The purpose of this paper is two-fold. First, the paper examines Nishida’s “energetistic” ethics with focus on the ideas of eidos and Tatsache (“fact”). Second, it clarifies the presentism inherent in his eidetic thought. The texts to be discussed are Nishida’s An Inquiry into the Good (1911), especially its Part Ⅲ, and Self-Aware Determination of Nothingness (1932), especially “My Thought about Self-Determination of Absolute Nothingness” (1931), as well as Miki’s Philosophy of History (1931-1932) and other texts. Unlike Fichte’s Wissenschaftslehre which begins with the first principle of Tathandlung, the kernel of Nishida’s energetistic ethics is Tatsache, defined as present self-productive poesis of sensible and embodied reality. In An Inquiry into the Good, Nishida argues that the self-productive and sensible reality of Tatsache is inseparable from three eidoi (truth, goodness, beauty) and that this energetistic ethics is compatible with eudaimonism of Plato and Aristotle. But how can the idea of “fact as such” (Tatsache) be the basis of normative thought of the eidoi? The paper shows that Nishida’s eidetic thought has some similarities to G.E. Moore’s metaethics in Principia Ethica (1903), in which Moore criticizes the “naturalistic fallacy.” Contrasting Nishida’s eidetic thought (of Tatsache) and Moore’s metaethics (of Sache) the paper clarifies the presentism of Nishida’s energetism as an essence of his ethics.
https://ror.org/02hwp6a56 
