The Relationship Between the Formal and Transcendental-Metaphysical Logic

Since Kant’s time, there has been an exciting debate concerning the question of which logic is prior to the other—is the formal-general logic prior to the transcendental logic or the other way round? Which logic serves as a model for the other? Some years ago, Nathan Rotenstreich argued for the priority of the formal-transcendental logic, whereas his colleague and student, Zvi A. Bar-On, following Solomon Maimon and others, thought that the priority is of the transcendental logic, according to which, in fact, Kant constructed the table of the concepts of the formal logic and not vice versa. As a student of both these great teachers, I thought of another possibility: The priority question is not proper for both logics, which are simply employments or uses of the same intellect—the formal-general use that relies upon the concepts of our understanding, and the transcendental use that relies upon our categories. Each logic supports, clarifies, and completes the other. Both uses or employments of our intellect are unified in one and the same intellect.