Introduction: Categories and the Question of Being

Notes

1. Ernst Cassirer, ‘Kant und das Problem der Metaphysik: Bemerkungen zu Martin Heideggers Kant-Interpretation’, Kant-Studien, 36 (1931), 17 (translation by the present writer). 2. Marjorie Grene, Martin Heidegger (London: Bowes & Bowes, 1957), 66–7. 3. Karl Löwith, Heidegger: Denker in dürftiger Zeit (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1960), 78n (translation by the present writer). 4. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, trans. Parvis Emad and Kenneth Maly (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1997), 3; [Phänomenologische Interpretation von Kants Kritik der reinen Vernunft, ed. Ingtraud Görland, Vol. 25 of Gesamtausgabe (Frankfurt am Main: Vittorio Klostermann, 1977), 4–5]. Hereafter, refer- ences to the original text are given in parentheses after the page number of the translation. 5. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, ed. Raymund Schmidt (Hamburg: Felix Meiner, 1976), A 314/B 370. 6. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 2–3 (3–4). 7. Martin Heidegger, Kant and the Problem of Metaphysics, trans. Richard Taft (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1997), 141; [Kant und das Problem der Metaphysik, 4th edition (Frankfurt am Main: Vittorio Klostermann, 1973), 195]. 8. Martin Heidegger, Kant and the Problem of Metaphysics, 141 (196). 9. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 3 (4). 10. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 3 (4). 11. Martin Heidegger, Kant and the Problem of Metaphysics, 143 (198). 12. Thomas Langan, ‘Foreword’, Kant and the Problem of Metaphysics, by Martin Heidegger, trans. J.S. Churchill (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1962), xii. 13. Charles Sherover, Heidegger, Kant and Time (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1971), 6. 14. Heidegger at times makes this principle quite explicit. Cf. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 64 (93). 15. Claude Piché, ‘La Schématisme de la Raison Pure: Contribution au dossier Heidegger-Kant’, Études Philosophiques, 1986, 83 (translation by the present writer). 16. Charles Sherover, Heidegger, Kant and Time, 12–13. For a similar view, see William J. Richardson, Heidegger: Through Phenomenology to Thought (The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff, 1967), 159. 17. Martin Heidegger, Kant and the Problem of Metaphysics, xx (xvii).

178 Notes 179

18. Martin Heidegger, Being and Time, 35 (40). 19. Ernst Cassirer, ‘Kant and the Problem of Metaphysics: Bemerkungen zu Martin Heideggers Kant-Interpretation’, 16. 20. Martin Heidegger, Kant and the Problem of Metaphysics, xvii (xiii). 21. Martin Heidegger, Contributions to Philosophy (From Enowning), trans. Parvis Emad and Kenneth Maly (Bloomington and Indianapolis: Indiana University Press, 1999) 176, 217, 317; [Beiträge zur Philosophie, ed. F.W. von Herrmann, Vol. 65 of Gesamtausgabe (Frankfurt am Main: Vittorio Klostermann, 1989), 250, 308, 451]. 22. Martin Heidegger, Contributions to Philosophy, 246 (351). 23. Martin Heidegger, Being and Time, trans. Joan Stambaugh (Albany: State University of New York Press, 1996), 8; [Sein und Zeit (Tübingen: Max Niemeyer, 1979), 9]. See also Martin Heidegger’s History of the Concept of Time: Prologomena, trans. Theodore Kisiel (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1985), 3; [Prologomena zur Geschichte des Zeitbegriffs, Vol. 20 of Gesamtausgabe (Frankfurt am Main: Vittorio Klostermann, 1979), 3–4]. 24. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 25 (36). 25. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 4 (6). 26. Martin Heidegger, Being and Time, 28 (32). 27. Martin Heidegger, Being and Time, 9 (10). See also History of the Concept of Time: Prologomena, 2 (2–3). 28. Martin Heidegger, Metaphysical Foundations of Logic, trans. Michael Heim (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1984), 56; [Metaphysische- Anfangsgründe der Logik im Ausgang von Leibniz, ed. Klaus Held, Vol. 26 of Gesamtausgabe (Frankfurt am Main: Vittorio Klostermann, 1978), 70]. 29. Martin Heidegger, Metaphysical Foundations of Logic, 57 (70). 30. Martin Heidegger, Being and Time, 19, cf. 20 (21; cf. 22). 31. Martin Heidegger, Being and Time, 8–9 (10). 32. Martin Heidegger, Being and Time, 10–11 (12–13). 33. Martin Heidegger, Being and Time, 144 (154). 34. Martin Heidegger, Basic Problems of Phenomenology, trans. Albert Hofstadter (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1988), 222; [Grundprobleme der Phänomenologie, ed. F.W. von Herrmann, Vol. 24 of Gesamtausgabe (Frankfurt am Main, Vittorio Klostermann, 1975), 317]; cf. also Being and Time, 9 (10–11). 35. Martin Heidegger, Being and Time, 42 (44–45); cf. Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 201 (296) and Martin Heidegger, What is a Thing? trans. W.B. Barton, Jr and Vera Deutsch (South Bend: Regnery/Gateway, 1967), 63; [Die Frage nach dem Ding (Tübingen: Max Niemeyer, 1975), 48]. 36. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, A 129–30, B 168–9. 37. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, A 147/B 187. 38. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, B 166. 39. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 57 (82–3). 40. Martin Heidegger, Being and Time, 16 (18). 41. Martin Heidegger, Being and Time, 23 (26). 180 Notes

42. Martin Heidegger, Being and Time, 20 (23). 43. Martin Heidegger, Kant and the Problem of Metaphysics, xvii (xiv). If this passage is intended to date the ‘discovery’ of the importance of the schematism, Heidegger was surely forgetful when he wrote this fourth preface (1973), since he had already lectured in the winter semester of 1925–26 on the crucial importance of the schematism. 44. Martin Heidegger, Being and Time, 21 (24). 45. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 114–15 (167). 46. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 3–4 (5). 47. Martin Heidegger, Kant and the Problem of Metaphysics, 46 (62). 48. Martin Heidegger, Being and Time, 149–50 (160). 49. Martin Heidegger, Kant and the Problem of Metaphysics, 113 (155). 50. Martin Heidegger, Basic Problems of Phenomenology, 60 (84–5). 51. Martin Heidegger, Kant and the Problem of Metaphysics, 141 (195). 52. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, A 15/B 29. 53. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, B xxvi. 54. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, B xxix. This and subsequent transla- tions from Kant are by the present writer except where noted. All emphases within quotations throughout this work are from the original source. 55. See Martin Heidegger, Kant and the Problem of Metaphysics, 117 (162). 56. This is to ignore entirely Kant’s conception of the ‘free play of the faculties’, which he developed in the Critique of Judgement. Heidegger pays little atten- tion to this work, although it might be argued that here Kant provides his own account of the role of freedom in transcendence. 57. Martin Heidegger, The Metaphysical Foundations of Logic, 164–5 (210). 58. Martin Heidegger, ‘On the Essence of Ground’, trans. William McNeill, in Pathmarks, ed. William McNeill (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998), 126; [‘Vom Wesen des Grundes’, in Wegmarken (Frankfurt am Main: Vittorio Klostermann, 1978), 162]. 59. Martin Heidegger, Kant and the Problem of Metaphysics, 118 (162); Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 189–90 (279). 60. Martin Heidegger, Kant and the Problem of Metaphysics, 109–12 (150–5). 61. Henri Declève, Heidegger et Kant (The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff, 1970), 35 (translation by the present writer). 62. Martin Heidegger, Kant and the Problem of Metaphysics, xvi–xvii (xiii–xiv). Heidegger had already made this change of mind public in 1950 in the foreword to the second edition: Kant and the Problem of Metaphysics, xx (xvii).

1. Laying the Foundations of Metaphysics in Ontology

1. Cf. Martin Heidegger, Being and Time, 7–9 (8–12); and ‘What is Metaphysics?’ in Pathmarks. 2. Martin Heidegger, Being and Time, 9 (10–11); Kant and the Problem of Metaphysics, 11 (16–17); Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 45–46 (66). Notes 181

3. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, B 22. 4. Martin Heidegger, Kant and the Problem of Metaphysics, 5 (8); see also Metaphysical Foundations of Logic, 57 (70). 5. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 9–11 (12–14); Kant and the Problem of Metaphysics, 4–6 (8–9). 6. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 11–12 (15–16). 7. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 18 (26). (The original ‘is previously concealed’ is here made gram- matically consistent as ‘was previously concealed’.) 8. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 19 (26). 9. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, B xiii; cf. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 22 (31). 10. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, B 5. 11. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 16–17 (23). 12. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 17 (23). 13. Martin Heidegger, Kant and the Problem of Metaphysics, 7 (11). 14. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 19 (27). 15. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 19 (27). 16. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 20 (28). 17. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 20 (28). 18. Martin Heidegger, Being and Time, 332 (363). 19. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 25 (36). 20. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 20 (29). 21. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 24 (34). 22. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 24 (35). 23. Martin Heidegger, ‘Phenomenology and Theology’, trans. James G. Hart and John C. Maraldo, in Pathmarks, 53–4; [‘Phänomenologie und Theologie’, in Wegmarken, 67]; see discussion in Logik: Die Frage nach der Wahrheit, ed. Walter Biemel, Vol. 21 of Gesamtausgabe (Frankfurt am Main: Vittorio Klostermann, 1976), 16–17. 24. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 26 (38). 25. Martin Heidegger, Being and Time, 8–9 (10). 26. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 25 (36). 27. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 25 (36). 182 Notes

28. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 25–6 (36–7). 29. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 26 (37); cf. Being and Time, 42 (45). 30. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, A 19/B 33. 31. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 57 (82). 32. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 57 (83); see also Kant and the Problem of Metaphysics, 15 (21). 33. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 57, 65 (83, 94). 34. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, A 19/B 33. 35. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 60 (87); see also Kant and the Problem of Metaphysics, 19 (25). 36. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, B 24. 37. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 27–9 (40–2). 38. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 35 (51). 39. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 33–5 (48–51). 40. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, B xvi. 41. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 38 (55). 42. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 38 (56); cf. Kant and the Problem of Metaphysics, 11 (12). 43. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 39–40 (57–9); Kant and the Problem of Metaphysics, 11 (16); Basic Problems of Phenomenology, 128 (180–1). 44. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, A 845/B 873; see also ‘Immanuel Kant über die von der König. Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Berlin für das Jahr 1791 ausgesetzte Preisfrage: Welches sind die wirklichen Fortschritte, die die Metaphysik seit Leibnitzens und Wolffs Zeiten in Deutschland gemacht hat?’, ed. Gerhard Lehmann, in Vol. 20 of Akademie-Ausgabe, 260. 45. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, A 247/B 303. 46. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, B 113. 47. Martin Heidegger, Kant and the Problem of Metaphysics, 141 (196). 48. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 64 (92). 49. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 62 (90). 50. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, A 15/B 29. 51. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 63 (91–2); Heidegger quotes from Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, A 835/B 863. 52. Martin Heidegger, Being and Time, 201 (218–19). 53. Martin Heidegger, Basic Problems of Phenomenology, 63 (88–9). Ronald P. Morrison has correctly noted the importance of Heidegger’s attacks on rep- resentationalism in his interpretation of Kant (‘Kant, Husserl, and Notes 183

Heidegger on Time and the Unity of Consciousness’, Philosophical and Phenomenological Research, 39, No. 2 (1978), 182). 54. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 15 (21). 55. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 16 (22). 56. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 30–1 (44). 57. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 13–14 (19). 58. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 14 (20). 59. Martin Heidegger, Being and Time, 64–5, 330 (68–9, 360–1). 60. Friedrich H. Jacobi, Vol. 2 of Werke, ed. R.F. Köpen (Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, 1968), 304–5. 61. G.W.F. Hegel, Logik, Vol. 4 of Sämtliche Werke, ed. H. Glockner (Stuttgart: Friedrich Frommann, 1965), 603–8. 62. Arthur Schopenhauer, Die Welt als Will und Vorstellung, Vols 2 and 3 of Sämtliche Werke, ed. A. Hübscher (Wiesbaden: F.U. Brockhaus, 1972), Vol. 2: 494–8, Vol. 3: 216. 63. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 67–8 (98); see also Kant and the Problem of Metaphysics, 22–3 (30–1), Metaphysical Foundations of Logic, 164 (209), and ‘On the Essence of Ground’, in Pathmarks, 116 (146). 64. Ronald P. Morrison, ‘Kant, Husserl, and Heidegger on Time and the Unity of Consciousness’, 195. 65. Robert W. Burch, ‘Heidegger and the Bounds of Sense’, Southwestern Journal of Philosophy, 6, No. 1 (1975), 27. 66. Grace A. de Laguna, On Existence and the Human World (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1966), 86–7. 67. Sandra B. Rosenthal and Patrick L. Bourgeois, ‘Lewis, Heidegger and Ontological Presence’, Philosophy Today, 27, No. 4/4 (1983), 292–4. 68. Martin Heidegger, Being and Time, 24, 63 (27, 67–8). 69. Martin Heidegger, Kant and the Problem of Metaphysics, 22 (30). 70. Jules Vuillemin, L’héritage Kantien et la révolution Copernicienne (Paris: Presses Universitaires de France, 1954), 257. 71. Mikel Dufrenne, ‘Heidegger et Kant’, Revue de la métaphysique et de morale, 54 (1949), 5; La Notion d’a priori (Paris: Presses Universitaires de France, 1959), 29. 72. Henri Declève, Heidegger et Kant, 129. 73. William F. Vallicella, ‘Kant, Heidegger and the Problem of the Thing in Itself’, International Philosophical Quarterly, 23 (1983), 40. 74. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 68 (99); cf. Metaphysical Foundations of Logic, 164 (209–10). 75. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, A 541/B 569, A 558/B 586. 76. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, A 252, B 307. 77. William Vallicella points out that Heidegger’s rejection of the concept of the thing in itself gives the appearance an independence that is incompati- ble with its status as a representation. This is correct in so far as the concept 184 Notes

of the appearance needs the purely negative concept of the thing in itself as a corrective. However, Vallicella goes too far when he claims that Heidegger thus transforms appearances into things in themselves. (William F. Vallicella, ‘Kant, Heidegger and the Problem of the Thing in Itself’, 39–40.)

2. The Transcendental Aesthetic and the Unity of the Faculties

1. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 40 (59). 2. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 58 (84). 3. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 70–1 (102). 4. Martin Heidegger, Being and Time, 79 (84–5); see also 80–1, 103 (86, 111). 5. Cf. Chapter 1 of the present work. 6. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, A 20/B 34. 7. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, A 23/B 38, A 30/B 46. 8. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 71 (103). 9. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 72 (104). 10. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, A 51/B 75. 11. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 85 (123). 12. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 85 (123). 13. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, A 266/B 322; cited in Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 86 (124). 14. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 97 (125–7). 15. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 88 (127–8); see also Heidegger’s Logik: Die Frage nach der Wahrheit, 274. 16. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 88–9 (128). 17. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 88 (127). 18. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, A 25/B 39–40, A 32/B 47–8; cf. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 80 (117). 19. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 89 (129); see also Logik: Die Frage nach der Wahrheit, 280. 20. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 92, 76 (131, 110). 21. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, A 34/B 50–1. 22. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 100 (145). Notes 185

23. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 102 (148–9); Logik: Die Frage nach der Wahrheit, 334–8. 24. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 104 (151); cf. also 183 (269). 25. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, B 67–8. 26. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 104 (152); see also Logik: Die Frage nach der Wahrheit, 338–9. 27. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, B 67–8. 28. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, B 160. 29. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, B 160–1. 30. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 92–3 (133–4). 31. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 93 (134). 32. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 93 (135). By the time he came to write Kant and the Problem of Metaphysics, Heidegger had dropped his objection to the term ‘synopsis’, so that in this work it serves for what is called ‘syndosis’ in the lectures. (Cf. Kant and the Problem of Metaphysics, 100 (137).) Furthermore, it should be noted that although Heidegger does not repeat this discussion of syndosis in the note to §26 for Kant and the Problem of Metaphysics, he clearly had not abandoned its application to this section. (Cf. Kant and the Problem of Metaphysics, 102n (140–1n).) 33. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 93 (135). 34. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 93 (135). 35. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 93 (135). 36. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 94–5 (136–7). 37. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 92 (134). 38. Paul Natorp, Die logischen Grundlagen der exakten Wissenschaften (Berlin and Leipzig: B.G. Teubner, 1910), 276; cf. reference in Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 91 (132). 39. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, B 161. 40. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, B 161. 41. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, B 159. 42. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, B 160. 43. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, B 160. 44. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, B 160–1. 45. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, B 160. 46. This is not intended to deny that space and time as forms of intuition are unities in some sense before the understanding acts upon them. However, they are unities through being singular, not through being a combination. The consciousness of space and time as uniﬁed manifolds, that is, space and time as intuited, must always be according to the categories. 47. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, B 160–1. 186 Notes

48. Cf. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 78 (113–14). 49. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, A 24/B 38–9 A 31/B 46. 50. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, A 25/B 39. 51. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, A 31–2/B 47. 52. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, A 19/B 33. 53. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, B 161. 54. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, B 136. 55. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, A 320/B 376–7. 56. Immanuel Kant, ‘On a Discovery According to which Any New Critique of Pure Reason Has Been Made Superﬂuous by an Earlier One’. In The Kant- Eberhard Controversy, ed. and trans. Henry E. Allison (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1973), 136; [Über eine Entdeckung, nach der alle neue Kritik der reinen Vernunft durch eine ältere entbehrlich gemacht werden soll, in Vol. 8 of Akademie-Ausgabe (Berlin: Georg Reimer, 1923), 222]. 57. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, A 140/B 179. 58. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, B 131. 59. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, B 154. 60. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, B 219. 61. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, A 197/B 242–3. 62. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, B 137. 63. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der Reinen Vernunft, B 151–2. 64. Immanuel Kant, ‘On a Discovery’, 135 (221–2). 65. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, B 150–1. 66. Immanuel Kant, ‘On a Discovery’, 136 (222–3). 67. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, B 161. 68. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, B 154, B 158. 69. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, B 150. 70. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, A 142/B 181. 71. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 95 (138).

3. Transcendental Logic and the Problem of Judgement

1. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 114 (166). 2. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, B 169. 3. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, A 86/B 118–19. 4. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 114 (166). 5. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 114–15 (167); cf. also Kant and the Problem of Metaphysics, 48 (65). 6. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 115 (168). 7. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, A 126. 8. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, A 68/B 93; Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 116–17 (170–1). Notes 187

9. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, A 77/B 102. 10. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, A 69/B 93–4; Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 116–17 (170–1). 11. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 118 (172). 12. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 118 (173). 13. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason. 119–20 (174–5); cf. also Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, A 55–6/B 79–80. 14. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, A 54–5/B 78–9. 15. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 122 (179). 16. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 123 (180–1). 17. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 124–5 (182–4). 18. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 127 (186). 19. Cf. Chapter 1 of the present volume. 20. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 129 (189). 21. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, A 58/B 82. 22. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 129–30 (189–90). 23. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 15 (21). 24. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 15 (20). 25. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 14 (20). 26. Martin Heidegger, Being and Time, 147–8 (157–8). 27. Martin Heidegger, Being and Time, 148 (158–9). 28. Martin Heidegger, Being and Time, 149 (159). 29. Martin Heidegger, Basic Problems of Phenomenology, 206 (293–4). 30. Martin Heidegger, Basic Problems of Phenomenology, 206–7 (294). 31. See a parallel discussion in Being and Time, 206–7 (224–5). 32. Martin Heidegger, Being and Time, 201 (218–19). 33. Martin Heidegger, Being and Time, 207–8 (226). 34. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 129 (189–90). 35. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 131 (193). 36. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 138 (203). 37. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 133 (195). 38. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, A 845–6/B 873–4. 188 Notes

39. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 136 (199–200). 40. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 140 (205). 41. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 140–1 (206). 42. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 150 (220). 43. Immanuel Kant, Logik (§3), in Vol. 9 of Akademie-Ausgabe (Berlin and Leipzig: Walter de Gruyter, 1923), 92. 44. Immanuel Kant, Logik (§1), Vol. 9 of Akademie-Ausgabe, 91. (‘Verschiedenen’ here could mean ‘many objects’ rather than ‘many representations’, but this does not make any significant change to the meaning of the passage.) 45. Immanuel Kant, Logik (§2), Vol. 9 of Akademie-Ausgabe, 91. Heidegger dis- cusses this in his Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 153–4 (225–7). 46. Immanuel Kant, Logik (§5), Vol. 9 of Akademie-Ausgabe, 93. 47. Immanuel Kant, Logik (§6), Vol. 9 of Akademie-Ausgabe, 94. 48. Cf. Heidegger’s discussion in his Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 155–61 (228–36). 49. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 153 (236); Kant and the Problem of Metaphysics, 37 (49). 50. Immanuel Kant, Logik (§5), Vol. 9 of Akademie-Ausgabe, 93. 51. Immanuel Kant, Logik (§5), Vol. 9 of Akademie-Ausgabe, 94. 52. Immanuel Kant, Logik (§5), Vol. 9 of Akademie-Ausgabe, 94. 53. Immanuel Kant, Logik (§3), Vol. 9 of Akademie-Ausgabe, 92. 54. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, A 56/B 80, A 86–7/B 118–19. 55. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 164 (241). 56. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 162 (238–9). 57. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 162–3 (239). 58. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 142–3, 150 (209, 220). 59. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 163 (240); see also Kant and the Problem of Metaphysics, 38 (51). 60. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, B 172–3. 61. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 168 (247). 62. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 168–9 (248). 63. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 170 (250); cf. also Kant and the Problem of Metaphysics, 38 (51). 64. Immanuel Kant, Reflexionen Kants zur kritischen Philosophie, ed. Benno Erdmann (Leipzig: Fues’s Verlag, 1882), Book 2, 172–3 (Reflection No. 544); cited in Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 170 (249) and Kant and the Problem of Metaphysics, 38–9 (51–2). Notes 189

65. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 170 (249–50). 66. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, A 320/B 377. 67. Immanuel Kant, Logik (§4), Vol. 9 of Akademie-Ausgabe, 93. 68. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 171 (251). 69. For the use of the term ‘Metaphysical Deduction’ in reference to deducing the categories from the table of judgements, see Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, B 159. 70. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, B 128; cf. also A 111. 71. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 171–2 (252); cf. also Kant and the Problem of Metaphysics, 46 (62). 72. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 172 (253). 73. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 211 (312). 74. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, A 69/B 94. 75. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 178 (262). 76. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 178 (261–2). 77. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, B 176–7; cf. also B 143. 78. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, A 245; cf. also A 247/B 304. 79. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, A 254/B 309.

4. The Relation of the Categories to Ontological Synthesis

1. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, A 76–80/B 102–5. For the application of the phrase ‘Metaphysical Deduction’ to this section, see B 159. 2. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 181 (265); Kant and the Problem of Metaphysics, 42–3 (57). 3. Martin Heidegger, Kant and the Problem of Metaphysics, 20 (27). 4. Martin Heidegger, Kant and the Problem of Metaphysics, 20 (27). The quota- tion from Kant is from the Logik (§17), Vol. 9 of Akademie-Ausgabe, 101. 5. See the discussion of reﬂection in Martin Heidegger, Kant and the Problem of Metaphysics, 36–7 (49); and Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 156 (229). 6. Martin Heidegger, Kant and the Problem of Metaphysics, 20 (28). 7. Martin Heidegger, Being and Time, 28–9 (32–3). 8. Martin Heidegger, Kant and the Problem of Metaphysics, 20 (28). 9. Martin Heidegger, Kant and the Problem of Metaphysics, 42 (57). 10. Martin Heidegger, Kant and the Problem of Metaphysics, 42 (57). 11. Martin Heidegger, Kant and the Problem of Metaphysics, 43 (57). 12. Heidegger does not indeed make it perfectly obvious that there is both an empirical and a pure veritative synthesis. This has led Henri Declève to claim mistakenly that ‘veritative’ refers solely to the a priori synthesis (Heidegger et Kant, 122). However it is clear that Heidegger’s earlier reference 190 Notes

to veritative synthesis (Kant and the Problem of Metaphysics, 20 (27)) is to an empirical synthesis, for in this veritative synthesis a being is made manifest. 13. In his Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 211 (311), Heidegger also equates the ‘pure predicative synthesis’ with the ‘veritative’ synthesis. However, since these lectures contain no sure reference to the set of the veritative, apophantic and predicative syntheses, we can put this inconsistency down to Heidegger not having stabilized his terminology in this respect. 14. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, A 77/B 102. 15. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 183 (269). 16. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, B 67–8. 17. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, A 77/B 103. 18. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, A 77/B 103. 19. Heidegger does leave open the possibility of this synthesis being a more broadly conceived kind of syndosis, but he discounts the possibility of this synthesis being mere syndosis as had been discussed in his treatment of the Transcendental Aesthetic. Cf. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 185, 187–8 (272, 276). 20. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 185 (272–3); Kant and the Problem of Metaphysics, 44 (59). 21. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 187 (275); Kant and the Problem of Metaphysics, 44–5 (60). 22. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, A 78/B 103. 23. By the time he came to revise the Critique of Pure Reason for its second edition, Kant had decided that the function of the mere understanding was also a synthesis, but a purely intellectual, non-imaginative synthesis. See Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, B 151. 24. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, A 94; cf. also A 115. 25. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, A 119; but see A 124. 26. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, A 97–8. 27. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, A 15/B 29. 28. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 189 (278); cf. also Kant and the Problem of Metaphysics, 96 (132). 29. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 147 (216); Kant and the Problem of Metaphysics, 112–13 (155). 30. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, B 130, B 152. 31. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, A 78/B 103; cited in Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 191 (281). 32. Immanuel Kant, Anthropologie in pragmatischer Hinsicht (§28), Vol. 7 of Akademie–Ausgabe, 167. This deﬁnition is also given in the second edition of the Critique of Pure Reason, at B 151. 33. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 189 (278); cf. also Kant and the Problem of Metaphysics, 91 (123–4). 34. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, A 121. 35. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, A 140/B 179. 36. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, B 152. 37. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, A 78/B 104. Notes 191

38. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 192 (282–3). 39. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, A 78/B 104. 40. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 192 (283). 41. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 193 (284). 42. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 192 (284). 43. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, A 78–9/B 104. 44. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 194 (286). 45. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 196 (288). 46. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, A 79/B 104–5. 47. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 196 (289). (The translation breaks the second sentence of the original German into two.) 48. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 196–7 (289). 49. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 197 (289). There is an error in the translation here, which I have emended: Emad and Maly translate ‘vermittelst’ as ‘by no means’. In their translation of the passage by Kant, they properly translate ‘vermittelst’ as ‘by means of’, and this is the term that Heidegger is pointing out, rather than the ‘ganz und gar nicht’ of his own text a few lines earlier, which they translate as ‘by no means.’ 50. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 197 (290). 51. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 198 (290). 52. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, A 78/B 104. 53. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, A 79/B 104. 54. See Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, A 116–19. 55. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 198–200 (290–3). 56. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 198 (291–2). 57. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 198 (291). 58. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, A 81/B 107. 59. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 201 (295). 60. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 201 (295–6). 61. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 201–2 (296). 62. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 203 (299). 192 Notes

63. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 205 (301). 64. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 205 (302).

5. The Problem of the Transcendental Deduction

1. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, A 76–80/B 102–5. 2. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, A 85/B 117. 3. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, A 84–5/B 116–17. 4. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 209 (309). 5. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 208 (307). 6. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, A xii. 7. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 209 (307–8). 8. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 212 (312–13). 9. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 212 (313). 10. Martin Heidegger, Basic Problems of Phenomenology, 206 (294). 11. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 213 (314). Emad and Maly use the hypenated ‘ob-ject’ to stand for ‘Objekt’ rather than ‘Gegenstand’. 12. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 212 (313); cf. Logik: Die Frage nach der Wahrheit, 331–3. 13. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, B xvi, A 127–8. 14. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 210 (310); Kant and the Problem of Metaphysics, 61 (83). 15. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 211 (311–12). 16. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, A 89/B 122. 17. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 224 (330); Kant and the Problem of Metaphysics, 61 (83–4). 18. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 213–14 (315). 19. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 224 (330). 20. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 215–16 (318). 21. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 216 (318). 22. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, A 92/B 124–5; (reading, with Erdmann, ‘Vorstellungen’ for ‘Vorstellung’ in the ﬁrst sentence). 23. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, A 92/B 125; discussed in Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 216–17 (319–20); cf. also Kant and the Problem of Metaphysics, 50–1 (68). Notes 193

24. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 217–18 (321); cf. also Kant and the Problem of Metaphysics, 51 (69). 25. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, A 93/B 125–6; cited in Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 218 (321). 26. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 218 (321–2). 27. Martin Heidegger, Kant and the Problem of Metaphysics, 51 (69). Taft’s term ‘taking in stride’ translates ‘hinnehmende’, which I read as ‘receptive’. I have also added the missing ‘t’ in ‘nicht’. 28. Charles Sherover has rightly noted that Heidegger emphasizes that the doctrine of the transcendental object is about the ontological structures that are involved in the appearing of an object as an object (Heidegger, Kant and Time, 91). 29. Mikel Dufrenne, La Notion d’a priori (Paris: Presses Universitaires de France, 1959), 70. 30. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 218 (322). 31. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, B 128; cited in Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 219 (322–3). 32. This conception of a ‘real definition’ differs from the real definition that Kant said was not possible for the categories. ‘Real definition’ in this latter context is the definite relation of a concept to a specific object, such as the relation of the concept of a triangle to the presentation of that triangle in intuition (Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, A 241–2). 33. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 219 (323). 34. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 219 (323); cf. also Kant and the Problem of Metaphysics, 49 (66). 35. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 219 (323). I have corrected the translation here: Emad and Maly’s text reads ‘sometimes only notions and something categories’. 36. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 219–20 (324). 37. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 220 (324); cf. also Kant and the Problem of Metaphysics, 49 (66–7). 38. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, A 78/B 103. 39. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 227 (335). 40. This threefold synthesis as such is entirely lacking in the second edition of the Critique of Pure Reason. 41. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 230 (339). 42. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 230 (339–40); see also Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, A 108–10. 43. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 227–8 (336). 194 Notes

44. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 228 (337). 45. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 229 (338). 46. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, A 111. 47. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, A 120. 48. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 231 (340–1); Kant and the Problem of Metaphysics, 124–5 (171–2). 49. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 229 (338); see also Kant and the Problem of Metaphysics, 124–5 (173). 50. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, A 245, B 309. 51. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, A 98–9. 52. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 231–2 (341–2); citing Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, A 78/B 103. 53. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 232 (342–3). 54. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 232 (343). 55. For a discussion of Heidegger’s attempted proof of syndosis with the context of the second edition of the Critique of Pure Reason, see Chapter 2 of the present work. 56. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 231 (341). 57. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, A 99. 58. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, A 99; discussed in Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 233–4 (343–5) and Kant and the Problem of Metaphysics, 125–6 (173–4). 59. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 234 (346). 60. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, A 99–100; Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 235 (347). 61. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 235 (347). 62. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 235–6 (347–8); cf. Kant and the Problem of Metaphysics, 126 (174). 63. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 236 (348). 64. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 229 (338). 65. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, A 97. 66. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 58 (84). 67. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, B 160n. 68. It seems silly to say that space and time cannot be understood without being understood, but this is an exact statement of the problem. The radical incomprehensibility of time and space ‘in themselves’ would seem to be the reason why in the second edition Kant emphasized (especially in Notes 195

the section headings) that he was dealing with the concepts of space and time (note the changes at Kritik der reinen Vernunft, A 20, B 34). 69. This concerns the actual consistency of images, not the consciousness of their sameness, which belongs to the synthesis of recognition. 70. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, A 102. 71. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, A 102. 72. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 239 (352); see also Kant and the Problem of Metaphysics, 127 (176). 73. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 239 (353). 74. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 239 (353). 75. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 239 (353); see also Kant and the Problem of Metaphysics, 128 (177). 76. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, A 102; cited in Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 354. 77. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 239–40 (354). 78. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 240 (354); Kant and the Problem of Metaphysics, 128 (177). 79. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 240 (354). 80. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 240 (354). 81. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, A 103. 82. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, A 103. 83. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, A 104–5. 84. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, A 106. 85. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, A 107. 86. This assertion that apperception is the basis of the purest objective unity might be taken as an argument against Heidegger’s claim that time has its own unity that is not dependent upon understanding. However, Heidegger could argue that it is only the ‘concepts’ of space and time that are at issue here, not their unities as intuitions. 87. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, A 109. 88. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, A 111; (reading, with Erdmann, ‘oben’ for the ﬁrst ‘eben’ in the second sentence). 89. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, A 111–12. 90. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 240 (355). 91. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 258 (381). 92. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 240–1 (355). 93. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 241 (355). 94. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 241 (356–7). 196 Notes

95. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 242–3 (358–9). 96. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 244–6 (360–3). By the time he wrote Kant and the Problem of Metaphysics, Heidegger had dropped this rather trivial objection to the word ‘recognition’ (although he still equates it with identiﬁcation). He even acknowledges that Kant’s choice of word is particularly appropriate (Kant and the Problem of Metaphysics, 130 (180)). 97. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 246 (363). 98. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 246 (364). 99. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 246 (364). 100. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 246 (364); see also Kant and the Problem of Metaphysics, 130 (180). 101. It should be noted that Heidegger does not seem to maintain a rigid distinction between identiﬁcation and precognition. 102. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 248 (367). 103. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 248 (366–7). 104. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 248 (367). 105. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 246 (364). 106. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 247 (365). 107. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 247 (365). 108. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, A 98–9. 109. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, A 99–100. 110. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, B 160n. 111. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, A 118; see also B 152. 112. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, B 151. 113. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, B 1.

6. Apperception, Objectivity and Temporality

1. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 249 (368). 2. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, A 104–10. 3. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 250 (369). 4. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 250 (369–70). 5. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 250–1 (370). 6. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, A 533/B 561, A 539–41/B 567–9. Notes 197

7. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 252 (372–3). 8. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 254 (373). 9. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 254 (375). 10. See Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, A 117n. 11. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kan’s Critique of Pure Reason, 256, 258 (379, 381). 12. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 254 (375). 13. See also Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, B 131ff. 14. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, A 341/B 399. 15. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 255 (376); see also Kant and the Problem of Metaphysics, 105 (145). 16. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 255 (376). The translation’s ‘we can not also say’ corrected to ‘we can now (jetzt) also say’. 17. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 255 (377). 18. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 259 (383). 19. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 257–8 (380). 20. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 258 (381). 21. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 260 (384–5). 22. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, A 111; cited by Heidegger in his Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 260–1 (385). 23. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 263 (388). 24. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, B 131. 25. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 263 (389). 26. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 264 (389). 27. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 264 (390). 28. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 264 (390); see also Being and Time, 333 (365). 29. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 264 (390). 30. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 264 (390). 31. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 265 (391); see also Kant and the Problem of Metaphysics, 133 (183–4). 32. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 265 (391). 198 Notes

33. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 266 (393). 34. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, B 159–61; A 99–100; see also B 67–8. 35. Ernest Joos, ‘Langage et Mythe ou Temps à Trois Dimensions chez Heidegger’, Dialogue, 10 (1971), 53. 36. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, A 77; cited in Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 265 (391). 37. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 267 (394). 38. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 267 (394); see also Kant and the Problem of Metaphysics, 134 (186). Heidegger himself refers us to his independent discussion of the temporality of the self in his Being and Time, §61 ff. and §78 ff. 39. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 267–8 (395). 40. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, A 177/B 220. 41. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 268 (395). 42. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 268 (395). 43. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 247–8 (366). 44. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 268 (396); Logik: Die Frage nach der Wahrheit, 323; Basic Problems of Phenomenology, 126–7 (177–80). 45. Kant was quite explicit about prudence as a maxim in philosophy. See his Kritik der reinen Vernunft, A 241. 46. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 269 (397). 47. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 269 (397). 48. See Heinrich Levy (‘Heideggers Kantinterpretation’, Logos, 21 (1932), 37) for a typical example. 49. Martin Heidegger, Kant and the Problem of Metaphysics, 121 (166). 50. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 269 (397–8). 51. Plato, Republic, Book VII, 514–17. 52. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 269–70 (398). 53. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 269 (397). 54. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 271 (400). 55. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 271 (400). 56. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, A 111. 57. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 272 (402). Notes 199

58. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 272 (402). 59. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, A 139–40/B 178–9. 60. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 273 (402–3). 61. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, A 115. 62. It might not be strictly accurate to say that the imagination is exactly equivalent to temporality. In one place Heidegger does seem to suggest that imagination is rather a direct outgrowth of temporality. It seems likely though that, in the context of cognition, imagination and temporality can be treated as equivalent. For the possible distinction, see Martin Heidegger, Kant and the Problem of Metaphysics, 137 (190). 63. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, A 116–19. 64. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, A 119–23. 65. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 274 (404). 66. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 275 (406). 67. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 275 (406). 68. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, A 117n. 69. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, B 129–30. 70. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 275–6 (407). 71. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, A 116–17. 72. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 277 (408–9). 73. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, A 116–17. 74. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 277 (409). 75. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, A 118; cited in Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 278 (410). 76. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 278 (410). 77. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 278 (411); Kant and the Problem of Metaphysics, 56 (77). 78. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 278 (410–11). 79. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 189–90, 279 (279, 412); Kant and the Problem of Metaphysics, 112, 118 (155, 162); Logik: Die Frage nach der Wahrheit, 378. 80. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, A 116–18. 81. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 278–9 (411); see also Kant and the Problem of Metaphysics, 56–7 (77). 82. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 279 (411); Kant and the Problem of Metaphysics, 57 (77). 83. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, A 118. 84. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, A 119. 200 Notes

85. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 281 (414). 86. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 281 (414–15). 87. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 285 (420). 88. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 285 (421). 89. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 283 (417–18). 90. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, A 124. 91. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, A 124 and B 151. 92. Kant in fact expressly contrasts receptivity with the function of the imagination. See his Kritik der reinen Vernunft, A 120n and A 97. 93. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 276 (407–8). 94. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 283 (417). 95. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 283 (417). By ‘beings in themselves’, Heidegger does not of course mean what Kant calls ‘things in themselves’, but rather that the beings are independent of our consciousness. 96. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 284 (419). 97. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, A 541/B 569. 98. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 286 (422). 99. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, A 158/B 197. 100. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 288 (425). 101. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 288–9 (425). 102. Martin Heidegger, Kant and the Problem of Metaphysics, 88 (120). 103. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 289 (426). 104. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, A 161/B 200. 105. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 289–90 (427). 106. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 290 (427). 107. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 291 (429); Kant and the Problem of Metaphysics, 63 (86); Logik: Die Frage nach der Wahrheit, 357–8. 108. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 86 (125). Basic Problems of Phenomenology is a contemporary lecture course that likewise does not provide all that it promises. Compare Heidegger’s initial outline of the course to the table of contents of the work as published. Basic Problems of Phenomenology, 24 (32–3). 109. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, A 138/B 177. Notes 201

110. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 292 (431). 111. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, A 138–9/B 177–8. 112. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, A 140/B 179–80. 113. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, A 140/B 179–80. 114. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, A 111. 115. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, A 142/B 181. 116. Martin Heidegger, Kant and the Problem of Metaphysics, 71 (97). 117. Martin Heidegger, Kant and the Problem of Metaphysics, 68 (93) (spelling of ‘Schema’ corrected). 118. Martin Heidegger, Kant and the Problem of Metaphysics, 70 (96). 119. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, A 140/B 179–80. 120. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, A 142/B 181. 121. Martin Heidegger, Kant and the Problem of Metaphysics, 72 (98–9); Logik: Die Frage nach der Wahrheit, 376. 122. Martin Heidegger, Kant and the Problem of Metaphysics, 73 (100); see also Logik: Die Frage nach der Wahrheit, 376–7. 123. Martin Heidegger, Kant and the Problem of Metaphysics, 74 (100–1); see also Logik: Die Frage nach der Wahrheit, 377. 124. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, A 138-9/B 177–8; Martin Heidegger, Kant and the Problem of Metaphysics, 74 (101). 125. See Chapter 4 of the present work. 126. Martin Heidegger, Kant and the Problem of Metaphysics, 77–8 (105–6). Heidegger’s quotations are from Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, A 78/B 104. 127. Martin Heidegger, Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, 142–3, 150, 163 (209, 220, 240); Kant and the Problem of Metaphysics, 38 (51). 128. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, A 111. 129. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, A 245–8, B 303–6. 130. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, A 119. 131. Immanuel Kant, Kritik der reinen Vernunft, B 151–2.

Conclusion

1. Martin Heidegger, Kant and the Problem of Metaphysics, 96–7n (132n). 2. Heinrich Levy, ‘Heideggers Kantinterpretation’, Logos, 21 (1932), 25. 3. Martin Heidegger, Kant and the Problem of Metaphysics, xvii (xiii). 4. Martin Heidegger, Contributions to Philosophy (From Enowning), 317 (451). Bibliography

Alexander, Edwin. ‘Hermeneutical Violence’, Philosophy Today, 25 (1981), 286–306. Alphéus, Karl. ‘Was ist der Mensch? (Nach Kant und Heidegger)’, Kant-Studien, 59 (1968), 187–98. Barrett, William. What is Existentialism? (New York: Grove Press, 1964). ——– ‘Introduction’. In Heidegger, Kant and Time, Charles Sherover (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1971), ix–xiii. Bollnow, Otto Friedrich. ‘Über Heideggers Verhältnis zu Kant’, Neue Jahrbücher für Wissenschaft und Jugendbildung, 9 (1933), 222–31. Burch, Robert W. ‘Heidegger and the Bounds of Sense’, Southwestern Journal of Philosophy, 6, No. 1 (1975), 27–30. Cassirer, Ernst. ‘Kant and the Problem of Metaphysics: Remarks on Martin Heidegger’s Interpretation of Kant’. In Kant: Disputed Questions, ed. Moltke Gram (Chicago: Quadrangle Books, 1967), 131–57. ——– ‘Kant und das Problem der Metaphysik: Bemerkungen zu Martin Heideggers Kant-Interpretation’, Kant-Studien, 36 (1931), 1–26. Declève, Henri. Heidegger et Kant (The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff, 1970). ——– ‘Heidegger et Cassirer interprètes de Kant’, Revue Philosophique de Louvain, 67 (1971), 517–45. Dufrenne, Mikel. ‘Heidegger et Kant’, Revue de la métaphysique et de morale, 54 (1949), 1–28. ——– La Notion d’a priori (Paris: Presses Universitaires de France, 1959). ——– The Notion of the A Priori, trans. Edward S. Casey (Evanston: Northwestern University Press, 1966). Fay, Thomas A. Heidegger: the Critique of Logic (The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff, 1977). ——– ‘Heidegger: the Origin and Development of Symbolic Logic’, Kant-Studien, 69, No. 4 (1978), 444–60. Gram, Moltke S. The Transcendental Turn (Gainesville: University of Florida Press, 1984). Grene, Marjorie. Martin Heidegger (London: Bowes & Bowes, 1957). Hegel, G.W.F. Logik. Vol. 4 of Sämtliche Werke, ed. H. Glockner (Stuttgart: Friedrich Frommann, 1965). Heidegger, Martin. Basic Problems of Phenomenology, trans. Albert Hofstadter (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1988). ——– Basic Questions of Philosophy, trans. Richard Roycewicz and André Schuwer (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1994). ——– Being and Time, trans. John Macquarrie and Edward Robinson (New York: Harper and Row, 1962). ——– Being and Time, trans. Joan Stambaugh (Albany: State University of New York Press, 1996). ——– Beiträge zur Philosophie, ed. F.W. von Herrmann. Vol. 65 of Gesamtausgabe (Frankfurt am Main: Vittorio Klostermann, 1989).

202 Bibliography 203

——– Contributions to Philosophy (From Enowning), trans. Parvis Emad and Kenneth Maly (Bloomington and Indianapolis: Indiana University Press, 1999). ——– ‘Ernst Cassirer: Philosophy of Symbolic Forms. Part Two: Mythical Thought. Berlin 1925’, trans. Peter Warneck. In Martin Heidegger, Kant and The Problem of Metaphysics. trans. Richard Taft (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1997). ——– Die Frage nach dem Ding (Tübingen: Max Niemeyer, 1975). ——– Grundfragen der Philosophie. Ausgewählte ‘Probleme’ der ‘Logik’, ed. Friedrich- Wilhelm von Herrmann. Vol. 45 of Gesamtausgabe (Frankfurt am Main: Vittorio Klostermann, 1984). ——– Grundprobleme der Phänomenologie, ed. F.W. von Herrmann. Vol. 24 of Gesamtausgabe (Frankfurt am Main: Vittorio Klostermann, 1975). ——– History of the Concept of Time: Prologomena, trans. Theodore Kisiel (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1985). ——– Kant and the Problem of Metaphysics, trans. J.S. Churchill (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1962). ——– Kant and the Problem of Metaphysics, trans. Richard Taft (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1997). ——– Kant und das Problem der Metaphysik. 4th edn (Frankfurt am Main: Vittorio Klostermann, 1973). ——– Logik: Der Frage nach der Wahrheit, ed. Walter Biemel. Vol. 21 of Gesamtausgabe (Frankfurt am Main: Vittorio Klostermann, 1976). ——– Metaphysical Foundations of Logic, trans. Michael Heim (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1984). ——– Metaphysische Anfangsgründe der Logik im Ausgang von Leibniz, ed. Klaus Held. Vol. 26 of Gesamtausgabe (Frankfurt am Main: Vittorio Klostermann, 1978). ——– Pathmarks, ed. William McNeill (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998). ——– Phänomenologische Interpretation von Kants Kritik der reinen Vernunft, ed. Ingtraud Görland. Vol. 25 of Gesamtausgabe (Frankfurt am Main: Vittorio Klostermann, 1977). ——– Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, trans. Parvis Emad and Kenneth Maly (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1997). ——– Prologomena zur Geschichte des Zeitbegriffs, ed. Petra Jaeger. Vol. 20 of Gesamtausgabe (Frankfurt am Main: Vittorio Klostermann, 1979). ——– ‘Review of Mythische Denken. Vol. 2 of Philosophie der symbolischen Formen, Ernst Cassirer’. Deutsche Literaturzeitung, 49 (1928), 1000–12. ——– Sein und Zeit (Tübingen: Max Niemeyer, 1979). ——– Vom Wesen der menschlichen Freiheit, ed. Hartmut Tietjen. Vol. 31 of Gesamtausgabe (Frankfurt am Main: Vittorio Klostermann, 1982). ——– Wegmarken (Frankfurt am Main: Vittorio Klostermann, 1978). ——– What is a Thing?, trans. W.B. Barton, Jr and Vera Deutsch (South Bend: Regnery/Gateway, 1967). Hoppe, Hansgeorg. ‘Wandlungen in der Kant-Auffassung Heideggers’. In Durchblicke: Martin Heidegger zum 80. Geburtstag, ed. Vittorio Klostermann (Frankfurt am Main: Vittorio Klostermann, 1970), 284–317. Jacobi, Friedrich Heinrich. Werke, ed. Roth F. Köpen (Darmstadt: Wissen- schaftliche Buchgesellschaft, 1968). 204 Bibliography

Joos, Ernest. ‘Langage et Mythe ou Temps à Trois Dimensions chez Heidegger’, Dialogue, 10 (1971), 47–59. Kant, Immanuel. Anthropologie in pragmatischer Hinsicht, ed. Otto Schöndörfer. In Vol. 8 of Immanuel Kants Werke (Berlin: Bruno Cassirer, 1923), 1–228. Also in Vol. 7 of Kants gesammelte Schriften (=Akademie-Ausagabe) (Berlin: Georg Reimer, 1907), 117–333. ——– Anthropology from a Pragmatic Point of View, trans. Mary J. Gregor (The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff, 1974). ——– Critique of Judgement, trans. J.H. Bernard (New York: Hafner, 1951). ——– Critique of Judgment, trans. Werner S. Pluhar (Indianapolis: Hackett Publishers, 1987). ——– Critique of Practical Reason, trans. Lewis White Beck (Indianapolis: Bobbs- Merrill, 1956). ——– Critique of Pure Reason, trans. Norman Kemp Smith (New York: St Martin’s Press, 1965). ——– Critique of Pure Reason, trans. Werner S. Pluhar (Indianapolis: Hackett Publishers, 1996). ——– Critique of Pure Reason, trans. and ed. Paul Guyer and Allen W. Wood (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997). ——– Kritik der praktischen Vernunft, ed. Karl Vorländer (Hamburg: Felix Meiner, 1974). ——– Kritik der reinen Vernunft, ed. Raymund Schmidt (Hamburg: Felix Meiner, 1976). ——– Kritik der Urteilskraft, ed. Karl Vorländer (Hamburg: Felix Meiner, 1974). ——– Logic, trans. Robert S. Hartman and Wolfgang Schwarz (Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill, 1974). ——– Logik, ed. Arthur Buchenau. In Vol. 8 of Immanuel Kants Werke (Berlin: Bruno Cassirer, 1923), 324–452. Also in Vol. 9 of Akademie-Ausgabe (Berlin and Leipzig: Walter de Gruyter, 1923), 1–87. ——– On a Discovery According to which Any New Critique of Pure Reason Has Been Made Superﬂuous by an Earlier One. In The Kant-Eberhard Controversy, ed. and trans. Henry E. Allison (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University, 1973), 107–60. ——– Prologomena to Any Future Metaphysics, trans. Lewis White Beck (Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill, 1977). ——– Prologomena zu einer jeden künftigen Metaphysik, die als Wissenschaft wird auftreten können, ed. Karl Vorländer (Hamburg: Felix Meiner, 1976). ——– Reﬂexionen Kants zur kritischen Philosophie, ed. Benno Erdmann (Leipzig: Fues’s Verlag, 1882). ——– Über eine Entdeckung, nach der alle neue Kritik der reinen Vernunft durch eine ältere entbehrlich gemacht werden soll, ed. A. Buchenau, E. Cassirer and B. Kellermann. In Vol. 6 of Immanuel Kants Werke (Berlin: Bruno Cassirer, 1923), 1–71. Also in Vol. 8 of Akademie-Ausgabe (Berlin: Georg Reimer, 1912), 185–251. ——– Welches sind die wirklichen Fortschritte, die die Metaphysik seit Leibnizens und Wolffs Zeiten in Deutschland gemacht hat?, ed. Otto Buek. In Vol. 8 of Immanuel Kants Werke (Berlin: Bruno Cassirer, 1923), 233–321. Also in Vol. 20 of Akademie-Ausgabe (Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 1942), 255–332. ——– What Real Progress Has Metaphysics Made in Germany since the Time of Leibniz and Wolff?, trans. Ted Humphrey (New York: Abaris Books, 1983). Bibliography 205

Krüger, Gerhard. ‘Über Kants Lehre von der Zeit’. In Anteile: Martin Heidegger zum 60. Geburtstag (Frankfurt am Main: Vittorio Klostermann, 1950), 178–211. Laguna, Grace A. de. On Existence and the Human World (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1966). Langan, Thomas. ‘Foreword’. In Kant and the Problem of Metaphysics, Martin Heidegger, trans. J.S. Churchill (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1962), ix–xiii. ——– The Meaning of Heidegger (New York: Columbia University Press, 1966). Levy, Heinrich. ‘Heideggers Kantinterpretation’, Logos, 21 (1932), 1–43. Löwith, Karl. Heidegger: Denker in dürftiger Zeit (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck and Ruprecht, 1960). Martin, Gottfried. Immanuel Kant, Ontologie und Wissenschaftstheorie (Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 1969). ——– Kant’s Metaphysics and Theory of Science, trans. P.G. Lucas (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1955). Mizera, Januz. ‘Some Remarks about Heidegger’s Interpretation of Kant’, Reports on Philosophy, 6 (1982), 35–48. Moreiras, Alberto. ‘Heidegger, Kant, and the Problem of Transcendence’, Southern Journal of Philosophy, 24, No. 1 (1986), 81–93. Morrison, Ronald P. ‘Kant, Husserl, and Heidegger on Time and the Unity of Consciousness’, Philosophical and Phenomenological Research, 39, No. 2 (1978), 182–98. Natorp, Paul. Die logischen Grundlagen der exakten Wissenschaften (Berlin and Leipzig: B.G. Teubner, 1910). Piché, Claude. ‘La Schématisme de la Raison Pure. Contribution au dossier Heidegger-Kant’, Études philosophiques, No. 1 (1986), 79–99. Pöggeler, Otto. Der Denkweg Martin Heideggers (Tübingen: Neske, 1963). ——– Martin Heidegger’s Path of Thought, trans. Daniel Magurshak and Sigmund Barber (Atlantic Highlands: Humanities Press, 1987). Richardson, William J. Heidegger: Through Phenomenology to Thought (The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff, 1967). ——– ‘Kant and the Later Heidegger’. In Phenomenology in America, ed. James M. Edie (Chicago: Quadrangle Books, 1967), 125–44. Rosenthal, Sandra B. and Patrick L. Bourgeois. ‘Lewis, Heidegger, and Kant: Schemata and the Structure of Perceptual Experience’, Southern Journal of Philosophy, 17, No. 2 (1979), 239–48. ——– ‘Lewis, Heidegger and Ontological Presence’, Philosophy Today, 27, No. 4/4 (1983), 290–6. Rotenstreich, Nathan. ‘Schematism and Freedom’, Revue Internationale de Philosophie, 28, No. 4 (1974), 464–74. Schalow, Frank. Imagination and Existence: Heidegger’s Retrieval of Kant’s Ethic (Lanham: University Press of America, 1986). ——– The Renewal of the Heidegger-Kant Dialogue: Action, Thought, and Responsibility (Albany: State University of New York Press, 1992). Schopenhauer, Arthur. Die Welt als Will und Vorstellung. Vols. 2 and 3 of Sämtliche Werke, ed. A. Hübscher (Wiesbaden: F.U. Brockhaus, 1972). Schrag, Calvin O. ‘Heidegger and Cassirer on Kant’, Kant-Studien, 58 (1967), 87–100. 206 Bibliography

Seidel, George J. Being, Nothing and God: a Philosophy of Appearance (Assen: Van Gorcum and Co., 1970). Sherover, Charles. ‘Heidegger’s Ontology and the Copernican Revolution’, The Monist, 51 (1967), 456–70. ——– ‘Kant’s Transcendental Object and Heidegger’s Nichts’, Journal of the History of Philosophy, 7, No. 4 (1969), 413–22. ——– Heidegger, Kant and Time (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1971). Smith, F. Joseph. ‘Heidegger’s Kant Interpretation’, Philosophy Today, 11, No. 4/4 (1967), 257–64. Sontag, Frederick. ‘Heidegger and the Problem of Metaphysics’, Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 24 (1964), 410–16. Spiegelberg, Herbert. The Phenomenological Movement: a Historical Introduction (The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff, 1982). Taminiaux, Jacques. ‘Finitude et Absolu: Remarques sur Hegel et Heidegger, interprètes de Kant’, Revue Philosophique de Louvain, 69 (1971), 190–215. Vallicella, William F. ‘Kant, Heidegger and the Problem of the Thing in Itself’, International Philosophical Quarterly, 23, (1983), 35–44. Van de Wiele, Jozef. ‘Kant et Heidegger. Le Sens d’une Opposition’, Revue Philosophique de Louvain, 76, (1978), 29–53. Vuillemin, Jules. L’héritage Kantien et la révolution Copernicienne. Fichte, Cohen, Heidegger (Paris: Presses Universitaires de France, 1954). Weatherston, Martin. ‘Formal Intuitions and the Categories’, International Studies in Philosophy, XXV/3 (1993), 75–86. ——– ‘Heidegger on Assertion and Kantian Intuition’, Journal of Speculative Philosophy, 5, No. 4 (1991), 276–97. ——– ‘The Rigour of Heidegger’s Thought’, Man and World, 25, No. 2 (1992), 181–98. Index

Aesthetic, Transcendental 30, ﬁnitude 19, 30–1, 35, 37–42, 69, 41–51, 53, 56–9, 65, 119–20 109, 146, 151–2, 156–7, 162–4, affection 88, 90, 107; self-affection 167–8, 173–6 88, 145–8 form 12, 43–51, 53–8, 61–4, 70–1, analytic, transcendental 33 77–80, 88, 93–6, 99–100, 107, apophantic 34, 35, 72; see also 109–12, 115, 120, 124, 128, 131, synthesis, apophantic 133, 135–6, 138, 142, 147–8, 156, apperception, transcendental 55–6, 160–1, 167, 169, 174 60–5, 89, 91, 97, 125–9, 131, 133–4, freedom 8, 9, 16–21, 24, 27, 32, 39, 137–51, 153–67 43, 117, 139–42, 149, 151–3, 163–4, Aristotle 14, 70, 72–3, 99–100, 151 175 assertion, statement, proposition (Aussage) 9–15, 35, 71–6, 79, 86, groundlaying, transcendental 24, 99–100, 105 28–9, 32–3, 35–6

Being and Time 2, 4, 8–9, 13, 15–16, handy, to hand (zuhanden) 36, 43, 43, 70, 87, 165 72 Hegel 37, 151 categories 10–16, 33–5, 50, 52–67, 75–6, 78–85, 91–114, 126–8, 132–3, Idealism, German 39, 175 136, 140–3, 147–8, 153–5, 160–1, imagination, reproductive 113–14, 165–76 116, 120–5, 128–30, 132, 134–6, 138, 142, 144, 158, 162 Dasein 11, 15, 19–20, 24, 29, 36, 43, imagination, transcendental 1–2, 70, 72, 74–5, 105–6, 111–13, 140, 15–17, 19–21, 44–5, 53, 60–1, 151–2, 161, 164 64–6, 83, 89–101, 106, 110–16, deduction, metaphysical 81, 85, 118–20, 122–3, 129, 133–4, 136, 101, 111 155–77 Deduction, Transcendental 6, intuition 12–13, 15–16, 18, 30–1, 11–12, 15–16, 34–5, 50, 53–5, 57, 34–69, 71, 75–7, 79, 81–99, 67, 78, 101–37, 140, 143–5, 155–8, 103–5, 107–10, 112–14, 116–28, 162, 164, 166, 169 132–4, 136, 146–8, 150, 154–7, Descartes 79, 150 159–76 dialectic, transcendental 6 intuition, formal 50–1, 53–7, 59, 61–4, 66, 120, 134, 147 equipment 36, 72 existentiality 15 Jacobi 37 existentials 12, 152 judgement 14–15, 25, 32, 35, 37, extant, at hand (vorhanden) 36–7, 46, 67–9, 72–4, 76, 78–87, 91–2, 39, 43, 47–8, 72–6, 99, 103–5, 140, 94–6, 98–101, 109–10, 133, 164–6, 150 171

207 208 Index

Leibniz 164 ontology, traditional 11–14, 39, 68 logic 9–16, 19, 21–2, 55, 67–83, ontology, fundamental 3, 11, 29, 91–5, 98, 100–2, 106, 109–13, 118, 105, 111, 113, 140, 161 128, 132, 156–7, 165, 172–3 ontology, regional 29, 32, 75 logic, transcendental 67–70, 75, 92–3, 106 philosophy 2–4, 6–12, 14, 23–4, logos, λο ´γος 10–12, 14–15, 25, 72–3 28–9, 32, 42, 45, 67, 70, 72–4, 79, 93, 98–103, 151–3, 176 metaphysica specialis, metaphysica philosophy, transcendental 32–3, generalis 24, 75, 165 71, 75 metaphysics 2, 8–11, 13–14, 22–5, Plato 14, 70, 151 29–31, 33–4, 76, 78, 102, 175 predication 33–4, 40, 76, 79, 86–7, 105 Natorp, Paul 53 pre-ontological understanding 26, nature 11–12, 17, 24–6, 29, 48, 55, 28–9, 32, 71 70, 75, 99–100, 104, 130–2, 136–8, proposition see assertion 142–3, 153, 161, 173 neo-Kantianism 42, 45, 53, 65, 105, quaestio juris 102–5, 110–12, 143 175 nothing 108–9 reality, objective 104–5, 110–11, notion 15, 59, 81–2, 85, 87, 91, 100, 126, 128 103–4, 106, 110, 112, 154, 169–72, receptivity 17, 19, 32, 40, 42, 44–5, 176 62–4, 66–7, 88–9, 108, 117, 119–20, 132–5, 147–51, 157, 160–3, 165, object 22, 24, 26–7, 30–5, 37, 39, 167, 173–6 43–4, 46–9, 55–6, 58–66, 69–71, representation 34–5, 37–8, 44, 48–9, 74–83, 85–6, 88, 90, 92–4, 97–9, 51, 55–6, 58–66, 68–9, 73–4, 76–80, 101, 103–10, 112, 120–8, 131, 85–8, 91–8, 107–8, 115, 117, 120–1, 138–43, 146–50, 153–4, 161, 165–6, 123–7, 129–31, 134, 141, 143, 148, 170 154, 156, 158, 166–72 object, transcendental (concept of an root, common 16–17, 40, 45, 50, object in general) 64, 81, 83, 97, 53, 66, 90, 114, 117, 128–9, 173–4, 107–10, 112–13, 126–7, 138, 145–6, 176–7 153 objectivity, objectness 44, 61, 73–4, schema, schematism 6, 13, 20, 60, 78, 99, 107–9, 125, 127–8, 138–43, 64, 83, 137, 154, 165–72, 176 145–50, 154, 161, 163, 165, 169–70, Schopenhauer 37 172 science 10, 22–9, 36, 151 objectiﬁcation 26–9, 36, 46, 112–14, sensibility 12, 16–19, 30–1, 40–1, 116, 118, 121–4, 127, 146, 170–1, 43–4, 51, 53–4, 56–9, 61–6, 69, 81–4, 175–6 88, 90–1, 101, 103, 112, 125, 127–9, ontic 26, 28–9, 32, 43, 50, 86–7, 91, 134, 151–6, 160, 162–3, 168, 172 93, 102–3, 108, 113–14, 136, 139, statement see assertion 154, 163 subjective 35, 44, 61–3, 73–4, 77, ontology 11, 13–16, 19, 24–34, 80, 89, 103–7, 109, 119 41–3, 50, 68, 70–6, 85–8, 93, 96–7, subjectivity 44, 139–41, 143–6, 99–100, 102–5, 108–14, 131–3, 149–51, 153, 155–7, 161, 163–5 135–6, 138–40, 154, 159, 161, syndosis 50, 52–5, 66, 68, 85, 87, 163–5, 170–1, 173 89, 104, 116–18, 120, 122, 174 Index 209 synopsis 52, 85, 87, 117, 119–20, 53, 55, 59–60, 63–6, 86–94, 97–8, 122–3 101, 103–4, 106–12, 115, 117–18, synthesis 14, 16, 41, 50–8, 60–6, 120–4, 129, 132, 139–42, 144, 68–9, 72, 83, 85–100, 104, 111–49, 146–8, 151, 153–5, 161–5, 167–8, 153–5, 157–62, 164, 166–8, 170–2, 170–2, 174, 176 174–6 time 1, 6, 13–14, 20, 31, 42, 44–66, synthesis, apophantic 40, 86–7 82–4, 87–100, 103, 109–23, 125–6, synthesis, gnoseological 85, 87 128–140, 143–50, 153–4, 157, synthesis, predicative 40, 86–7 160–7, 169–72, 174–5 synthesis, veritative 40, 86–7, 104, transcendence 17–21, 32–3, 41, 67, 112 70–1, 105–7, 109, 111–13, 116, 120, 128, 140, 152, 156, 168, temporality (Zeitlichkeit) 115, 118, 172–4, 177 139, 148–52, 155, 157, 160–1, truth 8–12, 14–17, 19–22, 35, 61, 163–4, 172 71, 86, 105, 108, 110, 124, 163 Temporalität 175 thematization 27, 29, 36, 72, 79 validity, objective 104–5, 126 thinking, thought 10, 12, 14–20, violence, interpretative 3, 34, 50, 30–1, 34–5, 38, 40–2, 44, 46, 48–9, 177