Therefore I can depict the number five within the act of counting.
In contrast to the second form of sense-depiction (namely, sensibilization by way of those five dots), Kant now distinguishes [369] the schema of number. And in establishing the distinction he begins with the fact that “only with difficulty [can we] get a comprehensive view” (B 179) of an image for larger numbers—i.e., a bunch of things, given to intuition, that would add up to such a large number. We can’t rely on a direct comprehension of all the countable dots—we can’t hold them together in a unity—that would add up to this specific number, say, “5,768.” Instead, we need a specific procedure, if only for drawing the dots, a procedure that has to follow a specific rule and come to an end at a specific point. There is no direct sensibilization for such large numbers as there is for, say, the number five. Instead, to understand those large numbers we rely on the presentation of a method of their possible intuitive depiction. That means understanding the possible way of numbering something given to intuition as a succession of dots. Therefore, it is a procedure for sensibilizing a number, according to a rule regarding countable things, namely dots. The presentation of such a procedure for the sensibilization of a concept—or that which such a procedure can present—is what Kant calls the schema.123
* * *
An “image of the number five” simply means: something that is intuitable in some way and is meant to indicate that number. Here “image” simply means “that which appears directly to intuition.” In German we speak of Landschaftsbildern, and the word can have two senses. It can mean “landscapes” in the sense of paintings that depict natural scenery. But it can also refer to “landscape scenery,” actual landscapes that we see. In the latter case, when I see a Landschaftsbild, I actually see an actual landscape, not a depiction of it. The question is: How is this meaning of “image” [Bild] connected with the meaning of what we earlier called an Abbild, an “image-as-copy”?
In an Abbild, an image as a copy, we distinguish between the Abbildende and the Abgebildete, i.e., the painting itself that depicts something
123. [Here (Moser, p. 741) Heidegger ends his lecture of Thursday, 18 February 1926, to be followed by that of Friday, 19 February, which opened with a 580word summary that is omitted in GA 21.]