This a text from Mike Johnduff.
Division Two, Chapter Six, xvi... The extent to which an even more radical understanding of time than Hegel's makes itself evident in Kant, will be shown in the first division of the second part of this treatise.
The reference to the first division of the second part of course doesn't mean anything, because this portion was never published. I haven't read Heidegger's book on Kant yet, which is supposed to answer some of the issues that first division of the second part would have posed, but I'm just thinking now that, given Heidegger's interpretation of the historizing potential of Dasein, Kant would have a more radical understanding of time than Hegel.
Hegel reduces time down to history. And while Heidegger's view of time is probably closest to Hegel's with respect to the the degree to which he accords it importance and determining power over Being, Heidegger we know is farthest from Hegel in interpreting things as present-at-hand or as realized potentials, and thus might have more affinity with the indeterminate and yet primordial phenomenon of time in Kant.
That is, Hegel reduces time right down to the now, and then extends this now out to encompass history. Kant leaves time intederminate--it has no relation to history other than as the factor which makes it possible. Because it is a possibility or a categorical determinant of existence for Kant, then, it might be closer to the act of stretching-itself-along or temporalizing itself historically that Heidegger has in mind when he says Dasein historizes. And because this potential is so determinate yet not present-at-hand at all in Kant, it might then be said to be more "radical:" it hits more at the nature of temporality as it determines Being.
While Hegel gives time such an important place in its ability to detemine Being, he ultimately undoes this importance in making it something present-at-hand. Kant of course leaves time mostly unelaborated as a concept--that is, when compared to Hegel--but it remains less present-at-hand than in Hegel and thus more powerful.
Posted by Mike Johnduff
Download ebooks on http://www.frenchtheory.com/ - See that post with different algorithms in metabole - See the journal French Metablog with today different posts-Enter Hypertextopia-PHONEREADER Library -- Jean-Philippe Pastor
métabole
hypertexte
Division Two, Chapter Six, xvi... The extent to which an even more radical understanding of time than Hegel's makes itself evident in Kant, will be shown in the first division of the second part of this treatise.
The reference to the first division of the second part of course doesn't mean anything, because this portion was never published. I haven't read Heidegger's book on Kant yet, which is supposed to answer some of the issues that first division of the second part would have posed, but I'm just thinking now that, given Heidegger's interpretation of the historizing potential of Dasein, Kant would have a more radical understanding of time than Hegel.
Hegel reduces time down to history. And while Heidegger's view of time is probably closest to Hegel's with respect to the the degree to which he accords it importance and determining power over Being, Heidegger we know is farthest from Hegel in interpreting things as present-at-hand or as realized potentials, and thus might have more affinity with the indeterminate and yet primordial phenomenon of time in Kant.
That is, Hegel reduces time right down to the now, and then extends this now out to encompass history. Kant leaves time intederminate--it has no relation to history other than as the factor which makes it possible. Because it is a possibility or a categorical determinant of existence for Kant, then, it might be closer to the act of stretching-itself-along or temporalizing itself historically that Heidegger has in mind when he says Dasein historizes. And because this potential is so determinate yet not present-at-hand at all in Kant, it might then be said to be more "radical:" it hits more at the nature of temporality as it determines Being.
While Hegel gives time such an important place in its ability to detemine Being, he ultimately undoes this importance in making it something present-at-hand. Kant of course leaves time mostly unelaborated as a concept--that is, when compared to Hegel--but it remains less present-at-hand than in Hegel and thus more powerful.
Posted by Mike Johnduff
Download ebooks on http://www.frenchtheory.com/ - See that post with different algorithms in metabole - See the journal French Metablog with today different posts-Enter Hypertextopia-PHONEREADER Library -- Jean-Philippe Pastor
métabolehypertexte
Bookmark this on Delicious
