In its attempt to come to grips with the nature of the human mind
idealism employs such terms as "pure self," "transcendental
apperception," "pure con- sciousness" and so on. What do these terms
mean? What do they refer to? Pro- visionally, at least, the following
answer could be satisfying: such and similar expressions are purported
to capture a very special quality of human mind, a quality due to which
man is not simply a part of nature, but a being capable of knowing and
acting according to principles governing the spiritual realm. In the
first chapter of the present study the author attempts to bring the idea
of "pure Ego" down to earth. By analyzing Kant's concept of pure
appercep- tion - the ancestor of all similar notions in the history of
modern and contem- porary idealism - the author concludes that certain
functions and capacities attributed to pure apperception by Kant himself
imply the rejection of the idealistic framework and the necessity to
"naturalize" the idea of pure self. In other words - and Kant's claims
to the contrary notwithstanding - pure ap- perception cannot be
conceived as superimposed upon man viewed as a part of nature, as a
feeling and a sensing being. The referent, as it were, of the expres-
sion "pure self' turns out to be something much more familiar to us - a
human organism, with all its needs, drives and dispositions.