I'm gonna admit that I mostly enjoy philosophy because it hasn't been completely demystified for me and still feels magical.
>>25195249Kant is most definitely science. That's his whole spiel.
there aren't clear demarcation lines between an art and science, so you're ultimately speaking gibberish
>>25195255But you do agree it's possible to do a superficial reading of Kant where everything is seen as a mere artistic gesture, right? Like how can you not get how someone might so easily mangle a notion like representation to be something entirely different. Or even the noumenon and phenomenon, can both be hilariously mis classified in an categorical and quite funny manner.
>>25195259You're exaggerating near the end of your psot and it makes me feel bad
>>25195261wtf are you talking about dude? no
>>25195274You ought to be able to understand this anon, it's not that deep
>>25195278no i mean you are retarded
>>25195286Aggression aside why don't you try to understand my point and make a gesture of mutual understanding instead of being antagonistic because you don't like my post
>>25195291because you are incoherent.
>>25195314Ok, look at it this way. Am unawares reader might mistake the word 'representation' to mean symbolic representation in the literary sense, the noumenon to be an expression for the thing without a representation, and the phenomenon to be an outcropping of the representation. This is not incoherent in the least.
>>25195320no
>>25195327Never have I seen someone so bitter until today
>>25195331
>>25195343You haven't even afforded me any kind of charitable refusal you've simply outlined your distaste for my post. Not to mention you have not even commented on my post, and only the subject line, which leads me to believe you are looking for reasons to disagree.
>>25195261This is an exceptionally bad argument. 'A thing is A if it can be mistaken for A.' It's possible for someone to give a superficial and wrong reading of anything, that doesn't make any statement on the genre of that original book. If I misunderstood concepts in Newton, that wouldn't make it not science.
>>25195331newfag detected
