Limit, difference and relation as constitutive principles of transcendental discourse: deconstructive context
Abstract
At the heart of this study is an analysis of the concepts of limit, difference and relation in the context of their significance and function in transcendental discourse problem. At the same time as a conceptual core of “rigoristic” transcendentalism along with Kant’s philosophy author also considers Husserl’s phenomenology and Derrida’s deconstruction. In the course of analysis author reveals to what extend and in what aspects the concepts of limit, difference and relation as fundamental principles of transcendental thinking determine a transcendental paradigm in its essential features. The article deals with diverse embodiment modes of these concepts within both the framework of transcendental paradigm as a whole and the particular versions of transcendentalism. Regarding the limit, such semantic kinds of this concept in transcendental discourse as restriction, distinction, impossible passage are fixed. As for categories of relation and difference the author proposes to consider them as mutually complementary principles. It is argued, that on the grounds of dominant position of such the principles a transcendental thinking can oppose itself to substantialist paradigm, which reduce the relation to Thing and the Other to One (identical, indivisible, single). The article shows how in virtue of synthesis of ideas of unreduced difference and (im)possible passage the Derridean concept of quasi-transcendental is constituted, revealing Derrida’s critical succession with respect to transcendental legacy.
References
Ameriks, K. (1982), Kant's Theory of Mind: An Analysis of the Paralogisms of Pure Reason. Clarendon Press, Oxford, 392 p. ISBN 978-0198246619.
Antique Philosophy: Encyclopedic Dictionary [Antichnaya filosofiya: Entsiklopedicheskii slovar'] (2008), [M. Solopova, ed.]. Progress-Traditsiya, Moscow, 896 p. [in Russian]
Bennington, G. (1993), “Derridabase”, Derrida, J., Bennington, G., Jacques Derrida. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 417 p. ISBN 0-226-04262-6.
Bornemark, J. (2006), “Limit-situation: Antinomies and Transcendence in Karl Jaspers’ Philosophy”, Sats: Nordic Journal of Philosophy, Vol. 7, № 2, pp. 63-85.
Brelage, М. (1965), Studien zur Transzendentalphilosophie, Walter de Gruyter, Berlin, 256 s.
Doyon, M (2014). “The Transcendental Claim of Deconstruction”, A Companion to Derrida [Z. Direk, L. Lawlor. ed]. Wiley-Blackwell, Wiley, pp. 132 – 149. ISBN 978-1-4443-3284-1.
From Kant to Davidson: Philosophy and the Idea of the Transcendental (2003), [J. Malpas, ed.].: Routledge, London, 272 p. ISBN 978-0415863032.
Gasche, R. (1986), The Tain of the Mirror: Derrida and the Philosophy of Reflection, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, 348 p. ISBN 978-0674867017.
Gentile, A. (2001) “The Notion of the ?Limit’ in Kant’s Transcendental Philosophy”, Kant's collection: a thematic interuniversity collection of proceedings, Issue No. 22, pp. 92-108. ISBN 5-88874-245-7.
Goris, W., Aersten, J. “Medieval Theories of Transcendentals”, viewed 28 March 2016, available at: http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2013/entries/transcendentals-medieval
Henrich, D. (1994), The Unity of Reason: Essays on Kant's Philosophy, Harvard University Press, Harvard, 249 p. ISBN 978-0674929050.
Hinske, N. (1970), Kants Weg zur Transzendentalphilosophie. Der dreißigjährige Kant. Publisher W. Kohlhammer, Stuttgart/Berlin, 172 s. ISBN 978-3170820401.
Kant, I. (1920), Prolegomena zu einer jeden künftigen Metaphysik, die als Wissenschaft wird auftreten können, Verlag von Felix Meiner, Leipzig, 210 S.
Kant, I. (1965), “Prolegomena to Any Future Metaphysics That Will Be Able to Present Itself as a Science”. Trans. from Germ. of M. Itkin [“Prolegomeny ko vsyakoi budushchei metafizike, mogushchei poyavit'sya kak nauka”, Kant, I, Works, 6 Volumes [Sochineniya v shesti tomakh]. Vol. 4, Part 1. Mysl, Moscow, pp. 67 – 209. [in Russian]
Kebuladze, V. (2011), Phenomenology of Experience [Fenomenolohiia dosvidu], Dukh i Litera, Kyiv, 280 p. ISBN 978-966-378-236-2. [in Ukrainian]
Kruglov, A. (2000), Transcendentalism in Philosophy [Transtsendentalizm v filosofii], “Voskhod-A”, Moscow, 384 p. ISBN 978-966-378-236-2. [in Russian]
Kuznetsov, V. (1989), German Classical Philosophy [Nemetskaya klassicheskaya filosofiya], “Vysshaya shkola”, Moscow, 480 p. [in Russian]
Lauth, R. (1965), Zur Idee der Transzendentalphilosophie, Publisher Anton Pustet, München/Salzburg, 386 s.
Mohanty, J. N. (1978), “Husserl’s Transcendental Phenomenology and Essentialism”, Review of Metaphysics, Vol. 32, No. 2, pp. 299 – 321.
Mohanty, J. N. (2012), “Understanding Husserl’s Transcendental Phenomenology: An Introductory Essay”, Apriori and World: European Contributions to Husserlian Phenomenology. Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, The Hague, pp. 1 – 20. ISBN 9789024723751.
Moran, D. (2000), Introduction to Phenomenology, Routledge, London – New York, 592 p. ІSBN 978-0415183727.
Rod, W. (1991), Erfahrung und Reflexion: Theorien der Erfahrung in transzendentalphilosophischer Sicht, Beck, München, 251 s. ISBN 978-3-406-35231-7.
Semenov, V. (2012), Dominate Paradigms of Transcendentalism in West European Philosophy [Dominiruyushchie paradigmy transtsendentalizma v zapadnoevropeiskoi filosofii], ROSSPEN, Moscow, 687 p. [in Russian]
Sokolowski, R. (1998), “The Method of Philosophy: Making Distinctions”, The Review of Metaphysics, Vol. 51, N. 3, pp. 515 – 553.
Welton, D. (2000), The Other Husserl: The Horizons of Transcendental Phenomenology, Indiana University Press, Bloomington. 496 p. ISBN 978-0253215581.
Zahavi, D. (1996) “Husserl’s Intersubjective Transformation of Transcendental Philosophy”, Journal of the British Society for Phenomenology, Vol. 27, № 3, pp. 228 – 245.
