understanding or the Notion to the stages
presupposed by it； the form of these stages is determined by the particular science under
consideration。 In our science； that of pure logic； these stages are being and essence。 In
psychology the antecedent stages are feeling and intuition； and then ideation generally。 In the
phenomenology of spirit； which is the doctrine of consciousness； the ascent to the understanding
is through the stages of sensuous consciousness and then perception。 Kant presupposes only
feeling and intuition。 How incomplete to begin with this scale of stages is is revealed by the fact
that he himself adds as an appendix to the transcendental logic or doctrine of the understanding a
treatise on the concepts of reflection a sphere lying between intuition and the understanding
or being and the Notion。
About these stages themselves it must be remarked； first of all； that the forms of intuition； ideation
and the like belong to the self…conscious spirit which； as such； does not fall to be considered in the
science of logic。 It is true that the pure determinations of being； essence and the Notion constitute
the ground plan and the inner simple framework of the forms of the spirit； spirit as intuiting and
also as sensuous consciousness is in the form of immediate being； and； similarly； spirit as ideating
and as perceiving has risen from being to the stage of essence or reflection。 But these concrete
forms as little concern the science of logic as do the concrete forms assumed by the logical
categories in nature； which would be space and time； then space and time self…filled with a
content as inorganic nature； and lastly； organic nature。
Similarly here； too； the Notion is to be regarded not as the act of the self…conscious understanding；
not as the subjective understanding； but as the Notion in its own absolute character which
constitutes a stage of nature as well as of spirit。 Life； or organic nature； is the stage of nature at
which the Notion emerges； but as blind； as unaware of itself and unthinking； the Notion that is
self…conscious and thinks pertains solely to spirit。 But the logical form of the Notion is independent
of its non…spiritual； and also of its spiritual； shapes。 The necessary premonition on this point has
already been given in the Introduction。 It is a point that must not wait to be established within logic
itself but must be cleared up before that science is begun。
Now whatever may be the forms of the stages which precede the Notion； we come secondly to
the relation in which the Notion is thought to these forms。 The conception of this relation both
in ordinary psychology and in the Kantian transcendental philosophy is that the empirical material；
the manifold of intuition and representation； first exists on its own account； and that then the
understanding approaches it； brings unity into it and by abstraction raises it to the form of
universality。 The un