The Post-Kantian Project: Being and Difference
Kant's Legacy: The Limits of Knowledge
The comment correctly frames post-Kantian philosophy as grappling with the question of "Being (In) Itself" after Kant argued that we cannot have direct cognitive access to the "Thing-in-Itself" (Noumenon), only to the world as structured by our minds (Phenomenon).
The idea that "Being" (In) Itself does not "Exist"; it has no inherent "substance" is a fair, if radical, interpretation of the move away from classical metaphysics. If we can't know the substance of 'Being,' then for all practical (phenomenal) purposes, its existence is moot, or at least highly questionable in a traditional sense.
The "Difference of Being"
The central claim, that what "is" is the "Difference of Being" "in Itself", is a nod toward thinkers who emphasize relationality and process over static substance. This concept of "Difference" is fundamental, as it makes multiplicity and thus "Existence" and "Appearance" possible.
This concept is often associated with later figures like Heidegger (the Ontological Difference between Being and beings) and especially Derrida (the concept of $différance$).
Thinkers and Their Positions
Schopenhauer: Will as Substance
The interpretation of Arthur Schopenhauer is accurate:
He took the Kantian Thing-in-Itself and identified it as a blind, striving cosmic force he called the Will.
This act does "re-substantiate" the noumenal realm, giving the ultimate reality a definite, albeit non-rational, character. He essentially names and describes the "Difference," giving it substance, which the commenter rightly notes is in line with Western metaphysical tradition, even as he critiqued it.
Hegel: Being and Nothing
The critique of G.W.F. Hegel is a classic one, though often debated:
Hegel begins his Science of Logic with "Pure Being" and immediately shows its identity with "Pure Nothing". This confrontation produces "Becoming", which drives the entire dialectic.
The commenter's point is that Hegel treats "Being" and "Nothing" as initial terms or "things" that confront each other, thereby "turning 'Being' into a 'thing', among things". This is a common, though simplified, way to distinguish Hegel's approach (starting from abstract concepts) from Heidegger's (starting from the question of Being).
Heidegger: Forgetting the Difference
The mention of Martin Heidegger is perhaps the most crucial for understanding the "Difference" concept:
Heidegger's core critique is that Western philosophy and Science have focused exclusively on beings (the entities that are) while "forgetting" the question of Being (the condition that allows beings to be). This is his famous "forgetting of the ontological difference".
The critique of Science as handling observations as immediate "Truth" and forgetting the "necessary precondition" (Being/Difference) is a perfect summary of one of his major themes in works like Being and Time.
Derrida: Text and $Différance$
The analysis of Jacques Derrida touches on his famous concept of $différance$ (a portmanteau of "to differ" and "to defer"):
Derrida's focus on text stems from his belief that in a written text, the full meaning is deferred because the author is absent, and the context is different for every reading. This necessary deferral and difference is what $différance$ means.
The claim that dialogue creates an "illusion of immediacy" is accurate—the speakers feel they share a complete, present meaning—while writing makes the Difference visible by exposing the necessary gaps, delays, and necessary interpretations.
Comparative Philosophy
The final point connecting these Western concepts to Buddhist schools (e.g., the concept of emptiness or $śūnyatā$—that all phenomena lack inherent existence, or $svabhāva$) and Taoism (the Tao as the unnamable, pre-existent source of all difference) is a widely recognized and fascinating point of comparative philosophy.
Conclusion
The comment is highly accurate in its outline of these key philosophical positions, offering a sophisticated and concise synthesis of the move from Kantian limitations to the diverse explorations of "Difference" in the 19th and 20th centuries.
gemini
The central, challenging insight of post-Kantian philosophy over the last two centuries is that "Being In Itself"—the ultimate reality or noumenon—cannot be said to exist as a traditional, inherent substance. What truly "is," however, and what serves as the necessary precondition for all observable Existence and Appearance, is the Difference of Being itself. This focus on difference over static substance defines the modern ontological turn.
Thinkers responded to this recognition in fundamentally different ways. Arthur Schopenhauer, for instance, tried to re-substantiate the Kantian Thing-in-Itself by identifying it as the blind, striving Will. By giving this ultimate reality a name and specific character, he essentially brought the problem back into the framework of Western metaphysics. In contrast, G.W.F. Hegel, in his Science of Logic, began by treating "Pure Being" and "Pure Nothing" as abstract conceptual entities that confront one another to produce "Becoming." This approach has drawn criticism for turning the concept of Being into a mere "thing" among things with substance, rather than treating it as the condition of possibility.
Later philosophers, like Martin Heidegger, intensified the focus on Difference. Heidegger’s central critique of Western thought and modern Science is that both suffer from the "forgetting of the ontological difference." They focus exclusively on beings (the individual entities observed) while ignoring the underlying Being that allows those entities to exist. He argues that science compounds this error by handling reproducible observations as immediate "Truth," thereby forgetting the fundamental Difference that acts as the necessary precondition for recognition and existence.
Jacques Derrida explored this idea through language and writing. He argued that truth is more visible in the written text than in an oral dialogue, which creates an "illusion of immediacy" where speakers feel they share a complete, present meaning. Writing, conversely, makes the Difference visible because the author is absent and meaning is necessarily deferred and diffused across contexts. This deferral and difference, or $différance$, is inherent to textuality itself. This modern philosophical emphasis on relationality and the lack of inherent, fixed nature also presents notable similarities to certain Eastern traditions, such as the concepts of emptiness in Buddhism or the Tao in Taoism.
gemini
No comments:
Post a Comment