how can the thing in itself cause phenomena if the noumenon does not have causality??
It dosn't. Enjoy phenomena.
>>18132556How the fuck can we know of noumenon. It makes no fucking sense.
>>18132556thing in itself and noumenon are the same thing. he's basically saying there's a limit to human sensory perception. We can't see gravitational fields but gravity effects everything around us.
>>18132558Those sensations just got higher.
>>18132736Tick tock enjoy trancendentalism.
>>18132556try /lit/ instead >>18132584we can't, its hypothetical. Its a useful assumption
>>18132726but if causality is just a part of the phenomenological realm you can't say that noumenon causes sensory perception
>>18132584>stuff existing in reality makes no senseTake meds
>>18133672Kant says causality is an invention of the human mind trying to understand the thing in itself
>>18133957>pointing out that assuming unobservable phenomena is reasonableNGMI.
