| BookTalk.org News |
| • The Secret Garden has won the Dec. 2008 Jan. 2009 Fiction book poll! |
| • Thank you Ophelia!!! Your donation is MUCH appreciated! |
| • Thank you for your very generous donation Interbane! |
| • 5 members are now enjoying the new "Email Digests" feature. Click on the digests link on the right at the top of every page to learn more. This is a great feature for keeping updated on forum activity. |
| • Regular casual chats are back on the menu! Check out the calendar for the schedule. |
| Featured Videos |
BREAKING NEWS
Andrew Bacevich
"The Limits of Power"
More Videos
|
| Amazon Honor System |
|
| Donate to BookTalk.org |
Please support BookTalk.org by making a small donation today!
•
Who supports us?
|
| Show us where you live! |
 |
|
| Author |
Message |
Thomas Hood 
Sophomore
Book Discussion Leader
Usergroups: None
Joined: 17 Feb 2008
Posts: 281
Thanks
Given: 0
Received: 1 in 1 Posts
Gender: 
Location: Wyse Fork, NC
|
 Posted: Sat Jul 05, 2008 9:10 pm Post subject:
|
 |
|
| President Camacho wrote: |
| Why is Melville's name brought up so much? I really thought Moby Dick was torturous. Was he really a good author? It seems like many people think so. |
I imagine myself to be defending Walden against the academic myth that Thoreau was influenced by Kant.
Tom |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Thomas Hood
Sophomore
Book Discussion Leader
Usergroups: None
Joined: 17 Feb 2008
Posts: 281
Thanks
Given: 0
Received: 1 in 1 Posts
Gender:
Location: Wyse Fork, NC
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 05, 2008 10:06 pm Post subject:
|
|
|
Saffron, reading essays about Kant isn't reading Kant. Using some of Kant's terminology isn't understanding Kant. To quote myself:
| Quote: |
| I know of no evidence that either Emerson or Thoreau read German philosophy. Frederick Henry Hedge was the German philosophy expert in the group, and from the little I have read of him, he is neither inspiring nor clear. |
I do not have access to jstor, but here are some publically accessible links:
Emerson and Immanuel Kant
http://www.vcu.edu/engweb/transcendentalism/roots/rwe-kant.html
| Quote: |
| "Though his knowledge of Kant, Fichte and Schelling was primarily second-hand, this does not minimize its importance. It was, true, translated through a medium, and thus diluted, and altered subtly from its original form. Emerson did, true, alter it somewhat to coincide with his own primal urges and native influences. Yet without the seed that traveled across the water from Germany, the germination of American Transcendentalism would not have been." |
This is untrue as the work of Hawthorne and Melville shows. The Scarlet Letter deals extensively with the relation of subjective and objective without any debt to Kant. Kant IMO is a status symbol of no practical importance for the study of Walden. Maybe Robert has read the Critique of Pure Reason, but I doubt any Thoreau scholar has.
http://www.vcu.edu/engweb/transcendentalism/roots/hedgecoleridge.html
"Coleridge"
Frederic Henry Hedge
The Christian Examiner, March 1833
Coleridge, according to Hedge, failed to explain German metaphysics. I found Hedge's description of the transcendental effect hilarious:
| Quote: |
| "As in astronomy the motions of the heavenly bodies seem confused to the geocentric observer, and are intelligible only when referred to their heliocentric place, so there is only one point from which we can clearly understand and decide upon the speculations of Kant and his followers; that point is the interior consciousness, distinguished from the common consciousness, by its being an active and not a passive state. In the language of the school, it is a free intuition, and can only be attained by a vigorous effort of the will. It is from an ignorance of this primary condition, that the writings of these men have been denounced as vague and mystical. Viewing them from the distance [as] we do, their discussion seem to us like objects half enveloped in mist; the little we can distinguish seems most portentously magnified and distorted by the unnatural refraction through which we behold it, and the point where they touch the earth is altogether lost. The effect of such writing upon the uninitiated, is like being in the company of one who has inhaled an exhilarating [laughing] gas. We witness the inspiration, and are astounded at the effects, but we can form no conception of the feeling until we ourselves have experienced it. To those who are without the veil, then, any exposé of transcendental views must needs be unsatisfactory." |
Tom |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Robert Tulip
Senior
Usergroups: None
Joined: 04 Oct 2005
Posts: 388
Thanks
Given: 8
Received: 5 in 4 Posts
Gender:
Location: Canberra
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 06, 2008 1:52 am Post subject:
|
|
|
| Thomas Hood wrote: |
Saffron, reading essays about Kant isn't reading Kant. Using some of Kant's terminology isn't understanding Kant. ...Maybe Robert has read the Critique of Pure Reason, but I doubt any Thoreau scholar has.
Tom |
Yes I have read the Critique of Pure Reason by Immanuel Kant. In my Bachelor of Arts degree at Macquarie University I took a second year philosophy course in 1983 in which I wrote an essay on it. I have always found Kant hard to understand, and have found Heidegger’s characterization of his main ideas in terms of the élan of transcendental imagination a useful interpretation. Kant distinguished between phenomena – things as they appear, and noumena – things as they are, saying we can know phenomena but not noumena. I disagree on this as I hold true knowledge to be noumenal. Kant’s theory of knowledge gave priority to mathematical reason, and here I think is a point of difference with Thoreau. Kant assigned more reality to a triangle than to a tree, while Thoreau saw the living thing as more real than the shape. This epistemological distinction underpins how Kant supported a calculative way of thinking while Thoreau is more meditative. Kant represented the modern enlightenment, including in its interpretation of knowledge as representation rather than relationship. For Thoreau, to know something is to have a relation with it, while the somewhat dominant Kantian paradigm asserts that knowledge is only of conceptual representations of things rather than of the things themselves. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Saffron
Amazingly Intelligent
Usergroups: None
Joined: 01 Apr 2008
Posts: 653
Thanks
Given: 19
Received: 11 in 11 Posts
Gender: 
Location: Purcellville, VA
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 06, 2008 6:11 am Post subject:
|
|
|
Robert and Tom,
I am not sure what evidence you each are going on in arguing that Transcendentalism was not influenced by Kant. Please enlighten me. Here is what I have found to support that Emerson at least had some understanding of and was influenced by Kant. I am not trying to say he read Kant directly. I am only saying appears to be obvious that to some degree, at least one of Kant's ideas shaped the formation of Transcendentalism. Emerson himself gives Kant credit.
The following is a direct quote from a lecture Emerson delivered in January 1842 at the Masonic Temple, Boston:
"It is well known to most of my audience, that the Idealism of the present day acquired the name of Transcendental, from the use of that term by Immanuel Kant, of Konigsberg, who replied to the skeptical philosophy of Locke, which insisted that there was nothing in the intellect which was not previously in the experience of the senses, by showing that there was a very important class of ideas, or imperative forms, which did not come by experience, but through which experience was acquired; that these were intuitions of the mind itself; and he denominated them Transcendental forms." |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Thomas Hood
Sophomore
Book Discussion Leader
Usergroups: None
Joined: 17 Feb 2008
Posts: 281
Thanks
Given: 0
Received: 1 in 1 Posts
Gender:
Location: Wyse Fork, NC
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 06, 2008 8:17 am Post subject:
|
|
|
| Saffron wrote: |
| . . .I am not sure what evidence you each are going on in arguing that Transcendentalism was not influenced by Kant. Please enlighten me. |
Saffron, my understanding is that Kant had no influence on Thoreau, and, as Robert points out, their philosophies are antithetical:
| Quote: |
| Kant’s theory of knowledge gave priority to mathematical reason, and here I think is a point of difference with Thoreau. Kant assigned more reality to a triangle than to a tree, while Thoreau saw the living thing as more real than the shape. |
Thoreau was responsible, accountable, and significant below the enigmatic surface. He should not be painted with the same Transcendental brush as Emerson, Alcott , or Very:
| Quote: |
"To the practical mind of that day the transcendentalists
seemed a set of visionaries, with their heads in the clouds and
their thoughts up among the moonbeams. Their talk was
more or less incomprehensible, their theories "transcendental
moonshine," and their radiant air-castles "pinnacled dim in the
intense inane." Of their ideal communities Lowell remarked
that "everything was to be common but common sense."
Dickens, on his first visit to America in 1842, was told when in
Boston that "whatever was unintelligible would certainly be
transcendental."' Among these New England idealists there
were, indeed, some apostles of the "new views" who made
themselves ridiculous by their eccentric dress and manners,
and by their "Orphic utterances," which even the initiated
could scarcely understand. Numerous "isms" sprang up,
special "revelations" were reported, fantastic schemes of social
reform were advocated, and the return to nature and the simple
life was enthusiastically urged upon the faithful"(p.151).
American Literature By John Calvin Metcalf
Google Book |
Tom |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Penelope
Stupendously Brilliant
Silver Contributor
Usergroups: None
Joined: 02 Oct 2007
Posts: 737
Thanks
Given: 0
Received: 0 in 0 Posts
Gender:
Location: Cheshire, England
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 06, 2008 8:39 am Post subject:
|
|
|
I hate to admit it, but I hadn't ever heard of Thoreau until Tom Hood posted about him. I have only recently looked at some of these people you mentioned. I knew about Kant of course, but I just thought he was an economist!!! Critique of Pure Reason - I used to leave on a coffee table to impress my friends. 
I wonder if the reason I hadn't encountered Thoreau is because I'm British.
When looking at Transcendentalism, we were more likely to be pointed in the direction of Krishnamurti. Do you know about him? How does he differ from Thoreau?
| Quote: |
When you look at this life of action—the growing tree, the bird on the wing, the flowing river, the movement of the clouds, of lightning, of machines, the action of the waves upon the shore—then you see, do you not, that life itself is action, endless action that has no beginning and no end. It is something that is everlastingly in movement, and it is the universe, God, bliss, reality. But we reduce the vast action of life to our own petty little action in life, and ask what we should do, or follow some book, some system.
— Krishnamurti, Bombay 1958Get Daily Quotes |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Thomas Hood
Sophomore
Book Discussion Leader
Usergroups: None
Joined: 17 Feb 2008
Posts: 281
Thanks
Given: 0
Received: 1 in 1 Posts
Gender:
Location: Wyse Fork, NC
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 06, 2008 6:04 pm Post subject:
|
|
|
| Penelope wrote: |
| I wonder if the reason I hadn't encountered Thoreau is because I'm British. |
Maybe Thoreau is blamed for the loss of the empire? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Robert Tulip
Senior
Usergroups: None
Joined: 04 Oct 2005
Posts: 388
Thanks
Given: 8
Received: 5 in 4 Posts
Gender:
Location: Canberra
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 07, 2008 1:26 am Post subject:
|
|
|
| Thomas Hood wrote: |
| Kant had no influence on Thoreau, and, as Robert points out, their philosophies are antithetical |
The antithesis between Kant and Thoreau turns on their conflicting views of knowledge as representation or relation. For Kant, knowledge is the conceptual representation of reality, structured as language. This doctrine is known as the representational theory of truth. Thoreau has a more relational view of the nature of truth, whereby our knowledge of the world has a depth beyond the explicit concept, suggesting the theme of silent knowledge. This contrast between Kant and Thoreau underpins debate around the modern world view and its conflict with religious thought. Kant follows Descartes in accepting revelation as a politically expedient factor in thought, but also shared Descartes’ contempt for the traditional religious argument that we know things because God told us. This is why Mendelssohn gave Kant the nickname ‘the all-destroyer’. Thoreau questions the modern assumption that we can rely on reason rather than revelation, aiming to put back a sense of awe and wonder into thought. Kant also wrestled with this problem, but saw reason as complemented more by systematic empirical observation rather than by a sense of the divine. The point of Kant’s critique was that pure reason is not sufficient to form knowledge, which requires that concepts are based on perception.
As I read them, both Kant and Thoreau have an ultimate goal of understanding transcendence, but they have markedly different approaches. Hence the antithesis is more between their methods than their goals. Both agree that the cosmos is transcendent in some sense, but where Kant suggests that mathematics is the key to knowledge, Thoreau is more mythopoetic. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Saffron
Amazingly Intelligent
Usergroups: None
Joined: 01 Apr 2008
Posts: 653
Thanks
Given: 19
Received: 11 in 11 Posts
Gender:
Location: Purcellville, VA
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 07, 2008 5:47 am Post subject:
|
|
|
| Thomas Hood wrote: |
| Saffron wrote: |
| . . .I am not sure what evidence you each are going on in arguing that Transcendentalism was not influenced by Kant. Please enlighten me. |
Saffron, my understanding is that Kant had no influence on Thoreau, and, as Robert points out, their philosophies are antithetical:
| Quote: |
| Kant’s theory of knowledge gave priority to mathematical reason, and here I think is a point of difference with Thoreau. Kant assigned more reality to a triangle than to a tree, while Thoreau saw the living thing as more real than the shape. |
Tom |
Robert & Tom,
I fully understand that Kant's idea that all thought was based on sensory perceptions from the objective world is the opposite of the Transcendentalist notion that the mind/intuition shaped ones understanding of the objective world/sensory perceptions/experiences. Just because Kant's theory of knowledge is different, even opposed to the Transcendentalist, does not mean they (in general, as a group) were not influenced by him. Thoreau was doubtlessly influenced by the other Transcendentalist and therefore it seems impossible to say that he was in no way influenced by Kant. The following quote from the very first post to my mind is misleading, if not false.
| Quote: |
| Not at all. Contrary to notions promulgated in numerous, authorative webpages, the Transcendentalism practiced by Thoreau had nothing to do with Kant, Unitarianism, or Harvard Divinity School. |
| Quote: |
| Thoreau was responsible, accountable, and significant below the enigmatic surface. He should not be painted with the same Transcendental brush as Emerson, Alcott , or Very: |
It is my understanding that this statement could be made about each one of the Transcendentalist, not just HDT. In fact, that is one of the striking things about the American Transcendentalist movement, it was not unified and rather there was much variation of ideas. It could almost be said that each of the individuals of the movement had their own brand of Transcendentalism. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Thomas Hood
Sophomore
Book Discussion Leader
Usergroups: None
Joined: 17 Feb 2008
Posts: 281
Thanks
Given: 0
Received: 1 in 1 Posts
Gender:
Location: Wyse Fork, NC
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 07, 2008 11:40 am Post subject:
|
|
|
| Saffron wrote: |
| The following quote from the very first post to my mind is misleading, if not false. |
| Thomas Hood wrote: |
| Not at all. Contrary to notions promulgated in numerous, authorative webpages, the Transcendentalism practiced by Thoreau had nothing to do with Kant, Unitarianism, or Harvard Divinity School. |
Well, I wouldn't want to say anything misleading or false  , so if you would show me the error of my ways I'd be pleased to change. If Thoreau were influenced by Kant, I'd like something specific he said or did under that influence.
Walter Harding describes the alleged Kant connection on pp.62-3 of The Days of Henry Thoreau.
| Harding wrote: |
| ". . . there was a body of knowledge innate with man and that this knowledge transcended the senses -- thus the name "Transcendentalism." This knowledge was the voice of God within man -- his conscience, his moral sense, his inner light, his over-soul -- and all of these terms and others were used by the various Transcendentalists. But it was central to their belief that the child was born with this innate ability to distinguish between right and wrong. Unfortunately however as he grew older he tended to listen to the world about him rather than the voice within him and his moral sense became calloused. Thus did evil come into the world. And therefore it was the duty, the obligation of the good citizen to return to a childish innocence and heed once more the voice of God within him" (p.62). |
Now, to me this looks more like Rousseau than Kant, although my knowledge of Kant doesn't extend much beyond Will Durant. Is there any suggestion in the writings of Thoreau that he embraced congenital infant goodness? Are "We need the tonic of wildness" (17.24) and "In wildness is the salvation of the world" supposed to apply to infants? I think they refer to an openness to mystery in the uniqueness and creative potential of every physical event.
Tom |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Saffron
Amazingly Intelligent
Usergroups: None
Joined: 01 Apr 2008
Posts: 653
Thanks
Given: 19
Received: 11 in 11 Posts
Gender:
Location: Purcellville, VA
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 08, 2008 7:08 pm Post subject:
|
|
|
Tom,
I think you misunderstand me. I am not meaning to suggest that the whole of Kant's philosophy influenced HDT. I believe the influence only to go as far as the one idea that I have referred to in my previous posts. An example: my approach to teaching and in general working with people has been greatly influenced by Paulo Freire's Pedagogy of the Oppressed. I have not read the whole book, nor do I need to in order to be deeply effected by the central idea in his book. My ideas are not identical to Freire's, but he is at the root of them. I use this example from my own thinking to explain how I see the relationship between one of Kant's concepts and the ideas of the Transcendentalist and even Thoreau.
Saffron |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Robert Tulip
Senior
Usergroups: None
Joined: 04 Oct 2005
Posts: 388
Thanks
Given: 8
Received: 5 in 4 Posts
Gender:
Location: Canberra
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 08, 2008 11:56 pm Post subject:
|
|
|
| Thomas Hood wrote: |
…Walter Harding describes the alleged Kant connection
| Harding wrote: |
| ". . . there was a body of knowledge innate with man and that this knowledge transcended the senses -- thus the name "Transcendentalism." This knowledge was the voice of God within man -- his conscience, his moral sense, his inner light, his over-soul -- and all of these terms and others were used by the various Transcendentalists. But it was central to their belief that the child was born with this innate ability to distinguish between right and wrong. Unfortunately however as he grew older he tended to listen to the world about him rather than the voice within him and his moral sense became calloused. Thus did evil come into the world. And therefore it was the duty, the obligation of the good citizen to return to a childish innocence and heed once more the voice of God within him" (p.62). |
Now, to me this looks more like Rousseau than Kant, although my knowledge of Kant doesn't extend much beyond Will Durant. Is there any suggestion in the writings of Thoreau that he embraced congenital infant goodness? Are "We need the tonic of wildness" (17.24) and "In wildness is the salvation of the world" supposed to apply to infants? I think they refer to an openness to mystery in the uniqueness and creative potential of every physical event. Tom |
Hi Tom, these ideas show a strong conceptual affinity between Thoreau and Kant, despite their differences. Kant’s argument was that the senses alone are not sufficient to provide knowledge, which also requires the ordering faculty of reason, also known as the transcendental imagination. Kant asks where we get our ideas of space and time, and observes that these are not the product of sense perception but of pure reason. He calls them the a priori categories of the understanding, because space and time are not objects that we can observe, but the formal framework into which observation is placed.
This illustrates what a slippery word transcendental is, in that Kant’s claim that the ideas of space and time are transcendental is very different from traditional theism.
Your juxtaposition of ‘openness to mystery’ and ‘return to innocence’ is interesting in that many would argue they amount to the same thing. Kant’s theory of morality, based on doing duty, does seem to have an affinity with Thoreau’s ideas in that Kant held that conscience is the source of true duty. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Thomas Hood
Sophomore
Book Discussion Leader
Usergroups: None
Joined: 17 Feb 2008
Posts: 281
Thanks
Given: 0
Received: 1 in 1 Posts
Gender:
Location: Wyse Fork, NC
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 09, 2008 1:40 am Post subject:
|
|
|
| Saffron wrote: |
Tom,
I think you misunderstand me. I am not meaning to suggest that the whole of Kant's philosophy influenced HDT. |
Saffron, my objection to the Kant connection is based on a real consideration. Kant is right about the organizing powers of the mind: We go from the unknown to the known and achieve insight because the mind is active. But Kant misunderstood insight and attributes subtle objective features to the subjective mind (as in the subway example). Insight is similar to extrapolation and interpolation in mathematics. The mind continues and completes a trend already physically present. This is not the imposition of a form ("a transcendental flight of fancy") but a completion of inherent form, like the angel Michelangelo found trapped in a stone. That is, our experience is not an arbitrary imposition of meaning but a development of meaning already present. The clay of experience is as active in creation as is the potter. I hope shortly to give a concrete example of Thoreau's view on the working of the mind.
Tom |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Thomas Hood
Sophomore
Book Discussion Leader
Usergroups: None
Joined: 17 Feb 2008
Posts: 281
Thanks
Given: 0
Received: 1 in 1 Posts
Gender:
Location: Wyse Fork, NC
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 09, 2008 11:48 am Post subject:
|
|
|
| Robert Tulip wrote: |
| Your juxtaposition of ‘openness to mystery’ and ‘return to innocence’ is interesting in that many would argue they amount to the same thing. |
Probably many do so argue, Robert, “Verily I say unto you, except ye be converted, and become as little children, you cannot enter the Kingdom of Heaven.” To enter the cloud of unknowing -- a return to the aboriginal, uninterpreted raw data of experience -- the adult must struggle against fixed interpretation, the dead hand of convention. ("Convention is death," Thoreau somewhere said.) The difference between infant and adult is that the adult has developed a self that is a framework for reinterpretation.
| Quote: |
| Kant’s argument was that the senses alone are not sufficient to provide knowledge, which also requires the ordering faculty of reason, also known as the transcendental imagination. Kant asks where we get our ideas of space and time, and observes that these are not the product of sense perception but of pure reason. He calls them the a priori categories of the understanding, because space and time are not objects that we can observe, but the formal framework into which observation is placed. |
Kant is correct in that no recognition (not just space and time) is given by the senses but requires an activity of mind. And he is also correct that recognition requires "pure reason" but this is reason as used in a peculiar sense by Transcendentalists to mean approximately intentionality. Will intruded into experience because the interpreter contributes to interpretation. Recognition has inherent moral quality because it give expression to the inner self (genius) of the interpreter. Recognition is always recognition as. I find the maxim "Style is character" a more convenient expression of this state of affairs. The way we recognize and express discloses personality.
Kant's idea of space and time as a priori categories is, I think, a mistake. This idea does not accord with modern science, and it differs from Thoreau's in that Thoreau thought in terms of the uniqueness of place and moment:
| Quote: |
| "Wherever I sat, there I might live, and the landscape radiated from me accordingly"(2.1). Or, "This frame [the partially completed house], so slightly clad, was a sort of crystallization around me, and reacted on the builder" (2.9). |
| Quote: |
| "Time is but the stream I go a-fishing in. I drink at it; but while I drink I see the sandy bottom and detect how shallow it is. Its thin current slides away, but eternity remains" (2.33). |
Are such statements possible for Kant?
Tom |
|
| Back to top |
| |
