The Transcendental Analysis of Cognition and Coleridge's Theory
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
φThe Weights & Measures of the Human Mind’: The Transcendental Analysis of Cognition and Coleridge’s Theory of the Mental Faculties Dillon Struwig PhD University of York English September 2015 Abstract The aim of this thesis is to lay the ground for further work on interpreting Coleridge’s Logic and its relation to the rest of his philosophy, particularly the system of speculative metaphysics and theology presented in Coleridge’s Opus Maximum fragments. I do this by exploring the connections between Coleridge’s conceptions of the a priori, the cognitive faculties (or capacities), and the nature of logical theory. Part 1 seeks to place Coleridge’s views on logic in their broader historical and intellectual context, showing why Coleridge considered the investigation of the faculties, and the analysis of our cognitive operations and contents, to be fundamental to logical theory, and arguing that this position is a product of Coleridge’s critical engagement with the early modern logic of ideas and faculties. Part 2 gives a preliminary account of Coleridge’s interpretation of two key Kantian terms, φa priori’ and φtranscendental’, exploring the analogies Coleridge uses to elucidate the nature of the a priori and the purpose of transcendental claims. Part 3 expands on this account, considering how Coleridge’s conceptions of the a priori and the transcendental inform his claims, especially in Logic, on the human mental faculties and their contribution to sensory experience and cognition; it focuses on Coleridge’s views on φthe obvious threefold division’ of our cognitive capacities into sense, understanding, and reason, his descriptions of the formal (a priori) and material (a posteriori) elements of cognition, and his functional theory of the constitution of our faculties. Part 4 discusses the relations between Coleridge’s theory of the cognitive capacities and his conception of the a priori, focusing on Coleridge’s claims concerning the origins of a priori forms and contents in our cognitive capacities, and the transcendental method of inquiry which he contends is able to prove such claims. 2 Contents Abstractλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλ...2 Contentsλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλ..3 Prefaceλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλ6 Acknowledgementsλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλ.8 Author’s Declarationλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλ...9 1. Coleridge on Logic, Psychology, & the Cognitive Facultiesλλλλλλλ...10 1.1 Coleridge on Logic, Psychology, & the Understandingλλλλλλλλλλλλλλ.12 i. Coleridge’s Criticisms of Eighteenth-Century Logic: An Overviewλλλλλλλ12 ii. Coleridge’s Definitions of φLogic’ & φthe Understanding’λλλλλλλλλλ...14 iii. Coleridge on Logic & the Problem of Faculty Terminology...........................................17 1.2 Coleridge, Aristotle’s Logic, & the Question of Kant’s Influenceλλλλλλλλλλ..21 i. Coleridge’s Kantian Reading of Aristotleλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλ21 ii. Logical Rules & the Cognitive Faculties in Kant & Coleridgeλλλλλλλλλ24 1.3 Faculties, Ideas, & Origins: Coleridge & the Facultative Traditionλλλλλλλλλλ26 i. The Development of Facultative Logic: An Outlineλλλλλλλλλλ.λλ..26 ii. Facultative Logic in Coleridge’s early 1800s Letters & Manuscriptsλλλλ.λλ..28 iii. Facultative Logic in Coleridge’s 1820s Logic Manuscriptλλλλλλλλλλ...32 1.4 Long Eighteenth Century Logic & Coleridge’s Critique of Hartley & Condillacλλλλ....35 i. Locke’s Influence on the Structure & Content of Logical Theoryλλλλλλλ...35 ii. Watts, Condillac, & Hartley in the Context of Facultative Logicλλλλλλλλ38 iii. Coleridge’s Conflation & Criticism of Hartley & Condillacλλλλλλλλλ...41 iv. Coleridge’s Distinction between Psychological & Logical Theories of Cognitionλ..43 1.5 Powers & Plantules: Coleridge on the Nature of the Facultiesλλλλλλλλλλλ..49 i. Education & Inquiry into the Faculties: An Overviewλλλλλλλλλλλλ49 ii. The φeducible and eductive nature’ of the faculties: Coleridge’s Plantule Analogyλ..50 iii. From Faculties to Powers: The Potential & Actualised Modes of Sense & Understanding.............................................................................................................................................55 iv. Cognitive Constitution & Capacities as Componentsλλλλλλλλλλλ....59 2. Kantian & Coleridgean Conceptions of the Transcendental & the A Prioriλ..64 2.1 Kant & Coleridge on A Priori Cognitions, Transcendental Knowledge, & the Content of Transcendental Representationsλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλ....λλλλλ..64 3 i. Kant’s Definitions of φA Priori’ & φTranscendental’ in Coleridge’s Logicλλλλλ..64 ii. Coleridge on Transcendental Knowledge & the Analysis of the Facultiesλλλλ..67 iii. Coleridge on the Criteria for Apriority & the Problem of A Priori Originsλ.λλ...70 2.2 The Spectacles of the Mind: Coleridge on Interpreting the Kantian A Prioriλλλλ.λλ74 2.3 Coleridge on the A Priori, the Transcendental, & Necessary Conditionsλ.λλλλλλ..80 i. The Problem of Pre-existence: Coleridge on A Priori Forms as Necessary Conditionsλλλλ.................................................................................................................................80 ii. Coleridge on the Relationship between the A Priori & the Transcendentalλλλλ85 iii. The Psychological A Priori & Coleridge’s Twofold Conception of A Priori Representationsλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλ..90 3. The Elements of Experience: Coleridge’s Transcendental Theory of Cognition & the Transcendental Analysis of the Cognitive Powersλλλλλλλλλλ95 3.1 Transcendental Analysis & the Threefold Division of the Cognitive Powersλλλλλλ95 3.2 Transcendental Analysis & the Sources of Experience: Coleridge on the Formal & Material Elements of Cognitionλλλλλλλλλ.λλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλ101 i. Coleridge on Transcendental Analysis: An Overviewλλλλλλλλλλλ....101 ii. Kant’s Matter/Form Distinction in Coleridge’s Logicλλλλλλλλλλλ...102 iii. Kant’s Aesthetic & Logic: The Forms of Sense & Understanding in Coleridge’s Logicλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλ.106 iv. Transcendental Dialectic vs. Transcendental Noetic: Coleridge’s Departure from Kantλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλ.108 v. A Priori Form & Content: Coleridge’s Act-Product Terminologyλλλλλλλ111 3.3 Coleridge on Ancient Greek Faculty Terminology: The Threefold Division of the Cognitive Powers, their Contents, & their relation to Experienceλλλλλλλλλ..λλλλλ...114 i. Coleridge’s Kantian Reading of Ancient Greek Faculty Terminologyλλλλλ...114 ii. Coleridge on Probable vs. Certain Knowledge & the φpermanent truths of pure reason’λλ...............................................................................................................................................120 3.4 The Transcendental, the A Priori, & the Constitution of the Facultiesλ..λλλλλλ...124 i. Coleridge on A Priori Cognitions & Cognitive Constitution: An Overviewλλλ...124 ii. Coleridge’s Conception of φConstituent Forms’: the Mechanist Analogyλλλλ..127 iii. Formal, Transcendental, & Empirical Aspects of Mind: Coleridge’s Sextant Analogyλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλ130 4. ‘The Weights & Measures of the Human Mind’: Coleridge on the Threefold Division of Transcendental Inquiry & The Nature of the A Prioriλλλλλ...137 4 4.1 Transcendental Reflection & the Sources of A Priori Evidence: Coleridge’s Table of Pure Sciences & The Threefold Division of the Facultiesλλλλλλλλλλλλ...................137 4.2 The Classification of Content & The Analysis of the Faculties: Two Perspectives on Coleridge’s Table of Pure Sciencesλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλ......................142 i. Coleridge’s Table of Pure Sciences & the Employment/Analysis Distinctionλλ...142 ii. From Classification to Analysis: Coleridge’s History of Faculty-Theoryλλλλ...146 iii. Coleridge on Transcendental Inquiry & the Unanalysability of Reasonλλλλ...155 4.3 Coleridge’s Two-Level Theory of the A Priori: The Grounds for the Distinction Between Transcendental Analysis & Transcendental Noeticλλλλλλλλλ..λλλλλλλ.158 i. Coleridge on Conditionally vs. Absolutely Necessary A Priori Formsλλλλλ....158 ii. Coleridge on the Subsistence of Subjective & Objective A Priori Formsλλλλ..162 4.4 From the φPoint of Reflection’ to the φReality of Reason’: Noetic, The Universal Subjective, & the Principle of Subject-Object Identityλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλ....166 i. Coleridge’s Apriority Criteria & the Evidence of Reasonλλλλλλλλλλ..166 ii. Coleridge on the Subjective, the Objective, & the Limits of Reflectionλλλλ....168 iii. The Reality of Reason vs. The Reality of Nature: Noumenal & Phenomenal Objectsλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλ...λλ..171 4.5 Transcendental Inquiry & Transcendent Metaphysics: The Possibility of Noetic Knowledge & the Limits of Human Cognitionλλλλλλ....λλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλ176 i. Transcendent or Transcendental Knowledge? Coleridge’s Case for Noeticλλ...λ176 ii. Coleridge on the Relationship between Transcendental Analysis & Transcendental Noeticλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλ..λ180 Coda: A Final Word on Coleridge’s Transcendent/Transcendental Distinctionλλ...183 Abbreviationsλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλ..187 Bibliographyλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλλ188 5 Preface: Introduction to the Outline for a System of the Philosophy of Reading Coleridge’s Logic I began this project with the intention of producing an exposition of the theory of cognition which Coleridge presents in his Logic. Yet it soon become apparent to me that, before such an exposition could be produced, many currently unresolved (and largely unaddressed) issues in Coleridge studies would have to be confronted. To list a few of the most notable examples: The view that Kant is one of the greatest