Peak 089 My Innate

Idealists say that this' I 'is innate and established through an innate principle; As an empiricist, this' I 'is a product of experience, as the sum of all the complexities of experience. So, our understanding of 'I' depends on the scope of human experiential activities that can be learned. Therefore, this' I 'is composed of experience. Therefore, whether it is idealism or materialism, whether it is rationality or empiricism, they are all writing around' I '. Therefore,' Who am I 'has become the first question in philosophy.

Or, where did 'I' come from? The third is' me '. How do I know where I come from? Where is the fourth 'I' going.

Therefore, they are all centered around the concept of 'me', why does it become centered around the concept of 'me'?

If we do not view human or my existence as ontological, but only as an epistemological or epistemological sense of me, then the first thing we know is that 'I' first experiences the world, rather than the world understanding 'me'.

The activity of cognition has always been the subject's understanding of the object, rather than the object's grasp of the subject. It is "me" who understands the world, and it has never been said, "The world will come to know me once" or "The world thinks I am a good person". This must be said by someone in a mental hospital.

We will definitely say that the world we understand today is different from the world we understood yesterday, which is what normal people say. So, it must start from the "I", so different philosophers will give different interpretations of what kind of field this "I" is applicable to.

But as a result, “I am”， It is the concept of two core issues in philosophy, one is "I" and the other is "am", which means one is Self and the other is Being.

So, the word 'I am' expresses the philosophical concept itself, 'to be or being' is an ontological concept, while 'I or Self' is a subjectivist concept, and this subject is the subject of knowledge. Therefore, 'I am' includes both subjectivism and ontology.

We should not be able to derive the meaning of 'I am' from the experience activities that have not yet been obtained, in order to deduce the subsequent components. This is the principle that Fichte hoped to establish. Because 'I am' is both an actor and a product of action, why is it said to be an actor?

Because 'I am' expresses the thoughts and conscious activities of the subject, “I am a teacher”， That is an expression of my understanding of myself, a subjective self-awareness. Therefore, at this moment, it is action again, so why is it a product of action again?

When I say 'I am', it already constitutes a result because it is formed by me saying 'I am', so it is a product of action.

So, here the "actor" and the "product of action" are completely merged into one, in other words, the conscious activity of the subject and the results that this conscious activity can achieve are combined into one.

However, this merging only occurs before the experiential self and is also a conscious state of the absolute self. So, such a state or conscious activity, Fichte called it "factual action", which is a bunch of topics brought up by "I am", because "I am", there are other things behind it.

The formal expression of 'I am' is' A is', which means' A='.

Firstly, the simplest one is "A=A", so "I am me" or even "I am I" can be used because the two are different. The latter "I" is already defined by the former "I". At the same time, the "I" at the back defines the first "I" because with the "I" at the back, the first "I" becomes complete. If there is no second 'I', the first 'I' is incomplete, just empty, with this form but no content.

So, with the second 'I', the first 'I' is complete, which constitutes a complete sentence.

This is Fichte's understanding of the 'self'.

He believes that rational intuition is the only and reliable viewpoint for all philosophy. From this perspective, it is equivalent to explaining everything that happens in consciousness.

——Fichte

There is no such thing as "rational intuition" in Kant's view, because in Kant's view, intuition only exists in the intellect, and it only exists in the process of human sensory experience being grasped through the form of intellect. At this point, the word 'intuition' can be used. Therefore, intuition must be 'sensory intuition', and there is no such thing as' rational intuition '. If there is' rational intuition', it must grasp something beyond experience, such as God, things in themselves, etc., in order to grasp it through 'rational intuition'.

So, Kant's intuitive usage of concepts is very clear and definable, rather than being used arbitrarily. However, in Fichte's view, the understanding of intuition is different. He regards intuition as a "rational activity" because he differs from Kant's way of intuitive perception. Intuitive perception is the sensory activity in which we grasp objects through intellectual forms. Such sensory activity has objects, you can see objects, have content, and know what objects you grasp.

However, for rational intuition, it has no object, it precedes the object. Rational intuition is not used to grasp the object, but rather to grasp the "self" itself.

Based on this understanding, he said: what reason intuitively perceives is the possibility of self-awareness taking factual actions, that is, the unity of subject and object. In this perspective, the subject and object, action and thinking have not yet been distinguished. It is the self reflection before self reflection and the self-awareness before self awareness.

——Fichte

It is a state of consciousness that occurs before the formation of self-awareness, and this state has neither formal conditions nor content requirements. It is a pure or absolute self, and the concepts of "pure" and "absolute" are repeatedly used.

Many people find these concepts difficult to understand, but they are actually easy to comprehend. Their simplicity lies in the fact that if we view the facts of experience as a process of various experiential objects provided to us by a complex world, then the pure and simple self is a kind of consciousness that has already formed before any experiential activity occurs.

It is precisely the simplest, although it is absolutely abstract, it is also the simplest. Because experience is complex, and what precedes experience must be simple, it is actually a simple thing, not complex, it is something that cannot be any simpler.

If according to Plato's theory of ideas, it belongs to the category of "one", of course, when we need to explain the concepts of one and many, it is no longer this "one".

However, in order to understand Fichte's concept of the 'absolute self', we must place it in a state of consciousness that already exists before experiential activities, and this state of consciousness itself is a reflective activity of self-awareness.

Give a simple example, although it may not be very precise, it can help us understand. Just like the question we asked our mothers when we were children, it's about who I am. Actually, when you ask your mother questions like "Who am I" and "Where do I come from", you don't really care about her answers. Your mother can come up with a set of reasons to tell you who you are and where you come from. However, as time goes by and you gradually grow up, you will have a new understanding of this issue.

So even if you hear an adult's answer to you when you're a child, you don't pay attention to that answer, or see it as the only answer or the correct answer. You just trust your parents, and when they tell you what it is, you accept it, saying, 'You're a good child, you're a baby...' So the child thinks, 'Oh, I'm a good child...' However, he doesn't have a concept of what a good child is or what a baby is, because he doesn't have a standard of right or wrong for good or bad.

As for the standards of good and bad, he gradually realized them as he grew older. So, when you were very young and your parents told you that you were a good child, you didn't have a concept and didn't know what good and bad meant. You only knew one thing, which was to obey.

However, you often have a desire for disobedience in your heart, which is why you cry. Your crying is a rebellion against the outside world, and it expresses your dissatisfaction. However, before you cry, when you hear everyone express themselves, the conscious activity you form is called the "pre consciousness" activity, because it is a reflection activity on "self-awareness".

So, the baby has already reflected, but this reflection is a non conceptual reflection, a non objective reflection. Therefore, the reflection of infants is the most primitive reflection activity, and of course, there are two situations where such reflection occurs. The first is due to the instinctive effect. Because instinct is the reason that prompts him to reflect.

For example, his concept of "distance" towards the external world is instinctive, meaning that in order to protect himself, he may distance himself from what he considers to be wrong or bad.

However, even so, he still hasn't formed a true reflection. This is just the state of pre reflection that forms before formal reflection. The true reflection activity is formed over time with the accumulation of a large amount of experience, and it did not truly reflect before the lack of experience.