Prophantasia EditionHoly text: Critique of Pure Reason https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Critique_of_Pure_Reason_(Meiklejohn)A place to discuss developments in the system of esoterik Kantianism, the philosophical school that takes a Straussian esoteric writing reading of Kant as a metaphysician-wizard who hid a hinted at an esoteric system behind the apparent contradictions and loose ends of the exoteric readings of his texts, that goes beyond the limits of the exoteric understanding of the mind.It sees the German Idealists as the rightful successors of Kant attempting to grow that esoteric kernel, but also sees the Naturphilosophs as extending that growth into the domains of occult philosophy, natural magic and beyond.The German Idealist framework for scientific reenchantment.
The a priori law grounding the formality and legality of humano-daimonic relations as the metaphysics of morals.
What is Prophantasia? THE SUPERIMPOSITION OF IMAGINATION UPON PHENOMENAL SPACE
What is hallucinosis? where the brain actively constructs percepts from ambiguous visual input.
The Metaphysics of Nature as grand unified force theory.
I admire esoterik kantanons autistic persistence with this thing.
>>25228433me too but i cannot for my life understand a word but i can see the vision
>Remote Viewing
>>25228464>Hardly are those words out >When a vast image out of Spiritus Mundi>Troubles my sight
The senses are self-verifying.
>>25228389Practicing this is most propitious while reading the Deduction.
>>25228539but only qua senses not qua effects and accurate representations of their cause
>>25228544please further elaborate on this point
>>25228467>philosoraptorI was there Gandalf—I was there 3000 years ago.
>>25228548Think of it as a guide of sorts.>In fact it is not images of objects but schemata that ground our pure sensible concepts. No image of a triangle would ever be adequate to the concept of it. For it would not attain the generality of the concept, which makes this valid for all triangles, right or acute, etc., but would always be limited to one part of this sphere. The schema of the triangle can never exist anywhere except in thought, and signifies a rule of the synthesis of the imagination with regard to pure shapes in space. Even less does an object of experience or an image of it ever reach the empirical concept, rather the latter is always related immediately to the schema of the imagination, as a rule for the determination of our intuition in accordance with a certain general concept. The concept of a dog signifies a rule in accordance with which my imagination can specify the shape of a four-footed animal in general, without being restricted to any single particular shape that experience offers me or any possible image that I can exhibit in concreto.
>>25228570i have no idea what i just read
>>25223291>which of the subsequent philosophers could be said to have espoused a sort of antecedent esoteric kantianism in a more exoteric sense the most? Or at least, who was the first to adopt this train of thought?Cambridge Platonistshttps://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=cambridge+platonistsPorphry/Proclus are the kernel of Western hermeticism/magic/occult after the Renaissance.
>>25228590TL;DR: Because humans have senses, we cannot see.
>>25228590Have you read Kant before? Or you want to start?
>>25228602where do i start?
>>25228603
Pure space is the blank space when you close your eyes
>>25228606>>25228603Prolegomena may be better for someone just beginning, assuming you’ve read some Descartes and Hume. At least, familiar with their core ideas.
There is a living self-moving synthetic activity that is both agent and patient of all cognition, and Kant’s critical philosophy contains the negative outline of this positive doctrine — the German Idealists were right to develop it, the Naturphilosophs were right to extend it into nature.
reading Kant esoterically — attending to his gaps, loose ends, and gestures beyond his stated limits — is a philosophically productive hermeneutic that reveals a coherent speculative program
At the root of all cognition and nature lies a living self-moving synthetic activity — a nothing which is something, a pure self-grounding substance that differentiates itself into everything that is. This activity must be simultaneously the agent and patient of its own synthesis, for any separation of the two generates an infinite regress that thought cannot survive. It is not a postulate or a regulative ideal in Kant’s restricted sense — for if all that is is ideal, then the regulative just is the constitutive, and what Kant prescribed as a heuristic for finite minds is revealed as the actual structure of reality itself. The critical philosophy contains the negative outline of this doctrine in its gaps, its loose ends, and its unresolved tensions. Esoterik Kantianism is the project of making that outline positive.
>The Soul's being Indivisible, does not prove it to be present only in a mere Point. Space, finite or infinite, is absolutely indivisible, even so much as in Thought; (To imagine its Parts moved from each other, is to imagine them moved out of themselves;) and yet Space is not a mere Point.Jesus Christ Leibniz got BTFO here. He really comes off a as a midwit, is all German philosophy like this?
>>25231004>says leibniz got BTFO>b-because he just did OK!!!you sure showed him little buddy
LLM thread
