Recognition cannot be found, but if we only know each other, then I must be a subject. I must say that he accepts me as a subject. With this, he cannot find existence or something that lasts. Why?
When he presents everything to me, it must not be presented as a special thing, but as something that is generally presented as a special thing. If it exists to me in this moment, it will not exist in the next moment. Something that does not exist, for consciousness, it does not exist, cannot find existence, it is all presented.
However, the mind does not rely on such a theoretical or epistemological standpoint. What does it rely on?
The true reliance of the soul is on practical and moral beliefs. He puts faith first and cognition second. The reason why he is a truly thorough practical philosopher is that, in our Fichte research papers and works, we cannot see this at all. However, Fichte makes it clear that this practical or moral belief is based on the realization that I am a moral will obeying moral commands. I understand myself as a moral will that obeys moral commands.
I am not primarily a cognitive subject, but rather a moral will that obeys moral commands. This is a fundamental belief that I consider the basis of everything. The foundation of this practical belief in the limited self is infinite will, as Confucius said, as a human being, he is a limited self. However, the problem is that as a human being, he can be called a person behind him, not a beast, because he has the Tao. This is the foundation of his limited self, while Fichte's limited self is based on infinite will.
Only in this way can we call ourselves human, with an infinite will behind us, who creates the world in a finite way. It can be seen very clearly that Fichte at that time, while retaining the theory of ideas, transcended self philosophy. He set an infinite fundamental and all encompassing will at that time, and the will at that time was no longer a subjective will. With the setting of the tone and inclination of his original philosophy, there was a dramatic change.
The self withdrew from the front stage, and as time passed, he used less self-concept. The self withdrew from the front stage, replaced by an infinite era. Only rationality exists, infinite rationality exists freely, and finite rationality exists within infinite rationality. Finite rationality refers to our human rationality, while infinite rationality refers to existential rationality, or objective rationality.
Limited rationality exists within infinite rationality and exists through infinite rationality. Only in our hearts can eternal will create a world, at least the things we have developed into a world, and the call of intuition.
The consistency of sensation, intuition, and thought patterns enables us to create and develop something in the world. In fact, Fichte here advocates for an active all encompassing theism, which is the ultimate religious concept. He believes that God includes the world and transcends it.
So, at this point, Fichte believed that the active everything was in theism and idealism. In Fichte's view, it was entirely our practice of faith. I believe that this is not a matter of knowledge, and knowledge cannot prove it. In fact, we Chinese believe in heavenly principles, and so does the heavenly way. You want to use natural science to prove the principles and ways of heaven, how can you prove them?
The Chinese believe that this is a belief, and this belief is an absolute belief. Since you believe in him, there is no doubt. Your way of settling down is to believe. If a person does not believe in the laws of heaven, of course they can do anything. What's even more terrifying is that if you do all kinds of unethical things, you can create many very noble reasons to prove that you are indeed doing the right thing. To some extent, I think it is the most powerful argument.
I believe it. Don't tell me that faith is not as powerful as proof. Is faith a bit hollow, weak, or arbitrary? Proof is the objective and inevitable way to 'not exist for Yao and not perish for Jie'.
wrong. We believe that proof is due to the modern intellectual way of thinking, and proof itself has its own significant limitations, which have been repeatedly elaborated by Western scholars. But we Chinese people are really pitiful. On the one hand, we worship and superstition the West extremely, and on the other hand, we really have limited understanding of Western ideas, and he is unwilling to go in. He thinks that Western thinking is just a tool for him, as long as it can improve the country. As for whether it is right or not, there is no need for reason. I just need to bring him to save the country and the people. He also believes that there is nothing more right than that. As long as you can improve the country, you don't know that you can't improve it like this.
I saw an article by an economist who said that reform requires ideological guidance. He believes that China's reform needs to reflect on the most fundamental aspect of China's 30 years of reform, which is the lack of ideology. Touching the stones to cross the river, it's like taking one step at a time. If you can make it through, it's fine. Then, if you can't make it through, turn back and smash it, and start over again.
Because there is no thought guidance, this is the biggest problem. In the past 100 years, Chinese people have only one kind of thought. The so-called that they are now advocating from Li Zehou. We Chinese people are born with rational use. They think that Confucius and Mencius are the ancestors of practical rationality. What's a joke? It means that Chinese people don't believe in ideals, Chinese people don't play tricks, Chinese people don't believe in faith, and Chinese people only believe in one thing. The only reason Chinese people believe is that things are not done, and it is reasonable to do them, and Chinese people are particularly developed in this area.
In a sense, going to Wenzhou can lead to development. But they have done a lot of unethical things, and not only have they harmed people, but they have also harmed themselves. They are also proud. Wenzhou people are so bad that they speculate on houses. For example, we have eight or seven relatives in our family. I went to Chongqing first, and the housing prices were originally very low. Then, I bought for one thousand, you bought for 1500, you bought for 2000, you bought for 2500, you bought for 3000. After ten weeks, the housing prices rose tenfold, from one thousand to 10000, and they started to sell off. In fact, Chongqing people are extremely panicked. In these three months, the housing prices have risen from 1000 to 10000. It seems that there is still room for further increase. After recruiting Wenzhou people, he started to sell. Just follow up. This kind of thing, if you think he can and he's not proud, he becomes a money chain.
There are many beautiful things in the world that he can't even imagine in his lifetime, let alone enjoy. He just counts the money, and his world is the most boring. It's the red one hundred yuan thing, he pops it.
I encountered a scene of a wealthy man getting married in Quanzhou. A large table was adorned with gold ornaments, which dressed the bride up. The people next to her said she was from a minority ethnic group, like the Yao people, with all her hair covered in gold ornaments, like ancient armored warriors.
Some things cannot be displayed, such as a BMW worth tens of thousands of yuan or a high-end villa in a certain area. This can only be written on paper because the villa cannot be moved in.
This is their attitude towards life. I'm afraid that if we Chinese are really in the money pile, then there will be no Wen Tianxiang or Wang Yangming. They are not slandering our ancestors. They also said that I was trying to publicize our Chinese fine traditions and show that we Chinese people are good. We don't play virtual games but play real games and make international jokes.
This is a viewpoint about Fichte. It is a matter of faith, not a matter of knowledge. In order to appropriately fulfill our moral mission, the mission of humanity is actually a moral mission. In order to fulfill our moral mission, we need to believe in a living and dynamic moral order, not a dogmatic moral order, not a dogmatic Three Obediences and Five Constants, but a living and dynamic moral order.
We can only interpret it as infinite rationality, that is, infinite will, which is a true existence behind me with limitations. I exist only as a manifestation of infinite will, and we need to consider the concept of absolute existence and give it a philosophical form.
Fichte's later philosophy largely considered problems. What kind of thing is such an absolute existence?
He needs to think and express himself in a philosophical way, or in other words, he did not solve the problem in 'The Mission of Man' because it is too narrow. Such an infinite absolute existence, beyond the scope of moral belief, is also too narrow. Fichte came later, and he definitely developed in the problem. In the end, he adopted an approach of equating existence with existence to solve the problem.
In his 1801 epistemological interpretation, 'All knowledge presupposes its own existence.' If it were in the early days, it would have been all knowledge predicting itself, because knowledge is a state of freedom and wisdom, absolute self infiltration, and therefore free expression.
Some scholars believe that it is a reversal of the early stage, but I do not think it is a reversal. It is indeed a significant development. He initially believed that all existence is for consciousness, so he could not recognize an absolute divine existence behind or beyond consciousness. He believed that it is our subjective belief.
And he also believed that imagining such a transcendent existence beyond knowledge, such a fact, would cause knowledge itself to lose its absoluteness and become a dependent thing. Therefore, there can be an absolute concept. It's contradictory, why?
Because absolute knowledge must be without any dependence, if we want to acknowledge absolute existence as knowledge, absolute knowledge and absolute existence can only be one of them. Of course, he believes that knowledge is absolute. Why is knowledge absolute?
For him, existence only exists because we have the will and consciousness. He indeed believes that existence is not a prerequisite for consciousness, but knowledge is a prerequisite for existence. Without existence, there would be no consciousness, and now he is reversing, existence is prioritized.
