弗里德里希Hölderlin“存在判断可能性”中的整体认识

IF 0.3 3区 哲学 0 PHILOSOPHY IDEALISTIC STUDIES Pub Date : 2020-01-01 DOI:10.5840/idstudies20201116124
H. E. Herrera
{"title":"弗里德里希Hölderlin“存在判断可能性”中的整体认识","authors":"H. E. Herrera","doi":"10.5840/idstudies20201116124","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In “Being Judgement Possibility,” Hölderlin posits that the division between subject and object produced in conscious knowledge requires admitting a being as the ground of that knowledge’s unity. Commentators argue over the way to access such being according to Hölderlin. For Dieter Henrich, being is a presupposition recognized reflexively. Manfred Frank, by contrast, maintains that Hölderlin grants direct access to it in an “intellectual intuition.” This article addresses the respective interpretations of both authors. It shows that Frank’s interpretation is closer to the textual evidence than Henrich’s interpretation. Frank’s interpretation also allows one to explain better the way in which the division between subject and object avoids leading to dispersal. Finally, this article considers the insufficiency of Frank’s interpretation so as to clarify an issue that he himself advances in the course of his argument: how the I manages to distinguish itself in the sphere of intuitable objects.","PeriodicalId":41879,"journal":{"name":"IDEALISTIC STUDIES","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2020-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Knowledge of the Whole in Friedrich Hölderlin’s “Being Judgement Possibility”\",\"authors\":\"H. E. Herrera\",\"doi\":\"10.5840/idstudies20201116124\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In “Being Judgement Possibility,” Hölderlin posits that the division between subject and object produced in conscious knowledge requires admitting a being as the ground of that knowledge’s unity. Commentators argue over the way to access such being according to Hölderlin. For Dieter Henrich, being is a presupposition recognized reflexively. Manfred Frank, by contrast, maintains that Hölderlin grants direct access to it in an “intellectual intuition.” This article addresses the respective interpretations of both authors. It shows that Frank’s interpretation is closer to the textual evidence than Henrich’s interpretation. Frank’s interpretation also allows one to explain better the way in which the division between subject and object avoids leading to dispersal. Finally, this article considers the insufficiency of Frank’s interpretation so as to clarify an issue that he himself advances in the course of his argument: how the I manages to distinguish itself in the sphere of intuitable objects.\",\"PeriodicalId\":41879,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"IDEALISTIC STUDIES\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"IDEALISTIC STUDIES\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5840/idstudies20201116124\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"PHILOSOPHY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"IDEALISTIC STUDIES","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5840/idstudies20201116124","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"PHILOSOPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

在"存在判断的可能性"一文中Hölderlin认为,在有意识的知识中产生的主体与客体的划分,需要承认存在作为知识统一的基础。根据Hölderlin的说法,评论员们争论着如何获得这样的信息。对迪特尔·亨利希来说,存在是一种反射性认识的预设。相比之下,曼弗雷德·弗兰克(Manfred Frank)坚持认为,Hölderlin允许人们以“智力直觉”的方式直接访问它。本文讨论了两位作者各自的解释。这表明弗兰克的解释比亨利希的解释更接近文本证据。弗兰克的解释也允许人们更好地解释主体和客体之间的划分避免导致分散的方式。最后,本文考虑了弗兰克解释的不足,以澄清他自己在论证过程中提出的一个问题:我是如何在直观对象的领域中区分自己的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Knowledge of the Whole in Friedrich Hölderlin’s “Being Judgement Possibility”
In “Being Judgement Possibility,” Hölderlin posits that the division between subject and object produced in conscious knowledge requires admitting a being as the ground of that knowledge’s unity. Commentators argue over the way to access such being according to Hölderlin. For Dieter Henrich, being is a presupposition recognized reflexively. Manfred Frank, by contrast, maintains that Hölderlin grants direct access to it in an “intellectual intuition.” This article addresses the respective interpretations of both authors. It shows that Frank’s interpretation is closer to the textual evidence than Henrich’s interpretation. Frank’s interpretation also allows one to explain better the way in which the division between subject and object avoids leading to dispersal. Finally, this article considers the insufficiency of Frank’s interpretation so as to clarify an issue that he himself advances in the course of his argument: how the I manages to distinguish itself in the sphere of intuitable objects.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
IDEALISTIC STUDIES
IDEALISTIC STUDIES PHILOSOPHY-
CiteScore
0.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
11
期刊介绍: Idealistic Studies provides a peer-reviewed forum for the discussion of themes and topics that relate to the tradition and legacy of philosophical Idealism. Established in 1971 as a vehicle for American Personalism and post-Kantian Idealism, the journal"s purview now includes historically earlier expressions, as well as the inheritance of that past in the developments of late 19th to mid-20th century philosophy. The journal has also become a venue for a number of philosophical movements that share Idealism in their genealogies, including Phenomenology, Neo-Kantianism, Historicism, Hermeneutics, Life Philosophy, Existentialism, and Pragmatism.
期刊最新文献
Kant, Schelling, and Hegel on How to Conceive Matter from a Metaphysical Point of View in advance Positive Aesthetic Pleasure in Early Schopenhauer: Two Kantian Accounts in advance Hegel on International Recognition in advance The Shadow of God: Kant, Hegel, and the Passage from Heaven to History, by Michael Rosen Rancière’s American Heritage in advance
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1