Thing in itself
It appears to me that the "thing in itself" of anything is supremely individual and so individual that we can't grasp it. We see a pear for example as food or art, and something else but as it is in itself we can not grasp. I have two questions about this
1) does it make sense to speak of a thing that cannot be seen from any perspective
2) why is it that the thing-in-itself escapes perception
The answer to the second question might come from how we perceive things. We sometimes can only understand singulars to understanding it in a community with other objects. Sometimes we however only can understand things one at a time. We seem to have different aspects of thinking, therefore, and all are optimal in understanding the world according to patterns and universals. Our language itself is an aspect of our minds (thinking apparatus) that expresses how we are meant to see the world. And that is exactly such that we can understand the world in unity so that we can have social relationships within nations and do so such that we have a coherent view of reality. But then why do we even wonder about the thing in itself? What are we wondering about and does it mean to wonder about that? Thanks
1) does it make sense to speak of a thing that cannot be seen from any perspective
2) why is it that the thing-in-itself escapes perception
The answer to the second question might come from how we perceive things. We sometimes can only understand singulars to understanding it in a community with other objects. Sometimes we however only can understand things one at a time. We seem to have different aspects of thinking, therefore, and all are optimal in understanding the world according to patterns and universals. Our language itself is an aspect of our minds (thinking apparatus) that expresses how we are meant to see the world. And that is exactly such that we can understand the world in unity so that we can have social relationships within nations and do so such that we have a coherent view of reality. But then why do we even wonder about the thing in itself? What are we wondering about and does it mean to wonder about that? Thanks
Comments (5)
I will take a stab at your questions (Both numbered as well as the ones in the paragraph):
The thing-in-itself is important for those that want to know the truth of that thing, or any thing, for that matter..
The thing-in-itself will always escape perception, if that perception is colored or biased in any way.
Could there be a deeper truth about ourselves that always escapes perception? Sartre, Freud, and many others say "yes". That is the in-itself of us. Some say that this consists of the only truth there is and that thinking with Kant about the thing in itself of the world is illusion. I personally think there is more "out there" that we can't know rather than subjective stuff. And maybe there is a connection between what we should learn internally and what alludes us outside ourselves. I am not saying everything is One, like Zeno and all them. I'm considering what way I can understand the world and ourselves if there be a unifying idea or whether there is more of a demarcation between us and any deeper reality that explains more too us then that which we already know
we dont need things or material objects to actually exist in order to live or communicate. as long as experience is predictable and shared we can
Maybe there is, maybe not. Evidence points to the fact there is. But the point is, through millennia people have asked that question....but that question maybe the wrong question. Under the conditions, the right question seems to be, since we aren't able to see or understand the thing-in-itself, how can that change.
1.) Yes, but only to demonstrate a limitation.....
2.) ....because of the limitation....
....and the limitation is us.