Question

The first idea is that the subject, theI, has two fundamental aspects: I canexperiencethings, and I canwillsome things to happen. I can experience redness, cold, hot, sadness, happiness. I can will myself to stand up from this chair and walk across the room.

The second idea is that this subject invariably meets points of resistance in its experience. There are things the subject cannot will. For example, if I jump up, I will come down and I cannot will myself to fly instead (unless I'm dreaming). There are asperities in my experience that are given and that I cannot will away. These blockers to my will I can call object. They are not in the subject because they are given to the subject as constraints to its will. As an observation, when parsing out subjective/objective that way,

It seems that thewillof the subject is critical. It seems to be the trait of the subject that leads to recognizing the existence of objects outside the subject. It seems also that a pure subjectivity in the absence of any object should be conceived as an all powerful will. Which philosophers have voiced similar or the same ideas (maybe just one, maybe both, maybe some variants)?

Answer 1

Philosophers such as John Locke, Immanuel Kant, and existentialists have articulated ideas about the interaction between the subjective experience of the will and the objective world. Locke discusses how sensory experiences like heat and texture depend on the subject's perception, while Kant emphasizes the limits of our knowledge and the role of space and time. Existentialists focus on the certainty of our existence and awareness, contrasting conscious beings with inanimate objects.

Step-by-step explanation:

Philosophers Discussing Subjectivity and Objectivity

The question explores the role of the subject, its capacity for experience and will, and its encounter with objectivity in the form of resistance or constraints on the will. Several philosophers have delved into the notions of subjectivity, objectivity, and how our understanding is shaped by our experiences and conceptual frameworks.

Firstly, John Locke in his epistemology differentiates between the primary and secondary qualities of objects, recognizing that certain experiences, like the sensation of heat or texture, are not inherent qualities of the object but are instead produced within the mind of the subject experiencing them. Locke's work opens a discussion on the accuracy of sense knowledge and the distinction between objects and their perception by the subject.

Immanuel Kant, a renowned philosopher, contributes significantly to this debate. Kant asserts that we cannot have knowledge that transcends our sensory experiences and that concepts like space and time are fundamental to our ability to process experiences. He introduces the notion of transcendental idealism, emphasizing that while we can know objects as they appear to us, the nature of objects in themselves is beyond our grasp. He also speaks of the mind's conceptual capacity and sensibility, along with innate categories that structure our experiences and understanding.

The ideas of Locke and Kant align with the inquiry about the will of the subject and its recognition of the existence of objects. Additional philosophical contemplation comes from existentialists, who emphasize our certainty of existence and our awareness thereof. They distinguish between conscious beings and inanimate objects, bringing a focus on the subject's awareness and freedom.

Strategies for Objectivity

In addressing the need for objectivity, it is essential to abstract from personal experiences to develop a more generalized view of philosophical issues. One must articulate thoughts not limited by subjectivity to apprehend broader truths.

Finally, Taylor's criticism of Determinism, both 'hard' and 'soft', challenges the idea that our sense of freedom and deliberation could be mere illusions if deterministic theories were accurate. These pose questions about the extent of subjective freedom against the backdrop of objective constraints.