Гетеротопология как практическая философия
In this article, we attempted to consider Kant’s transcendental philosophy as a special type of phi-losophizing and foundation of new transcendental paradigm, which differs both from the ‘object’ metaphysics of Antiquity and ‘subject’ metaphysics of Modern Age (metaphysics of objects (transcendent metaphysics; meta–physics) — metaphysics of the experience (transcendental met-aphysics) — metaphysics of the subject (immanent metaphysics, meta–psychology). For this pur-pose, we introduce such methodological terms as transcendental ‘shift’ (see: [CPR, B25]), tran-scendental perspective, transcendental ‘gesture’ and transcendental constructivism/pragmatism (see: ‘action of pure thought’ [CPR, B81]). The basis for such representation of transcendentalism is cognitive and semantic reading of the Critics (R. Hanna) in view of the question from Kant`s letter to M. Herz (21/02/1772; see: ‘What is the ground of the relation of that in us which we call “representation” to the object?’) and modern interpretation of Kant: theory of ‘two aspects’ (H.Allison). While in classical metaphysics, cognition is interpreted as a relation between empirical subject and object, in tran-scendental metaphysics, ‘possible experience/knowledge (Erfahrung)’ shall be understood as a re-lation between transcendental subject (transcendental unity of apperception) and transcendental object. Upon that, Kant’s transcendentalism, as contrasted to classical contemplative metaphysics, acts as an ‘experimental’ metaphysics, and the ‘transcendental’ is defined as a boundary ontologi-cal area between the immanent and the transcendent in capacity of the instrumental (‘kraft’) com-ponent of our consciousness/cognition (see ‘intentional reality’ of E. Husserl and/or theory of ‘three worlds’ of K. Popper). However, Kant considers the subject and the object uncritically, in the sub-stance modus and their transcendental rethinking in existential (Dasein/Existentia; Heidegger) and event-ness (Sachverhalt; Wittgenstein) mode will allow taking a substantial step towards develop-ment of transcendental paradigm of philosophy.
The paper focuses on the paradox embedded in conceptual logics of the Left and Right thought, that is the semantic amalgam of the concepts of sovereignty and legitimacy. Through the conceptual deconstruction of Carl Schmitt and Michelle Foucault theories we demonstrate the actual identification of sovereignty and legitimacy in political discourse. Since this identification forms the international legal framework, we perceive the power as legitimate one by recognizing the sovereignty. We reveal the similarities in power’s perception and conceptualization of the most radical representatives of the Right and Left political thought and explain it through the merge of legal and sacral in concept of sovereignty and perception of the power’s technic as independent political value.