Some time ago, I spoke with a friend about taking leave of many ideas. I told her that—quite unscientifically—I visit my memories and think about why I no longer find certain ideas interesting, that these are often ideas I engaged with during my studies. Great ideas! From Kant and Hegel, etc. She was quite taken with my account and asked whether I was writing it down. I said: why? I am taking leave, after all. She was disappointed. Did she want to check whether I was right to leave these ideas behind? Did she want me to share my thoughts so that others could follow, or did she simply want me to become a fellow writer? She advised me to start a blog.
The idea I was taking leave of when I spoke about this was no small idea. It was Kant’s idea of the transcendental ego. The idea that there must be an I that must be able to accompany all my thoughts. This I not only makes these thoughts conscious to me, but also integrates them into an identity. At the same time, however, this I is not merely part of my conscious world of experience; then it would be fleeting, would be lost in sleep. On a long train journey to France, it became clear to me that something similar must exist. An anchor point, as it were. From here to Hegel and the Phenomenology of Spirit. Yet I noticed that idealism no longer interested me. Especially German idealism. Consciousness in Germany is a romantic one, and a dangerous one. It is subjective.
That is why I now read books from India. I find cemeteries fascinating and suspect. Strange anchorages.
Leave a Reply