This is the first article I read in this book. I’m now still speechless on the ten pages’ deduction analysis. BUT it is amazing to see that a one page sophism’s example leading to a conclusion regrading to self-identification.
Two point to take from this article.
1. Distinction between “collectivity” and “generality”: the former is “already integrally represented in the form of the sophism, since the collectivity is defined as a group formed by the reciprocal relations of a definite number of individuals” while the later is “defined as a class abstractly including an indefinite number of individuals.” (174)
2. Anticipating subjective assertion:
“(1). A man knows what is not a man;
(2). Men recognize themselves among themselves as men;
(3). I declare myself to be a man for fear of being convinced by men that I am not a man.
This movement provides the logical form of all ‘human’ assimilation, precisely insofar as it posits itself as assimilative of a barbarism, but it nonetheless reserves the essential determination of the ‘I’…” (174)