Kant and Freud on Time
The experience of objects in space and time is only possible through the representation of the necessary connection of perceptions. The connection requires the applicability of the categories of relation to objects of experience.
Kant is concerned with explaining how it is possible for us to represent the temporality of experience. We cannot perceive time itself, nor is time a concept. Kant says there are 3 ways that we experience time: thru the notions of persistence, succession and simultaneity - we must explain how we are able to experience these three aspects of temporality. Although one moment follows another, time itself persists. And for any two events in time the first must be before, after or at the same time as the second. So the awareness of two events as being in time involves a capacity to distinguish between the events being successive or simultaneous.
Kant argues that the capacity to represent and distinguish between the persistence, succession and simultaneity of time and events in time requires the application of the three categories of relation. The category of substance is required for the representation of persistence, the category of causation is required for the representation of succession and the category of community (or mutual interaction) is required for the representation of simultaneity.
Causation however as an apriori concept only occurs when something goes "wrong" otherwise we have no idea of the actual causal relations. Lacan makes this insight.
Freud has a different understanding which involves the distinction between the Jewish and Christian metaphysical doctrines. Freud posits that symptoms are caused by events in the past - in the individual's past and in humanities past: the oedipal complex for example does not manifest symptoms immediately but only subsequently in the future. This behavior is determined by the past. Freud also invented the notion of the primal horde and the murder of the leader-father (in contrast to other forms of the father) to account for guilt and the construction of laws (totems and taboos). Sartre addressed this problem of determinism but posited that the treatment must be a turning back of the future to the present. Although this insight may not make sense in the individual case, it may be intelligible in terms of political history where the key issue of 'what will happen next' is of widespread concern.
Freud's use of time is however different from the Christian use of time which posits a beyond to the temporal, and thus a different motivational set than the material-temporal view that revolves around the past and the present. The Christian view of time revolves around the present-future and a notion of salvation. Freud addresses the determinism of past events by helping the person to understand the crucial situations of the Oedipus complex and the leader complex whereas Christians are determined by the effect of present behavior on future salvation.
The experience of objects in space and time is only possible through the representation of the necessary connection of perceptions. The connection requires the applicability of the categories of relation to objects of experience.
Kant is concerned with explaining how it is possible for us to represent the temporality of experience. We cannot perceive time itself, nor is time a concept. Kant says there are 3 ways that we experience time: thru the notions of persistence, succession and simultaneity - we must explain how we are able to experience these three aspects of temporality. Although one moment follows another, time itself persists. And for any two events in time the first must be before, after or at the same time as the second. So the awareness of two events as being in time involves a capacity to distinguish between the events being successive or simultaneous.
Kant argues that the capacity to represent and distinguish between the persistence, succession and simultaneity of time and events in time requires the application of the three categories of relation. The category of substance is required for the representation of persistence, the category of causation is required for the representation of succession and the category of community (or mutual interaction) is required for the representation of simultaneity.
Causation however as an apriori concept only occurs when something goes "wrong" otherwise we have no idea of the actual causal relations. Lacan makes this insight.
Freud has a different understanding which involves the distinction between the Jewish and Christian metaphysical doctrines. Freud posits that symptoms are caused by events in the past - in the individual's past and in humanities past: the oedipal complex for example does not manifest symptoms immediately but only subsequently in the future. This behavior is determined by the past. Freud also invented the notion of the primal horde and the murder of the leader-father (in contrast to other forms of the father) to account for guilt and the construction of laws (totems and taboos). Sartre addressed this problem of determinism but posited that the treatment must be a turning back of the future to the present. Although this insight may not make sense in the individual case, it may be intelligible in terms of political history where the key issue of 'what will happen next' is of widespread concern.
Freud's use of time is however different from the Christian use of time which posits a beyond to the temporal, and thus a different motivational set than the material-temporal view that revolves around the past and the present. The Christian view of time revolves around the present-future and a notion of salvation. Freud addresses the determinism of past events by helping the person to understand the crucial situations of the Oedipus complex and the leader complex whereas Christians are determined by the effect of present behavior on future salvation.
No comments:
Post a Comment