>Human reason has this peculiar fate that in one species of its knowledge it is burdened by questions which, as prescribed by the very nature of reason itself, it is not able to ignore, but which, as transcending all its powers, it is also not able to answer.What does that even meanI'm one sentence in and I don't get it
>>24683233Self awareness of the fact we evolved we now cannot unsee with our third eye so we look for history as a foot to stand upon
You are naturally plagued with a desire to know things beyond your power to know. Compare it to being completely in love with a girl you can never and will never have.
>>24683233now that is a prose style worth imitating for the next 200 years.my favorite Kant sentences are when its a paragraph long and in the middle of it there is a>..., ist, ...kek absolutely beautiful
why does kant look like a little gremlin
>>24683233Humanity at large has enough intellect to ask profound questions but not enough to actually solve them. >>24683306He was rocking the broccoli cut before these zoomers could say "baby gronk grimace shake"
>>24683233the quadrupeds will never get it
I'm surprised this thread is dead.>You will indeed hear but never understand, and you will indeed see but never perceive.
>>24683271good example?
>>24683233>whatfascism is the wayfresh oc
>>24683233>The very nature of reason.Kant is describing reason. You might need to understand it.
>>24684283Da die Substanz der Sache für sich, die mein Eigentum ist, ihre Äußerlichkeit, d. i. ihre Nichtsubstantialität ist – sie ist gegen mich nicht Endzweck in sich selbst (§ 42) – und diese realisierte Äußerlichkeit der Gebrauch oder die Benutzung, die ich von ihr mache, IST, so ist der ganze Gebrauch oder Benutzung die Sache in ihrem ganzen Umfange, so daß, wenn jener mir zusteht, Ich der Eigentümer der Sache bin, von welcher über den ganzen Umfang des Gebrauchs hinaus nichts übrig bleibt, was Eigentum eines anderen sein könnte.
>>24683233Any logically coherent statement rests on axioms, those axioms can't be proven by the statement or it would be circular.Same goes for any model of anything like the standard model in physics, it's logically impossible for it to model everything.However advanced your models of reality are, they will lead to questions that a man of reason will want answers to but the answers can't be found through reason.
>>24683233how can you not get this ? LOL !it just means you wanna know things you can never know because you lag the skill you would need to know them...in short: Reason is not skilled enough to solve the questions it asks itself
>>24683233Even with complex reasoning powers man will never be able to think or reason the true answers to the unknowable. And that truth bothers man immensely.
>>24683268That expresses the angst that is supposed to be present in OP—that unsatisfiable tension.
>>24683233Remember when Plotinus described the soul as "amphibious"? This is basically that translated into wordcel.
>>24683233Essentially, it is the nature of human reason to try to answer any questions presented to it, but we can't answer these questions because they are beyond the limits of human reason itself. A crude analogy would be trying to reach for a pen at the other side of your desk but failing because your arm isn't long enough.
>>24683268>>24685909>>24686032>>24686320the true question is (my negros) ... is Kant right ?
>>24687730maybe he just lagged some serious skill here...and just concluded not to touch the balls of the almighty...remember he said : "I had to deny knowledge in order to make room for faith"maybe someone skilled enough can break through
