The present study of Fichte's Wissenschaftslehre nova methodo is composed of two parts. The longer first part is a chapter by chapter interpretative explication of the text of the Wissenschaftslehre nova methodo, while the second part further develops certain key themes of this interpretation. Feeling, which plays a central role in the Wissenschaftslehre nova methodo's account of objective experience, is the special focus of this study. There are various types of feeling incorporated into the deductions of the Wissenschaftslehre nova methodo, (...) the most important of which for the purposes of this project is a feeling of self, which is here interpreted as a feeling of spontaneity or an immediate consciousness of doing . In attempting to explain how our representations come for us to possess reality or to refer to "actual things," Fichte also makes use of feelings of striving, limitation, intellectual compulsion, and a feeling of "ought," as well as other types of feeling. Fichte's use of a feeling of "ought" in his account of theoretical consciousness reflects his interest in the interdependency of the theoretical and the practical, which is a hallmark of his particular style of transcendental philosophy, focused as it is upon the freely acting I. ;Fichte's transcendental account of experience is also a genetic account of consciousness, which is here interpreted as an explanation of the origin of reflective consciousness. Another significant element of the present study is a reconstructed theory of Body as the essence of the actually willing subject for whom alone represented objects can possess reality. Finally, there is a focus in this study upon transcendental philosophy as such, including an investigation into the relations between the transcendental philosopher, the transcendental subject, and the empirical subject, as well as an examination of the distinctive method of transcendental philosophy. As a result of the latter, a theory of the double method of Fichte's transcendental philosophy is proposed as a synthesis of reason and observation. There are also occasional comparisons of Fichte's Wissenschaftslehre nova methodo, with Kant's Critique of Pure Reason. (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:Reviewed by:Idealism and Objectivity: Understanding Fichte’s Jena Project by Wayne M. MartinJanet RoccanovaWayne M. Martin. Idealism and Objectivity: Understanding Fichte’s Jena Project. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1997. Pp. xvii + 177. Cloth, $45.00.This text claims to present a new interpretation of Fichte’s Jena system. Toward this end the author presents a primary thesis and several secondary theses as alternatives to standard or recent Fichte interpretations. Martin’s main thesis is (...) that the central and guiding project of Fichte’s Jena Wissenschaftslehre is to develop an idealist theory of objectivity. Most controversial of the subordinate theses will certainly be Martin’s claim that Fichte is a realist.The text is symmetrically divided into two parts, each composed of three chapters. Part I addresses the “Parameters of the Jena Project,” while Part II focuses on the “Elements of a Theory of Objectivity.”In section one of the first chapter Martin sides against the long-standing interpretation of Fichte’s Wissenschaftslehre as speculative metaphysics and with the more recent epistemological (and anthropological) reading of the Wissenschaftslehre, but warns against taking Fichte as a “classic epistemologist,” whose anti-skeptical project is to “provide a rational justification of our claims to empirical knowledge” (15). Rather, Martin contends, Fichte’s main goal in the Wissenschaftslehre is to develop a theory of the “objectivity” or “referential character” of consciousness, which is a concern more with the structure, rather than with the justification, of knowledge.Section two is where Martin lays out his particular notion of objectivity, according to which a conscious state is objective if it is “ ‘of’ or ‘about’ something that I take to exist independently of that conscious state” (18). The author emphasizes that objectivity, as [End Page 634] he understands it, is “less a function of [the] immediate content [of a conscious state] than of how I interpret or ‘take up’ that content” (19).The arguments of Chapters 2 and 3 are intended to lend support to Martin’s thesis that Fichte could, without inconsistency, be counted as a realist. In Chapter 2 Martin argues that Fichte’s rejection of dogmatism should not necessarily be interpreted as a rejection of realism. According to the author, Fichte indeed rejects any synthesis of idealism and dogmatism, although there is textual support for the claim that Fichte might support a synthesis of idealism and realism.In Chapter 3 Martin argues that the standard interpretation that Fichte utterly rejects things-in-themselves is incorrect, and proposes that the concept of things-in-themselves must necessarily be used by Fichte “to state the epistemological implications of [his] idealist theory of objectivity” (75). Martin’s ultimate goal in these chapters is to counter-balance the standard caricature of Fichte’s idealism by arguing that Fichte does not deny the possibility of a reality independent of the I.Part II is where Martin actually begins his interpretation of the Grundlage, especially sections four and five of the same, which, according to Martin, is where “Fichte tries to carry out the task of providing a theory of the objectivity of consciousness” (81). In Chapter 4 Martin examines the Fichtean concepts of (self-) positing and op-positing and determines that these are pre-representational cognitive acts that establish the schema of subject-object opposition, which is a condition for the possibility of conscious representation.Chapter 5 is a study of Fichte’s methodology, which Martin claims is an unsuccessful, but nonetheless “strikingly original,” “dialectical category theory,” or method of contradiction (5). Martin compares Fichte’s method to the ancient mathematical method of “regula falsi,” and concludes that the positive impact of Fichte’s method is to force a conceptual expansion. Fichte, in other words, uses contradiction to retain, rather than to reject (as in a reductio) the source of contradiction.Finally, in what is the most intriguing chapter of the text (Chapter 6) Martin examines Fichte’s striving doctrine in light of his attempt to develop an idealist theory of objectivity. Using ontogenetic analogies based on how an infant comes to experience an independent world, Martin argues here for the primacy of practice, and more specifically that there is a kind of striving that “is independent... (shrink)

Fichte and Husserl both distinguish a properly philosophical or transcendental consciousness from natural or ordinary consciousness. The principal aim of this study is to provide clarification into the character of this philosophical consciousness, while simultaneously using this common idea as a means of establishing correspondences between the philosophies of Fichte and Husserl. The first section explicates certain relevant features of Husserl’s phenomenology, such as the reductions and his theory of intuition, while the second section ofters an exposition of significant aspects (...) of Fichte’s Wissenschaftslehre nova methodo, with special attention given to Chapter 8 of this text wherein Fichte’s theory of intellectual intuition finds elaboration. The final section reconstructs a “double-method” interpretation of transcendental philosophy according to which reason and the philosopher’s self-observations converge to produce a well-grounded philosophical science. Furthermore, a theory is outlinedthat interprets philosophical consciousness as a “subjective experience” that is grounded in a non-reflective immediate consciousness of spontaneity.Fichte et Husserl distinguent tous deux une conscience proprement philosophique et transcendantale d’une conscience naturelle ou ordinaire. Le but premier de cette étude est de clarifier la nature de cette conscience philosophique, tout en établissant, à l’aide de cette idée commune, une correspondance entre les philosophies de Fichte et Husserl. La première section analyse certains traits pertinents de la phénoménologie husserlienne, telles que les réductions et sa théorie de l’intuition, alors que la seconde section expose les aspects significatifs de la Wissenschaftslehre nova methodo de Fichte. Ici, une attention particulière sera accordée au chapitre 8 oú la théorie fichtéenne de l’intuition intellectuelle est élaborée. La dernière section reconstruit une «double méthode» d’interprétation de la philosophietranscendantale. Selon cette dernière, la raison et les observations de soi du philosophes convergent vers une science philosophique bien fondée. De plus, y est esquissée une théorie qui interprète la conscience philosophique comme «expérience subjective» fondée sur une conscience non-réflective et immédiate de la spontanéité. (shrink)

Fichte and Husserl both distinguish a properly philosophical or transcendental consciousness from natural or ordinary consciousness. The principal aim of this study is to provide clarification into the character of this philosophical consciousness, while simultaneously using this common idea as a means of establishing correspondences between the philosophies of Fichte and Husserl. The first section explicates certain relevant features of Husserl’s phenomenology, such as the reductions and his theory of intuition, while the second section ofters an exposition of significant aspects (...) of Fichte’s Wissenschaftslehre nova methodo, with special attention given to Chapter 8 of this text wherein Fichte’s theory of intellectual intuition finds elaboration. The final section reconstructs a “double-method” interpretation of transcendental philosophy according to which reason and the philosopher’s self-observations converge to produce a well-grounded philosophical science. Furthermore, a theory is outlinedthat interprets philosophical consciousness as a “subjective experience” that is grounded in a non-reflective immediate consciousness of spontaneity.Fichte et Husserl distinguent tous deux une conscience proprement philosophique et transcendantale d’une conscience naturelle ou ordinaire. Le but premier de cette étude est de clarifier la nature de cette conscience philosophique, tout en établissant, à l’aide de cette idée commune, une correspondance entre les philosophies de Fichte et Husserl. La première section analyse certains traits pertinents de la phénoménologie husserlienne, telles que les réductions et sa théorie de l’intuition, alors que la seconde section expose les aspects significatifs de la Wissenschaftslehre nova methodo de Fichte. Ici, une attention particulière sera accordée au chapitre 8 oú la théorie fichtéenne de l’intuition intellectuelle est élaborée. La dernière section reconstruit une «double méthode» d’interprétation de la philosophietranscendantale. Selon cette dernière, la raison et les observations de soi du philosophes convergent vers une science philosophique bien fondée. De plus, y est esquissée une théorie qui interprète la conscience philosophique comme «expérience subjective» fondée sur une conscience non-réflective et immédiate de la spontanéité. (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:Reviewed by:Idealism and Objectivity: Understanding Fichte’s Jena Project by Wayne M. MartinJanet RoccanovaWayne M. Martin. Idealism and Objectivity: Understanding Fichte’s Jena Project. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1997. Pp. xvii + 177. Cloth, $45.00.This text claims to present a new interpretation of Fichte’s Jena system. Toward this end the author presents a primary thesis and several secondary theses as alternatives to standard or recent Fichte interpretations. Martin’s main thesis is (...) that the central and guiding project of Fichte’s Jena Wissenschaftslehre is to develop an idealist theory of objectivity. Most controversial of the subordinate theses will certainly be Martin’s claim that Fichte is a realist.The text is symmetrically divided into two parts, each composed of three chapters. Part I addresses the “Parameters of the Jena Project,” while Part II focuses on the “Elements of a Theory of Objectivity.”In section one of the first chapter Martin sides against the long-standing interpretation of Fichte’s Wissenschaftslehre as speculative metaphysics and with the more recent epistemological (and anthropological) reading of the Wissenschaftslehre, but warns against taking Fichte as a “classic epistemologist,” whose anti-skeptical project is to “provide a rational justification of our claims to empirical knowledge” (15). Rather, Martin contends, Fichte’s main goal in the Wissenschaftslehre is to develop a theory of the “objectivity” or “referential character” of consciousness, which is a concern more with the structure, rather than with the justification, of knowledge.Section two is where Martin lays out his particular notion of objectivity, according to which a conscious state is objective if it is “ ‘of’ or ‘about’ something that I take to exist independently of that conscious state” (18). The author emphasizes that objectivity, as [End Page 634] he understands it, is “less a function of [the] immediate content [of a conscious state] than of how I interpret or ‘take up’ that content” (19).The arguments of Chapters 2 and 3 are intended to lend support to Martin’s thesis that Fichte could, without inconsistency, be counted as a realist. In Chapter 2 Martin argues that Fichte’s rejection of dogmatism should not necessarily be interpreted as a rejection of realism. According to the author, Fichte indeed rejects any synthesis of idealism and dogmatism, although there is textual support for the claim that Fichte might support a synthesis of idealism and realism.In Chapter 3 Martin argues that the standard interpretation that Fichte utterly rejects things-in-themselves is incorrect, and proposes that the concept of things-in-themselves must necessarily be used by Fichte “to state the epistemological implications of [his] idealist theory of objectivity” (75). Martin’s ultimate goal in these chapters is to counter-balance the standard caricature of Fichte’s idealism by arguing that Fichte does not deny the possibility of a reality independent of the I.Part II is where Martin actually begins his interpretation of the Grundlage, especially sections four and five of the same, which, according to Martin, is where “Fichte tries to carry out the task of providing a theory of the objectivity of consciousness” (81). In Chapter 4 Martin examines the Fichtean concepts of (self-) positing and op-positing and determines that these are pre-representational cognitive acts that establish the schema of subject-object opposition, which is a condition for the possibility of conscious representation.Chapter 5 is a study of Fichte’s methodology, which Martin claims is an unsuccessful, but nonetheless “strikingly original,” “dialectical category theory,” or method of contradiction (5). Martin compares Fichte’s method to the ancient mathematical method of “regula falsi,” and concludes that the positive impact of Fichte’s method is to force a conceptual expansion. Fichte, in other words, uses contradiction to retain, rather than to reject (as in a reductio) the source of contradiction.Finally, in what is the most intriguing chapter of the text (Chapter 6) Martin examines Fichte’s striving doctrine in light of his attempt to develop an idealist theory of objectivity. Using ontogenetic analogies based on how an infant comes to experience an independent world, Martin argues here for the primacy of practice, and more specifically that there is a kind of striving that “is independent... (shrink)