No one here has ever read Kant. You have only ever perceived the appearances of his work, never his philosophy in-itself. It's literally impossible to have read Kant.
So true
I read him as his work appears to me, empirically, and that’s okay, for now.
>>25246033Berkeleypilled
>>25246026> You have only ever perceived the appearances of his work, never his philosophy in-itself. Strong stuff
>Not reading Immanuel Kant means missing one of the most significant shifts in Western thought, often compared to the Copernican revolution in its impact on philosophy>Even if you disagree with his conclusions, reading Kant is considered excellent training in identifying, analyzing, and structuring complex philosophical arguments. It forces you to engage with a highly systematic thinker, sharpening your own ability to think critically.
>>25246478bot postalso, kant doing some sort of "copernican revolution" by being the first person ever to offer transcendental arguments or to scrutinize the grounds of reason and perception itself is essentially a myth. it is one of those myths, like the "dark ages" that has some thin grain of truth. kant is indeed being more critical than rationalists within his general epoch, such as wolfe, and some later, modern scholastics who had already taken on board a bunch of enlightenment assumptions. it is pure historical myth to think all of wester philosophy lacked this sort of critical approach though, or transcendental and phenomenological arguments paired with metaphysical and empirical ones to support it."everything is received in the mode of the receiver" is itself a scholastic dictum used to remind people that the human knows according to the human mode of knowing, and that the essences of things are inexhaustible (in their view).what is funny is not only that kant's myth remains so strong in philosophy, but that it is widely acknowledged that kant had nothing approaching expertise in the area he dismissed as "twaddle" nor was he free from making his own dogmatic assumptions
>>25246654go to bed, kane b. and remember to read lant before you fall asleep
>>25246026FilteredILTERED
>>25246694Reveal the secret of the noumena anon…
>>25246026dood wrote his whole book as an appearances... never even touched the thing in itself writing it...ofcourse you have read it all
>>25246746He wrote the appearance of the book, not the book in itself
>>25246026Are you saying one can't read Kant?
>>25246698Read Schopenhauer
>>25246790I can't even wipe my ass properly with Schopenhauer... so what do I need his books for except maybe to make a chimney fire ?
>>25246771Kant says this. Even Kant has never read Kant, only its appearances. We can only assume to have understood Kant as a postulate of practical reason, never as actual union with Kant's thought.
>>25246478That's Aristotle, buddy
>>25246026this whole transcendental idealism is so god damn stupid... just why ?
no one cares about this ugly goblin read the ancients and the medievals instead
>>25247251why is it stupid?
>>25247293Because I literally saw a noumena on my way to work once. Shit has been falsified.
Why do newfags visit 4chan.org and then decide to make the lowest-quality psychotic posts possible?
>>25246026I tried the Kant bossfight a few years ago with no preparation and died on his second phase. I've done a lot of grinding now, picked up the perks from Locke, Leibniz, and Hume, and I'm now back on his second phase again but this time with almost all my health left. Taking it much more careful in general, and unlike the first time I didn't make the mistake of skipping his dialogue before the fightI know there are guides you can look up but that feels kind of cheap to me
>>25248408god speed. make sure to stock up on German.
