The Difference Between The Two Editions Of Transcendental Deduction In Kant's Critique Of Pure Reason And Its Philosophical Implications

This paper holds that the significance of Kantian philosophy is the reconstruction of the "identity of thinking and being" against the background of modern thought,so as to save the dream of Aufklarung.Modern philosophy,based on the subjective reason of Enlightenment,regards human reason as a tool for the pursuit of knowledge,thus forms the dichotomies between subject and object,mind and world,immanence and transcendence,and so on.Kant tries to overcome this opposition by positing two worlds.Kant's plan to reconstruct "identity of thinking and being" is mostly exhibited in the"Transcendental Deduction" in the Critique of Pure Reason,but Kant wrote two totally different versions of this part,it is indeed this part that inspires mostly for subsequent philosophers such as German Idealists and many contemporary philosophers.By analyzing and reconstructing the argument of the two editions of Deduction,this paper aims to clarify the structure of both argument,and the meaning of some key concepts(such as "Transcendental Apperception" and "Transcendental Imagination)in the range of Kantian philosophy,and holds that the differences between the two editions are formal and in some way substantive.And the based on such differences,I take Fichte and Heidegger for instance,try to elaborate how such differences inspired western philosophy.This paper divides into five parts:Chapter 1:Introduction.Firstly,I will elucidate the background of the plan of Transcendental Deduction,exhibit the dilemma of modern philosophy and show the starting point of Kant's critical philosophy;Then I will show foreign and domestic research on this subject;Finally,I will describe the task and principle of Deduction and its significance in Kantian philosophy,I will focus on Kant's unique thought on"Judgment".Chapter 2:The analysis of arguments of A Deduction.The A Deduction consists of three single arguments,and through the analysis and reconstruction of these arguments.I try to show:First,the A Deduction develops in a way that compares Psychology and Transcendental Philosophy.In such Comparison,Transcendental Apperception and Transcendental Imagination are mutually conditioned.The Transcendental Apperception cannot revert into itself unless through the synthesis of Transcendental Imagination,and the rules of such synthesis comes from the Transcendental Apperception.That is to say,self-consciousness and unity of manifold representations must become possible at the same time.Therefore,the self-consciousness in A Deduction is a mediate selfconsciousness,the consciousness cannot revert into itself immediately,Secondly,the Transcendental Object as a thinking being,is the mediate by which the Transcendental Apperception can reflect itself its identity,it's not a Thing in itself,and it's also not an object in appearance,it can express only the function of unity of the manifold representations.Thirdly,Kant responds Hume's doubt of "cognitive emptiness" by the unity of self-consciousness.Finally,I try to show that each argument is necessary and has different aims.Chapter 3:The analysis of arguments of B Deduction.Through the analysis and reconstruction of arguments,I try to show that the structure of B Deduction is surely "Two steps in one proof',and its contents are more fruitful than A Deduction,and structurally more related to the contexts of the Critique back and forth.The first step of B deduction is to enquire the categories in understanding itself(synthesis intellectualis),the second step is to enquire the categories in the relation between understanding and sensibility(synthesis speciosa).Kant refutes Hume's doubt of "cognitive emptiness" by trying to show the relation between unity of intuition and unity of categories.Chapter 4:The analysis of the differences between two Deductions.Firstly,I show the differences of motives.Kant hope to avoid the reading of his idealism into Berkley's,so he deletes the most parts which are prone to be misunderstand,and relates the arguments to logic more closely.Secondly,I show the proof structure of both Deductions.Aim to refute Hume's doubt of "cognitive emptiness",Kant uses two different arguments in both Deductions.Finally,I show that there are some seemly substantively differences in both Deductions.At first,because the change of proof structure,Kant has to restate the meaning of transcendental apperception.Different from the mediate self-consciousness,the self-consciousness is as if immediate,the consciousness now can immediately revert into itself,and doesn't need the unity of manifold of sensible intuition as a mediate.Secondly,the mutual-conditioned relationship between transcendental apperception and transcendental imagination do leave the room for question which one is the deeper ground.Chapter 5:The philosophical implication of Transcendental Deduction.Firstly,I elaborate that Fichte has insights into the stronger subjectivity in B Deduction,he uses such self-consciousness which reverts into itself immediately as the first principle,and develops his system of theoretical Wissenschaftlehre by which absolute ego sets up itself in a way of "opposite-unity",and of practical Wissenschaftlehre by which the intellectual ego strives to overcome the Ansto?,in order to become identical with the infinite absolute ego.Secondly,I show that Heidegger has seen the conditional relationship between Transcendental Apperception and Transcendental Imagination in A Deduction,under the guidance of his "fundamental ontology",he thinks the Transcendental Imagination is the common root of both sensibility and understanding.He thinks Kant has seen it and but he retreats.I make a short comment of such thought,and I believe Heidegger consciously wipe out the cartesian background of Kant,and deliberately misunderstands what Kant said "synthesis precedes unity".Finally,I try to elaborate there cannot be an only answer to such question of the real difference between two Deductions.Due to the richness of Kant's philosophy and the ambiguity of his expression,either there could be real difference or not both would make sense.And the most valuable part of Deduction is the implication of the asking of "identity of thinking and being" in the context of history of western philosophy.