Why do midwits love Kant so much?
>>17987415Why do retards hate Kant so much?
>>17987450He is responsible for everything that is wrong in today's world.
>>17987466How so?
>>17987481He gave birth to a modernity of bureaucracy, alienation, colonial arrogance, capitalist morality, and nihilistic emptiness.
>>17987493He single handedly did all that? Damn, I simply Kant handle this, gonna take awhile for me to process this one bros...
>>17987497>He single handedly did all that? without him it wouldn't happened
>>17987501How do you figure?
I think that Kant's philosophy was so fundamental that retarded people blow it out of proportion because they understand it. I actually had trouble understanding philosophy because I was reading these people like my mind was going to explode from the expectations
>>17987531my big brain
And unlike Heidegger, he’s just comprehensible enough to skim secondary sources and fake familiarity.
>>17987415Kant is the ultimate cope for NPCs who need a rigid, rules-based morality because they lack the creativity for actual virtue. They get off on feeling intellectually superior without having to do the based shit that requires real genius.
Kant is an anti-enlightenment retard that brought back Plato's retarded world of forms in order to disprove the capability of human reason so he can take over as philosopher king. It's the same shit with every philosopher except Aristotle and Rand. They tell you to think for yourself because you can, and must, know reality for yourself in order to live as a human being. Your mind is all you have, be very suspicious of those who tell you not to trust your mind in favor of their specific flavor of mysticism.
Hegelians eternally seething at the Kantian hero.
>>17988393>RandOpinion discarded>>17988593Likely this. Kant, while perpetually stuck in the Ethical Stage and never becoming a Knight of Faith and advancing to the religious mode, still had interesting things to say. I think about the categorical imperative often.
>>17988600>Critique of pure reason>Where kant criticizes the use of pure reason...using reasoning...>You: "Based! :O"Haha
>>17988665PURE reasonYou can absolutely use reason to find deficiency with purely using reason to encounter the world. >We know, there are known knowns; there are things we know we know. We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say we know there are some things we do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns—the ones we don't know we don't know.
>>17988676Ah yeah that makes sense so there must be a noumenal world!
>>17987415>t. youtube academic (no actual texts read)>t. pajeet>t. into Schopenhauer>t. currycel>t. thinks Schop is deep because he borrowed from Hindu metaphysics>t. jerks off to cuck porn of white girls humilliating him because he's Indian
>>17989867the jeet boogeyman kinda mindraping you rn fr...
>>17987493So you are saying that if Kant wouldn't have written what he wrote that Capitalism wouldn't have existed?
>>17987415>midwitsHe wrote the first moral philosophy that people get introduced to in an academic setting. The fact that the moral reasoning is rigorously and rationally justified makes it much more impactful since it contrasts to the moral volunteerism that was pressed into them as children. Everyone likes Kant, which means that even midwits like Kant.
>>17987415He must have pissed off a marxist. I love Kant now.
>>17987415He solved philosophy; cope&seethe
>>17989867Arthur "You must read Kant first" Schopenhauer? Arthur "I am a Kantian" Schopenhauer? Arthur "Don't let the philosophy professor tell you what's in Critique of Pure Reason, read it for yourself!" Schopenhauer?Did you read on the fourfold root of the principle of sufficient reason or the beginning of World as W&R where he promoted a form of transcendental idealism?>>17987415After Kant, we have no direct lineage canon or consensus, there is not an agreement where to go after him. The NPC support the current thing instinct is identifying the paradigm's ancestor.It is also extremely easy for state academia to support the categorical imperative as a kind of vulgar legalism, so his ethical system can appeal to unthinking "follow the rules" masses.It's a shame he is cited most for ethics, when his epistemology and methodology for scientific research is what is actually valuable about his philosophy>>17991941based>>17987493Are you going to say that when Hegel and others realized the state would pay them to say the state is God in state universities?>>17987919Based problem identifier. People will watch one lecture by some bald professor on Kant, and think it replaces tackling the critiques. The preface + introduction is like fifty pages, that's what Kant intended to even start reading the content proper.
