Article/Publication Details
Views: 1331

TRANSCENDENTALISM, NATURALISM AND ONTOLOGY

Abstract
The opposition between transcendentalism and naturalism plays a key role in discussions about consciousness at the confluence of phenomenology and analytical philosophy. Associated with it is a whole range of research programs. However, the opposition between transcendentalism and naturalism in these programs is, as a rule, operational and not thematic in nature and presupposes that 1) Transcendentalism and naturalism as traditions are initially alien to each other; 2) The domain of their opposition is ontology. The article attempts to problematize these premises based on one historical circumstance. Turning to the texts of Kant, the founder of transcendental philosophy, I intend to show that transcendentalism, which was first substantiated in them, is a version of naturalistic ontology, that is, a peculiarly interpreted naturalism that identifies nature with its natural scientific model and excludes constituting subjectivity from ontology. It is built not on the naturalization of phenomenology, but on the transcendentalization of natural science. Reinterpreting the experimental method in the spirit of the Copernican turn, Kant substantiates the apodictic nature and lack of alternative to the ontology of nature by turning nature into a correlate of consciousness and strictly limiting the principles of mathematical natural science to the boundaries of the phenomenal world. As a result, the true theme of philosophy—the thing in itself and transcendental subjectivity itself—is taken beyond the boundaries of ontology. The thematization of the naturalistic origins of transcendentalism and the removal of transcendental consciousness beyond the boundaries of ontology, carried out within its framework, thus reveals the problematic nature of these premises. The article also demonstrates that, despite significant differences in the understanding of transcendental philosophy and ontology between Kant and Husserl, the identified motives—the naturalistic nature of the ontological foundation and the meta-ontological character of transcendental subjectivity—remain of fundamental importance for the founder of phenomenology. This allows us to conclude that ontology is not the original domain of confrontation between transcendentalism and naturalism and to substantiate the compatibilist thesis according to which transcendentalism is compatible with ontological naturalism.

Keywords
transcendentalism, naturalism, ontology, subjectivity, phenomenology, Kant, Husserl.

References

• Descartes, R. (1994). Collected works. Vol. 2. Rus. Ed. Moscow: Mysl’ Publ. (In Russian)
• Fink, E. (1988). VI. Cartesianische Meditation. Teil 1. Die Idee einer transzendentalen Methodenlehre (Husserliana-Dokumente Bd. II/I). Dordrecht: Kluwer.
• Gallagher, S. (2003). Phenomenology and Experimental Design. Journal of Consciousness Studies,10 (9–10), 85–99.
• Gallagher, S., & Zahavi, D. (2008). The Phenomenological Mind. London: Routledge.
• Hume, D. (1996). A Treatise of Human Nature, being an Attempt to Introduce the Experimental Method of Reasoning into Moral Subjects. In Sobranie sochineniy. Tom 2 (53–655). Rus. Ed. Moscow: Mysl’ Publ. (In Russian)
• Husserl, E. (2005). Philosophy as a Rigorous Science. In Izbrannye raboty (187–240). Rus. Ed. Moscow: Territoriia budushchego Publ. (In Russian)
• Husserl, E. (2009). Ideas Pertaining to a Pure Phenomenology and to a Phenomenological Philosophy. First Book. General Introduction to a Pure Phenomenology. Rus. Ed. Moscow: Akademicheskii proekt Publ. (In Russian)
• Kant, I. (1994a). Collected Works. Vol. 7. Rus. Ed. Moscow: Choro Publ. (In Russian)
• Kant, I. (1994b). Critique of Pure Reason. Rus. Ed. Moscow: Choro Publ. (In Russian)
• Kant, I. (1994c). Prolegomena to Any Future Metaphysics That Will Be Able to Present Itself as a Science. In Sobranie sochineniy. Tom 4 (5–152). Rus. Ed. Moscow: Choro Publ. (In Russian)
• Mensch, J. (2010). The Question of Naturalizing Phenomenology. Annual for Phenomenological Philosophy, II, 302–317.
• Molchanov, V. I. (2004). Experience, Space and Thing in Itself. To the Difference of Analysis and Interpretation in “Critique of Pure Reason”. Filosofiya Kanta i sovremennost’. Materialy mezhvuzovckoi konverencii, 4–11. (In Russian)
• Patkul, A. B., & Artemenko, N. A. (2015). Public Debates “Ontology of Consciousness: Naturalism vs. Transcendentalism”. Horizon. Studies in Phenomenology, 4 (1), 240–307. (In Russian)
• Schnell, A. (2019). Was ist Phänomenologie? Frankfurt am Main: Vittorio Klostermann.
• Sepp, H. R. (1998). Medialität und Meontik — Eugen Finks spekulativer Entwurf. Internationale Zeitschrift für Philosophie, 1, 85–93.
• Shestova, E. (2018). Speculative Reasoning in E. Fink’s Meontic Phenomenology. Horizon. Studies in Phenomenology, 7 (2), 391–413. (In Russian)
• Varela, F. (1996). Neurophenomenology: A Methodological Remedy to the Hard Problem. Journal of Consciousness Studies, 3 (4), 330–350.
• Varela, F. (1997). The Naturalization of Phenomenology as the Transcendence of Nature. Searching for Generative Mutual Constraints. Alter, 5 (4), 355–381.