What a Feeling? In Search of a Metaphysical Connection between Panpsychism and Panentheism

U. Voigt
{"title":"What a Feeling? In Search of a Metaphysical Connection between Panpsychism and Panentheism","authors":"U. Voigt","doi":"10.30965/9783957437303_009","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"manner: What it is like to be in an atmosphere is the same as what it is like to be in space. If phenomenal bonding is possible in a way conceivable to us, this also is the fundamental content of the according mental states of the involved microsubjects. It may be surprising to assume that it is like something to be in space, that being in space is a qualitative perspective on the world, but this very assumption has been endorsed and elaborated by Immanuel Kant in a way which is pertinent to the present discussion51. For Kant, space is the pure form of external intuition52, whereby ›external‹ characterizes the way the objects encountering in this way are intuitively apprehended: namely as different from the subject perceiving them. Accordingly, to be in space is to be confronted with something different from oneself. This intuition is not based on conceptual insight, which would be a privilege of rational subjects; on the contrary, it is the foundation of any sensual faculty and thereby can be presupposed to be at work wherever qualities are sensed. So even microsubjects below the human level need not lack the intuitive knowledge (in a minimal sense) that there is something different from them, e.g. something they can be addressed by, they can combine and form arrangements with. What it is like to be in space, understood thus, is being open to atmospheres, as something not identical with oneself but at the same time mental, and what can happen within them. This is what it is like to be a natural subject; this is like what it is to be in the mental state which is God. What it is like to be in that mental state, however, is different and therefore to be distinguished from what it is like to be that mental state, in this case: to be God. We know that difference only from one of its side53, namely from our side as human and therefore natural subjects: We know what it is like that we can encounter something (or someone) else, we know what it is like that there can be otherness. We can approach the other side of this difference at best in a negative way, like Nicolaus Cusanus did it by calling God, considered in Himself, non-aliud, the »Not-Other«, thus in the final analysis staying on our side of the difference (where else could we stay or go, at least under our natural conditions?) and acknowledging it as only one side of it. These considerations allow to resume the initial question: Could it be the case that there is a metaphysical connection between panpsychism and panentheism? They even allow to give as a preliminary answer: Yes. This answer can be justified as follows: As suspected, the searched metaphysical 51 For the following, cf. Voigt 2016. 52 Cf. Critique of Pure Reason: B42/A26. 53 On the conception of a difference with only one (available) relatum, see Zorn 2016: 119-129. Uwe Voigt 9783957437303 Heruntergeladen von Brill.com05/19/2020 01:23:06AM via free access","PeriodicalId":112077,"journal":{"name":"Panentheism and Panpsychism","volume":"12 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-04-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Panentheism and Panpsychism","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.30965/9783957437303_009","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

manner: What it is like to be in an atmosphere is the same as what it is like to be in space. If phenomenal bonding is possible in a way conceivable to us, this also is the fundamental content of the according mental states of the involved microsubjects. It may be surprising to assume that it is like something to be in space, that being in space is a qualitative perspective on the world, but this very assumption has been endorsed and elaborated by Immanuel Kant in a way which is pertinent to the present discussion51. For Kant, space is the pure form of external intuition52, whereby ›external‹ characterizes the way the objects encountering in this way are intuitively apprehended: namely as different from the subject perceiving them. Accordingly, to be in space is to be confronted with something different from oneself. This intuition is not based on conceptual insight, which would be a privilege of rational subjects; on the contrary, it is the foundation of any sensual faculty and thereby can be presupposed to be at work wherever qualities are sensed. So even microsubjects below the human level need not lack the intuitive knowledge (in a minimal sense) that there is something different from them, e.g. something they can be addressed by, they can combine and form arrangements with. What it is like to be in space, understood thus, is being open to atmospheres, as something not identical with oneself but at the same time mental, and what can happen within them. This is what it is like to be a natural subject; this is like what it is to be in the mental state which is God. What it is like to be in that mental state, however, is different and therefore to be distinguished from what it is like to be that mental state, in this case: to be God. We know that difference only from one of its side53, namely from our side as human and therefore natural subjects: We know what it is like that we can encounter something (or someone) else, we know what it is like that there can be otherness. We can approach the other side of this difference at best in a negative way, like Nicolaus Cusanus did it by calling God, considered in Himself, non-aliud, the »Not-Other«, thus in the final analysis staying on our side of the difference (where else could we stay or go, at least under our natural conditions?) and acknowledging it as only one side of it. These considerations allow to resume the initial question: Could it be the case that there is a metaphysical connection between panpsychism and panentheism? They even allow to give as a preliminary answer: Yes. This answer can be justified as follows: As suspected, the searched metaphysical 51 For the following, cf. Voigt 2016. 52 Cf. Critique of Pure Reason: B42/A26. 53 On the conception of a difference with only one (available) relatum, see Zorn 2016: 119-129. Uwe Voigt 9783957437303 Heruntergeladen von Brill.com05/19/2020 01:23:06AM via free access
什么感觉?寻找泛心论和泛神论之间的形而上学联系
在大气层中的感觉和在太空中的感觉是一样的。如果现象联系在某种程度上对我们来说是可能的,这也是相关微观主体相应心理状态的基本内容。假设它就像在空间中一样可能会令人惊讶,假设在空间中是对世界的定性视角,但这个假设已经得到了伊曼努尔·康德的认可和阐述,其方式与当前的讨论有关51。对康德来说,空间是外部直观的纯粹形式,“外部”表征了以这种方式遇到的对象被直观地理解的方式:即与感知它们的主体不同。因此,在空间中就是面对与自己不同的东西。这种直觉不是建立在概念洞察力的基础上的,而概念洞察力是理性主体的特权;相反,它是任何感官能力的基础,因此可以假定它在任何感觉品质的地方起作用。因此,即使是低于人类水平的微观主体也不需要缺乏直觉知识(在最小的意义上),即存在与他们不同的东西,例如他们可以解决的东西,他们可以结合并形成安排。这样理解,置身于空间的感觉,就是对大气开放,作为与自己不相同但同时又是精神的东西,以及在其中可能发生的事情。这就是自然主体的样子;这就像处于上帝的精神状态一样。然而,处于那种精神状态的感觉是不同的,因此要区别于处于那种精神状态的感觉,在这种情况下,即成为上帝。我们只从差异的一个方面认识差异,即从我们作为人类,因而是自然主体的那一方面认识差异:我们知道我们能遇到别的东西(或别人)是什么样子,我们知道他性是什么样子。我们最多只能以否定的方式来接近这种差异的另一面,就像古萨努斯那样,他把神称为“非他者”、“非他者”,从而最终停留在差异的我们这一边(至少在我们的自然条件下,我们还能停留或去哪里?),并承认它只是差异的一面。这些考虑让我们回到最初的问题:泛心论和泛神论之间是否存在形而上学上的联系?他们甚至允许给出一个初步的答案:是的。这个答案可以证明如下:正如所怀疑的那样,对形而上学的研究如下,参见Voigt 2016。52参见《纯粹理性批判》:B42/A26。53关于只有一个(可用的)关联体的差异的概念,见Zorn 2016: 119-129。Uwe Voigt 9783957437303 Heruntergeladen von Brill.com05/19/2020 01:23:06AM免费访问
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信