Nietzsche's Critiques : The Kantian Foundations of His Thought

I'm glad I have this book. I read it once, but going back to it again, I find that my comprehension was not good. As far as Kant is concerned, this book was like a change of topics for me. I could picture Kant last year following Hume, thinking that all concepts of cause would have to be conclusions made from experience relating to properties of things-in-themselves that our perceptions have no access to. Causality is mentioned in this book, but the mix of abstractions is so much more complicated than I remember, it seems possible that Nietzsche was inspired to refute the basic unity of the self from reading Kant. The index of NIETZSCHE'S CRITIQUES THE KANTIAN FOUNDATIONS OF HIS THOUGHT by R. Kevin Hill on pages 239-242 has nothing for `unity' but the six entries for `apperception' include pages covering the topics: "a new account of Kant's notion of the transcendental unity of apperception," (p. 36), "the original, synthetic unity of apperception;" (p. 157), "What happened to the unity of the self, the mysteriously named `transcendental unity of apperception'?" (p. 158), and quotes Kant: since we have to deal only with the manifold of our representations, and since that x (the object) which corresponds to them is nothing to us--being, as it is, something that has to be distinct from all our representations--the unity which the object makes necessary can be nothing else than the formal unity of consciousness in the synthesis of the manifold of representations. (CPR A 135) (Hill, pp. 159-160). According to Hill, "the unity of the self (in a cognitive act) is the unity of an act of judging. Thus the notion of the unified self cannot be literally understood as a model for the notion of an object. If we are to think in terms of a `projection hypothesis', the best we can do is think of a fact being a projection of an act of judgement." (p. 160). "It is more helpful to think of the upsurge of cognitive unity, factual unity, the forms of judgement, and the categories as coeval; this was Kant's considered view of the matter as well." (pp. 160-161). The Paralogisms in CPR concerning the nature of the self illustrate the mind's ability to jump to conclusions about itself. "The necessary unification of contents leads to a transcendental illusion of a substantial self." (p. 162). "Yet this further judgement, `and it is I who am thinking this thought!' . . . is utterly empty of all but formal content." (p. 162). "The very unity of awareness that constitutes our introspective selves is itself imposed on the conceptual field: the self is also a product of synthesis. This paradox provided Kant with a tool for attacking inflated notions of selfhood prevalent in the rationalist tradition. Nietzsche's encounter with Kant's thought decisively shaped his own account of self as synthesis and his critique of metaphysics. But thinking that the synthesis falsifies, that facts are the product of synthesis, and truth a mapping from thoughts to facts, he concluded that the truth is not truth. He inspired a vertigo which today lures us to an abyss into which deconstruction has already fallen." (p. 163). Nietzsche's reaction to Descartes and Kant in section 54 of BEYOND GOOD AND EVIL is quoted on pages 180-181, including, "Basically, Kant wanted to prove that the subject could not be proved by means of the subject, nor could the object be proved either." Hill concluded: "Nietzsche is signalling his difference with Kant: whereas Kant believes that behind the merely synthetic unity of the apperceiving self, there is a noumenal self, Nietzsche claims that there is no such thing. There is only the body." (p. 181). The vocabulary used by the author and the form of citation are certainly very scholarly throughout the book. Of the seven chapters in the book, I found the first most helpful in setting up the amount of attention Nietzsche devoted to Kant compared to other philosophers mentioned in Nietzsche's writings. The final pages of the first chapter explain the rest of the book. Chapter 7, considering the three essays of Nietzsche's GENEALOGY OF MORALS on equality, autonomy, and otherworldliness respectively, as reactions to different aspects of Kant's moral philosophy, is supposed to teach me something about Nietzsche's "rejection of the agent-neutral dimension of rule-governed action." (p. 36). I'm interested in rules and even found something in Kant about good judgement being necessary to apply rules in a way that produces appropriate results, but much of what I found in Kant while I was reading this book, and after my basic curiosity about Kant's CRITIQUE OF JUDGEMENT had been aroused, failed to provide a unifying system for me. As I approach the age of sixty, I am aware of a number of scientific thinkers whose writings became more religious as their ages advanced. Having a religious upbringing might be a big factor in wanting to do some heavy thinking, but only for a while. Nietzsche had a great year when he was 44, summing up much that he had done in ECCE HOMO and NIETZSCHE CONTRA WAGNER, but stopped before he returned to the religious teachings he had been exposed to when he was young. Kant was about 57 when CPR was published and 66 when CJ completed his string of CRITIQUES. Much of what I read in Kant was far more religious in nature than the scholarly level of the philosophy in Hill's book, as is to be expected in this day and age. I don't think religious instincts have disappeared. Many people would like to disguise them as something else, or think that the judgements which Kant applies to fine arts applies much more aptly, now, to the modern immersion in entertainment values, and few people are concerned about the current status of cognition on space, time, antimonies, or even moral intuitions. The index only mentions pages 53-57 for `sublime,' but the section "Aesthetic judgement" on pages 49-58 and "The unity of the concept of reflective judgement on pages 58-67 leads into a comparison of the underlying forms: [I] {[can't help but][feel that]([this][is designed to be synthesized as a unity])} [I]{[can't help but][feel that]([I][am designed to be synthesized as a unity])} ". . . with the beautiful, it is the object about which we have intimations of designedness. With the sublime, it is the subject about which we have these intimations." (p. 65). Contents......Page 10 Abbreviations......Page 13 A Note on Textual Methodology......Page 14 From Kant to Nietzsche......Page 18 Germany in the later nineteenth century......Page 26 Nietzsche’s secondary sources concerning Kant......Page 30 Nietzsche’s image of Kant......Page 37 Reading Kant......Page 49 The interpretation......Page 52 PART ONE. The First Reading: Judgement (1868–1874)......Page 54 The place of the Critique of Judgement in Kant’s thought......Page 56 Aesthetic judgement......Page 66 The unity of the concept of reflective judgement......Page 75 Teleological judgement......Page 84 The message of the Critique of Judgement......Page 89 Why Nietzsche read the Critique of Judgement......Page 90 Schopenhauer on teleology......Page 92 Lange, Darwin, and Kant......Page 97 ‘On the concept of the organic since Kant’......Page 100 'On Schopenhauer’......Page 111 The Dionysian world artist......Page 115 The aesthetics of Birth of Tragedy......Page 121 Life force......Page 129 PART TWO. The Second Reading: Reason (1880–1889)......Page 134 Space and time in Kant......Page 136 Space and time in Nietzsche......Page 140 Time......Page 151 The Antinomies......Page 158 The Deduction introduced......Page 163 Categories......Page 166 The Transcendental Deduction......Page 170 The Paralogisms......Page 178 Appendix: textual issues concerning the Transcendental Deduction......Page 181 Kant’s and Nietzsche’s critiques compared......Page 186 The presence of Kant in Truth and Lie......Page 188 The argument of Twilight of the Idols: ‘reason’ in philosophy......Page 192 Nietzsche’s reading of the Deduction and Paralogisms......Page 197 Truth......Page 203 Synthesis and struggle......Page 211 The three pillars of Kantian ethics......Page 213 The second Critique and the Genealogy of Morals......Page 219 Genealogy......Page 220 First essay: slave morality as a source of moral intuitions......Page 222 Second essay: conscience and the analysis of agency......Page 232 Third essay: asceticism and the phenomenal–noumenal contrast......Page 239 Conclusion: The Ruins of Reason?......Page 247 Bibliography......Page 250 E......Page 256 N......Page 257 T......Page 258 Z......Page 259 Kevin Hill's highly original new interpretation of Nietzsche's philosophy is the first to examine in detail his debt to Kant, in particular the Critique of Pure Reason, Critique of Practical Reason, and Critique of Judgement. Nietzsche, Hill argues, knew Kant far better than is commonly thought, and can only be thoroughly understood in relation to Kant. Nietzsche's Critiques maintains that beneath the surface of his texts there is a systematic commitment to a form of early Neo-Kantianism in metaphysics and epistemology, ethics, and aesthetics, grounded in his reading of the three Critiques, Kuno Fischer's commentary on the first Critique, and Friedrich Lange's discussion of Kant in The History of Materialism. The book also documents the decisive influence Nietzsche's close reading of the Critique of Judgement had on the writing of the Birth of Tragedy, and offers a remarkably accessible interpretation of Kant's system, while clarifying such difficult issues as the interpretation of Kant's'Transcendental Deduction'and his notion of reflective judgement. Lucid and thorough, Hill's work will be of great value to scholars and students with interests in either of these philosophical giants, or in the history of ideas generally. Kevin Hill's highly original new interpretation of Nietzsche's philosophy is the first to examine in detail his debt to Kant, in particular the Critique of Pure Reason, Critique of Practical Reason, and Critique of Judgement. Nietzsche, Hill argues, knew Kant far better than is commonly thought, and can only be thoroughly understood in relation to Kant.Nietzsche's Critiques maintains that beneath the surface of his texts there is a systematic commitment to a form of early Neo-Kantianism in metaphysics and epistemology, ethics, and aesthetics, grounded in his reading of the three Critiques, Kuno Fischer's commentary on the first Critique, and Friedrich Lange's discussion of Kant in The History of Materialism. The book also documents the decisive influence Nietzsche's close reading of the Critique of Judgement had on the writing of the Birth of Tragedy, and offers a remarkably accessible interpretation of Kant's system, while clarifying such difficult issues as the interpretation of Kant's 'Transcendental Deduction' and his notion of reflective judgement.Lucid and thorough, Hill's work will be of great value to scholars and students with interests in either of these philosophical giants, or in the history of ideas generally. Kevin Hill Presents A Highly Original Study Of Nietzsche's Thought, The First Book To Examine In Detail His Debt To The Work Of Kant. Hill Argues That Nietzsche Is A Systematic Philosopher Who Knew Kant Far Better Than Is Commonly Thought, And That He Can Only Be Properly Understood In Relation To Him. Nietzsche's Critiques Will Be Of Great Value To Scholars And Students With Interests In Either Of These Philosophical Giants, Or In The History Of Ideas Generally. Nietzsche's Flesh, Kant's Skeleton -- The First Reading: Judgement (1868-1874) -- The Critique Of Judgement -- Early Nietzsche And The Critique Of Judgement -- The Second Reading: Reason (1880-1889) -- Space, Time, And Idealism -- Kant On Metaphysics -- Nietzsche On Metaphysics -- The Critique Of Morality -- The Ruins Of Reason? R. Kevin Hill. Includes Bibliographical References (p. [233]-237) And Index.

kevin Hill Presents A Highly Original Study Of Nietzsche's Thought, The First Book To Examine In Detail His Debt To The Work Of Kant. Hill Argues That Nietzsche Is A Systematic Philosopher Who Knew Kant Far Better Than Is Commonly Thought, And That He Can Only Be Properly Understood In Relation To Him. nietzsche's Critiques Will Be Of Great Value To Scholars And Students With Interests In Either Of These Philosophical Giants, Or In The History Of Ideas Generally.

Offering a study of Nietzsche's thought, this book argues that Nietzsche is a systematic philosopher who knew Kant far better than is commonly thought, and that he can only be properly understood in relation to him. It is useful to scholars and students with interests in either of these philosophical giants, or in the history of ideas generally. Examining in detail Nietzsche's debt to the work of Kant, this title argues that Nietzsche is a systematic philosopher who knew Kant far better than is commonly thought, and that he can only be properly understood in relation to him.