提問：Ideal 與 Presentation 的關係 (§17)

在判斷力批判第十七節中，康德提到

Idea properly means a rational concept, and ideal the presentation of an individual being as adequate to an idea (§17).

雖然這一句的主旨，同時也是我主要想知道的是「Idea 與 Ideal」的關係、差別。但我想，先了解 Ideal 也許是個開始的方式。尤其第十七的節的主題是："On the Ideal of Beauty"。

在odgerBlue" href=http://mepopedia.com/wiki/?page=122>康德判斷力批判中的百科介紹有提到

Presentation 是 inner determinations of our mind in this or that relation of time (A 197/B 242)。


若如此，如果我沒有理解錯誤的話，我想問的是：Ideal 是我們的什麼的 Inner determinations 呢？是對一個 Object 的 Inner determinations 嗎？繼者，Idea 所意謂的 A rational concept，是不是某種「對象/Object」？就如(應該是？)康德的想法：知性的對象是概念(;想像力的對象是直觀)。



不過說真的，花了約三十分鐘打了以上問題之後，覺得問題好像不像原來我所想的那樣，目前的問題好像也不是問得很好。不過怎麼問比較好，現在一下也沒個頭緒。不過大致的方向是想問 Idea/Ideal/Presentation 的意義，與其之間的關係。



(編輯記錄)

The ideal is defined as the 'representation' of an individual existence as adequate to an idea in §17.
The representation is analyzed into two components: normal idea and rational idea, where a normal idea is a representation (as an individual intuition) of the standard representative of one kind, while a rational idea stands for a concept which we can never find an adequate intuition.

For exemple, the ideal cup is an
{COMPONENT1 imagined representation of an individual existance-- by which we in a linguistic community judge an instance of cup as a cup intuitively--} as
{COMPONENT2 adquate to the idea CUP (perhaps I am allowed to put it this way, the soul, the function of the cup as the cup is thought for)-- by which we in a linguistic community judge an instance of cup as a cup conceptually--}.

And then let's see how Kant put this:
The ideal of beauty has two components. The first is the aesthetic standard idea, "which is an individual intuition (of the imagination) by which we present the standard for judging [human being] as a thing belonging to a particular animal species"; the second is the rational idea: "which makes the purposes of humanity, insofar as they cannot be presented in sensibility, [i.e.], the principle for judging his [or her] figure, which reveals these purposes, as their effect in apprearance. (§ 17)



(編輯記錄)

看完你的解釋，又再看了康德的原文，發現再看原文的感受和看到的內容都有很大的不同。對 Idea 和 Ideal 突然間有了立體的感受和區別。

因為我覺得解釋得很清楚，所以我也把你的解釋加入了康德判斷力批判的 odgerBlue"href=http://mepopedia.com/?page=122>MEPO Page。

不過我想說一個很好笑的事。和我這個「外國人」讀這一段英文鬧的一個小笑話有關。


對於 Ideal 的定義，康德不是說是 the presentation of an individual being as adequate to an idea 嗎？

Well, 我看到 being 就想說是這是指 human being。而且前面再加上 individual ... 嗯，活脫就是講「一個人」嘛。沒錯...沒錯...

所以我就在想：那什麼是「the presentation of 一個人」呢？(而且又要足以成為一個理念？)

我想到：Presentation 不是指 Inner determinations of our mind 嗎？可是那有 inner determinations of our mind 又要 of「一個人」的說法呢？想來想去實在是不懂，所以就在前文提了問題。(而且還想辦法問得很抽象... 問什麼：「Ideal 是我們的"什麼的" Inner determinations 呢？是對一個 "Object" 的 Inner determinations 嗎？」嚕嚕嚕...)

不過看了你的解釋 The ideal is defined as the 'representation' of an individual existence as adequate to an idea. 差點沒昏倒...

原來 individual being 就是 individual existence，是一個「個別的存有」。(看完之後就種恍然大悟中的感覺...)(如果不是想要躲起來的感覺...)

我想我還是多問些「英文學習」的問題好了... 嗯嗯嗯... 沒錯。



(編輯記錄)