The Kantian Attack on Cognition

Kant takes the standard attack on the senses from their limitation and applies it to cognition as such. It is said that because man has specific means of perception that he is therefore cut off from reality: “you might think that that car is red, but that is because of the makeup of your eyes in particular, it isn’t red in itself;” “you might think that A is A, but that is due to the specific structure of your cognitive faculties, this does not apply to things in themselves—all of these things you call laws are really just subjective.” In the words of Ayn Rand: “man is blind, because he has eyes—deaf, because he has ears—deluded, because he has a mind—and the things he perceives do not exist, because he perceives them.”¹

What sort of consciousness can perceive reality, in the Kantian, anti-identity approach? The answer is: a consciousness not limited by any means of cognition; a consciousness which perceives no-how; a consciousness which is not of this kind as against that; a consciousness which is nothing in particular, i.e., which is nothing, i.e., which does not exist. This is the ideal of the Kantian argument and the standard it uses to measure cognitive validity: the standard is not human consciousness or even an invented consciousness claimed to be superior to man’s, but a zero, a vacuum, a nullity—a non-anything.²

So on the Kantian approach, consciousness is invalid because it does not perceive reality, which means it is not conscious of reality, which means it is not a consciousness, which means it does not exist—and the alternative given is a consciousness which apprehends reality in no particular way, which therefore lacks identity, which therefore also does not exist; the coin is fixed:

Watch the pincer movement. If you’re sick of one version, we push you into the other. We get you coming and going. We’ve closed the doors. We’ve fixed the coin. Heads—collectivism, and tails—collectivism. Fight the doctrine which slaughters the individual with a doctrine which slaughters the individual. Give up your soul to a council—or give it up to a leader. But give it up, give it up, give it up. My technique, Peter. Offer poison as food and poison as antidote. Go fancy on the trimmings, but hang on to the main objective. Give the fools a choice, let them have their fun—but don’t forget the only purpose you have to accomplish. Kill the individual. Kill man’s soul. The rest will follow automatically.³