Dinesh

Dinesh club

Posted: 20 Apr 2020


Taken: 20 Apr 2020

0 favorites     2 comments    48 visits

See also...


Keywords

Excerpt
Being and Nothingness
Author
Jean-Paul Sartre


Authorizations, license

Visible by: Everyone
Attribution + non Commercial

48 visits


Knowledge

Knowledge

Comments
 Dinesh
Dinesh club
. . . In truth this knowledge which I get of it remains empty in this sense that I shall never know ‘the act of knowing’; this act, since it is pure transcendence, can be apprehended only by itself in the form of non-thetic consciousness or by the reflection issuing from it. What I know is only knowledge as ‘being-there’ or, if you like ‘the being-there of knowledge.’ Thus this relativity of the sensory organ which is revealed to my universalizing reason buyt which can not be thought, so far as my own sense of concerned, without determining the collapse of the world -- this I apprehend first when I apprehended the Other-as-object. I apprehend it ‘without danger’; for since the Other forms part of my universe, his relativity can not determine the collapse of this universe. The senses of the Other are ‘senses known as knowledge.’

We can see here the explanation of the error of psychologists who define ‘my senses’ by the Other’s senses and who give to the sense organ as it is for me a relativity which belongs to its being-for-others. We can see also how this error ;becomes truth if we place it on its proper level of being after we hae determined the true order of being and of knowing. Thus the objects of my world indicate laterally an object-center-of-reference which is the Other. But this center in turn appears to me from a point-of-view-without a point-of-view which is mine, which is my body or my contingency. In short, to employ an inaccurate but common expression, ‘I know the Other through the senses.’ Just as the Other is the instrument which I utilize in the manner of the instrument which I am and which no instrument can any longer utilize, so he in the ensemble of sense organs which are revealed to my ‘sense knowledge’; that is, he is a facticity which appears to a facticity. Thus there can be in its place in the order of knowing and being, a study of Other’s sense organs as they are known through the senses by me.
4 years ago. Edited 4 years ago.
 Dinesh
Dinesh club
. . . All human knowledge, Kant asserts, “begins with sense, then proceeds to the understanding and finally to reason, beyond which the human mind can discover nothing for elaborating the stuff of intuition and subjection it to the supreme unity of thought. Pure reason attempts to regulate all conceptions, just as the understanding regulates the material of sensation, and to unify them in a highest synthesis. The idea of God as First Cause, for example, while not a “cognizable object,” is “merely a regulative principle of the reason which demands that we consider all connections between phenomena as though they derived from anall-sufficient necessary cause, in order to ground therein the rule of a systematic and necessary unity according to general laws in the explanation (of phenomena)> ~ Page 13 (MORAL ACTION, GOD, AND HISTORY IN THE THOUGHT OF IMMANUEL KANT - Author: Carl. A. Raschke)
18 months ago.

Sign-in to write a comment.