Its hilarious that Kants critique is based entirely on this book, and he evidently read nothing else from Hume, since he simply did not have access to anything else
>>24725892What are some works that try to refute what Hume wrote here?>>24726102That's likely true but Kant wasn't trying to build off of or refute anything Hume wrote, but rather simply reading this book inspired him to build up his own metaphysics from the ground up and it just so happens he went in a totally opposite direction to Hume (strict materialism / empiricism vs. maximum idealism)
>>24726102Why is that hilarious? Is it that difficult for you to imagine the world before it got cucked by the internet?
>>24726118>Why is that hilarious?Its like his smallest and barely representative work lmao
Hume was the goat
>>24725892Hume was a great psychologist, but a terrible philosopher. great at diagnostics but shit at prescribing solutions.
