Extremely important book
Kant’s theory of the imagination usually receives little attention, but it’s the key to the Critique of Judgement due to the role Kant assigns to it in Reflective Judgment, which is the mechanism by which intuitions are compared and generalized into cognitive concepts
In Kant’s system Judgment is either Determinative, producing knowledge by subsuming objects under concepts, or Reflective, producing concepts through the comparison of a particular intuition with others. Imagination is the faculty which carries out this schematizing of concepts
The two modes of Judgment for Kant work reciprocally to elaborate systematic complexes of interrelated concepts, and Kant designates this process as Technics. Such systems of concepts are called Science. This is where Heidegger’s theories of technology originate.
Imagination for Kant is the faculty which produces intuitions by binding together the inchoate sensory manifold into phenomenon which it represents to us within the temporally structured domain of inner-sense. Likewise it compares these to represent cognitive concepts to us
What’s often missed is that Imagination is identical to the Faculty of Representation itself. That is, the faculty responsible for producing images. Or what in Memory Art was called Emblems, which were organized into “Places” or “Loci,” or as Aristotle calls them, Topoi. Topics
For Agricola, Ramus, and Bacon, Loci comprise the internal structure of Subjects. “Invention” in Rhetoric is the process of using the Topics as a map to the discover and organize the essential information about subjects by which they may be dialectically compared
In the New Science, humanist natural historians collect information about phenomenon using increasingly sophisticated methods of note-taking, cross referencing, and classification: Commonplace Books. The “Places” being subject matter headings on exactly this same model

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh

Keep Current with WYDNA Group

WYDNA Group Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!


Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @wydna00

2 Jan
Public propagandists of Science today uncritically accept the naïve epistemological “realism” of positivism under the false assumption that Science conquered metaphysics and formal logic obsoleted classical logic sometime in the 19th century, but the details of this elude them
The “Scientific Method” as it’s taught today is in no real sense actual Science. It’s merely an algorithm. It doesn’t represent the “Practical” compliment to any Philosophy or Theory of Science. It’s a brute force, unintelligent adherence to an algorithm of knowledge manufacture
The constant appeal to “interdisciplinary” ideals has not produced any meaningful reform of Science, as there exists no mechanism to enforce this ideal. Kant was clear though as to what body was entitled to enforce such standards: the academic Philosophy faculty.
Read 31 tweets
22 Dec 21
The “plain” style of Puritanism, and its hatred of ornament is a reflection of the influence of Ramist logic. Petrus Ramus expelled Rhetoric from the discipline of Logic, identifying it with Sophistry. Rhetoric includes Dialectic, and Ramism is purely Analytical in its method.
This is the real subtext of cultural critics and discourse havers today who invoke the Puritans as a boogeyman of repression. These critics, who style themselves as “transgressive” artists against neo-Puritanism, are really acknowledging in the comparison that they’re Sophists.
Puritanism, in its allegiances to Ramism and later Cartesianism, and its contempt for sophistical dialectic and the empty discourse of contemporary academic and theological disputation, actually represented an intellectually progressive movement to generalized critical method
Read 6 tweets
28 Nov 21
Extremely excellent book. Absolute must read imo ImageImageImageImage
This is also a must read Image
This book is also the best Ive read about the international financial crisis, and can be read to circumvent Quinn Slobodian’s rather sloppy book “Globalists” which lacks the academic precision and larger analytical scope of Boyce’s superior history. Image
Read 18 tweets
22 Nov 21
The concept of Worldview has degraded heavily from its origins to its present use in psychology, sociology, etc. It’s not an unconscious set of prejudices, assumptions, and values. It’s rather World-INTUITION, an image of cosmological unity we actively represent to ourselves
An intuition for Kant (who coined/invented the term worldview) is a class of representations. It’s a bundle of sensory data which the imagination binds together into a mental object, which we represent to ourselves in order to cognize/think about
A Worldview is an image of interconnected unity of things, but the imagination is incapable of raising this image to the level of an absolutely self-contained and coherent idea of world systemicity. The imagination stretches to extend its systemization, but snaps under the strain
Read 11 tweets
12 Nov 21
The Voynich Manuscript is worthless actually, he was never able to sell it. His widow sold it decades later for $25,000, less than 1/4 his asking price. The buyer was unable to resell it and donated it to Yale. It’s value is only in the fictitious mystery constructed around it
The legend of the manuscript was only ever a marketing ploy, which a perpetually cash strapped Voynich cooked up with amateur Roger Bacon scholar Robert Steele, a friend from the Savage Club, and Steele’s friend A.G. Little to coincide with the 700th anniversary of Bacon’s birth
19th century positivists and amateur scholars had, in the final decades of the century, constructed a highly distorted image of Roger Bacon as a martyr for science, ignoring the complexities of his thought to bolster their ideology of scientific and Comtean social progress
Read 18 tweets
4 Nov 21
I’m starting to wonder if Comenius didnt write the Rosicrucian manifestos. It seems increasingly clear to me that Rosicrucianism has a Hussite/Taborite core, that the concepts used trace back to Jan Hus and that Rosicrucian terminology is modified from phrases Hus used
The idea of the “invisible college” is right here: corpus mysticum universale eccles corcumex Christo et collegio predestinatorum veraciter constitutum

The universal mystical body, truly established by Christ and the college of the predestined.
The Temple of the Rose Cross is such a striking and original image, but what’s the source of that imagery? This militaristic, temple-tank on wheels? I can’t help but see some resemblance to the Hussite battle wagons. Am I crazy?
Read 9 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!

This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!


0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy


3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!