2 Answers

  1. Transcendo is a Latin word, a verb that means crossing a certain border. So the transcendent/transcendental is something that is beyond, beyond the boundary of something. We can quite say that, for example, Ukraine is a transcendental reality. But, as we said above, there is a certain purely conceptual difference between the words “transcendent” and”transcendental”. It seems to have happened, just historically (and I think so, and I say so only because I am not an expert in this field), that the word “transcendent” was used mainly by Latin scholastics to describe a certain reality that is beyond our own-that is, to characterize God. God is transcendent to this world, and in relation to the world, He is, first of all, the Creator. The reference to the transcendence of God is necessary in order to understand that God (like everything else, according to Aristotle) can act for the consciousness that knows him (that is, for you and me, mortal people) in two ways:first, as God-creator and savior, that is, as God ontologically connected with us personally and with the world in which we live, and secondly, as God in himself, regardless of In relation to us, God is all-good, all-powerful, all-knowing, and so on. But in itself, It is quasi-good, quasi-powerful, and so on. Prefixquasi in this case means “as if”. Why is God “sort of” powerful in his own right? Just because he is the Absolute, and we are finite consciousness, and to define God as a finite concept means to set a limit to him, and God has no limits, and, in fact, we cannot say anything about him.�

    So, we have all this in our culture, and then a little man like Kant is born. He needed a word to denote a certain instance in our knowledge that lies, attention, outside the sphere of the senses, and it was necessary that this word would not be so heavily loaded with scholastic connotations of an exorbitant, divine reality. Therefore, Kant uses a word with the same Latin root, but slightly modified, and in Kant this word means a priori, extra-sensory forms that are implicitly present in our consciousness “from birth”. These forms are, as it were, the receptacle of all our sensory experience, a kind of vessel, and they are space and time. Kant has his own justification for why exactly space and time are these a priori forms, as well as a justification for why these forms exist at all.�

    Therefore, the transcendental is an immanent form inherent in our cognition. To be honest, it is disgusting to say something more when there are wonderful lectures on Kant, for example, Perta Rezvykh. Google them in the vk, they are definitely available there. There are a lot of lectures, but they are very professional, perhaps the best available in Russian education.

  2. I can say that, firstly, it would be good to provide context (the same terms can be interpreted and used very differently by different philosophers); secondly, many people confuse “transcendental” with “transcendent”, and these are different things.

Leave a Reply