Heidegger, Kant, And The Ontological Argument
Heidegger, Kant, and the Ontological Argument In the introduction to The Basic Problems of Phenomenology, Martin Heidegger explains that throughout the history of philosophy, there has been many discoveries of the “domains of being” viz., “nature, space, and soul”.1 Yet, none of these discoveries could be understood in a way that explains “their specific being.”2 As an example, Heidegger interprets this problem as the reason Plato understood why the soul, along with its logos, was a different being from that of a sensible one.3 It is from this preliminary starting point that Heidegger explores the Kantian contention that the ontological argument fails, because “being is not a real predicate.”4 In this essay, I will discuss the basic history
…show more content…
“The thesis of medieval ontology (Scholasticism)” that has its roots in Aristotle. 2. The modern ontological thesis, which take the basic modes of being as res cogitans (Being of the mind), and res extensa (Being of nature). 3. A broad thesis of logic which identifies Being as a part of the meaning of the copula used in a judgment (the meaning of “is”).11 Heidegger explains that Kant's critique of the ontological argument is dependent upon Kant's conception of categories which determine our thinking from his “Table of Judgments” presented in the Critique of Pure Reason. Kant's implication here is that categories are combined in judgments that form a unity. Hence, they represent the conception of unity in judgment. Contrary to this, Kant thinks that reality and existence are in completely different classes from each other. Heidegger recognizes this and explains that both Kant and the Scholastic “concept of reality must be sharply distinguished from the Kantian concept of existence.”12 In the Critique of Pure Reason, Kant corroborates this explanation by Heidegger when he …show more content…
As far as reality is concerned, it is evidently intrinsically forbidden to think it in concreto without getting help from experience, because it can only pertain to sensation, as the matter of experience, and does not concern the form of the relation that one can always play with in
“The thesis of medieval ontology (Scholasticism)” that has its roots in Aristotle. 2. The modern ontological thesis, which take the basic modes of being as res cogitans (Being of the mind), and res extensa (Being of nature). 3. A broad thesis of logic which identifies Being as a part of the meaning of the copula used in a judgment (the meaning of “is”).11 Heidegger explains that Kant's critique of the ontological argument is dependent upon Kant's conception of categories which determine our thinking from his “Table of Judgments” presented in the Critique of Pure Reason. Kant's implication here is that categories are combined in judgments that form a unity. Hence, they represent the conception of unity in judgment. Contrary to this, Kant thinks that reality and existence are in completely different classes from each other. Heidegger recognizes this and explains that both Kant and the Scholastic “concept of reality must be sharply distinguished from the Kantian concept of existence.”12 In the Critique of Pure Reason, Kant corroborates this explanation by Heidegger when he …show more content…
As far as reality is concerned, it is evidently intrinsically forbidden to think it in concreto without getting help from experience, because it can only pertain to sensation, as the matter of experience, and does not concern the form of the relation that one can always play with in