Fichte’s Science of Knowing, 1804, Lecture 3:

1) knowing, as the oneness of being and thinking, is self-standing without requiring anchorage in a sensible object or derivation from a previously assumed postulate or axiom. It is manifest a priori and its manifestness is independent of the content of the thought through which it is apprehended.
2) the above can be demonstrated to oneself by coming to the realization that the unity of B and T obtains regardless of any changes made to the object or subject of thought. –> since we can contemplate an infinity of possible objects, we could never know via induction that we had surveyed all possible objects and yet we know that the unity of knowing is not a function of the  particular object thought. Thus we know this a priori. 
3) “Knowing…is not subjective.” (p. 35)
4) the changeable substrate which holds together all changeability is unchangeable in its changeability. 
5) the unchangeable opposes itself to the changeable and vice versa
6) when knowing is grasped as unity it merely appears as fact, in the form of what is the case. –> Fichte calls this form of knowing’s self-appearance “factical manifestness”.
7) Factical manifestness is merely the external existence of knowing; it is not, however, its internal essence which is not manifest as a fact but only as active principle, what Fichte here calls “genetic manifestness”.
8) Kant does not thematize this aspect of knowing. In fact, all science, including mathematics, thematizes only what is manifest as fact. This is not a weakness of empirical and mathematical sciences but it does highlight the territory of knowledge that is unique to philosophy.
9) WL is the only true philosophy because it recognizes that this genetic, active component is the proper subject matter of philosophy which aims to present the absolute, to ‘catch it in the act’ so to speak.
10) Any rival philosophy which sought to refute or best the WL by solely focusing on the contemplation of facts and factical manifestness would, in positing the absolute as such, contradict itself in the act since factical manifestness is possible only if it is also a genesis, a “synthesis that is also an analysis” logically and temporally simultaneous with any fact that is manifest.

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: