Welcome! 登入 註冊
美寶首頁 美寶百科 美寶論壇 美寶落格 美寶地圖

Advanced

提問:Ideal 與 Presentation 的關係 (§17)

Posted by HP 
提問:Ideal 與 Presentation 的關係 (§17)

分類標籤: 康德判斷力批判
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"。

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。



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 05/16/2009 04:47PM by HP.
(編輯記錄)

Re: 提問:Ideal 與 Presentation 的關係 (§17)

分類標籤: 康德判斷力批判
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)



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 05/17/2009 04:28PM by gustav.
(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。



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 05/20/2009 03:57AM by HP.
(編輯記錄)