Holy text: Critique of Pure Reason https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Critique_of_Pure_Reason_(Meiklejohn)
>Have you never wanted to do anything that was dangerous? Where should we be if nobody tried to find out what lies beyond? You never wanted to look beyond the clouds and the stars, or to know what causes the trees to burn, and what changes the darkness into light; well, if you talk like that people call you crazy—well if could discover just one of these things, what eternity is for example, I wouldn't care if they did think I was crazy.-Henry Frankenstein, Frankenstein (1931)
>But by far the greatest difficulty lies undoubtedly in the subject itself. The latest school [German Idealism] has expressly characterized its philosophy as an ESOTERIC SCIENCE [emphasis added], which would at all times remain confined to the narrow circle of the initiated; yea more, which is also intended to be solely confined to them, inasmuch as what constitutes it philosophy is, that it does not lay aside the veil which is impervious to the eye of the unitiated-- its scientific garb.- Chalybäus
these are the most pseud threads on this board
The Universal Ghost already cleared the path, the way, to the truth and is itself, along with the destination, the truth.The Particular Ghost only has to walk along and stick to the path laid out before it. This makes it sound like it should be easy—but it's not.
>>25292040midwit cope
>I flatter myself that I have discovered the cause of—and consequently the mode of removing—all the errors which have hitherto set reason at variance with itself, in the sphere of non-empirical thought. I have not returned an evasive answer to the questions of reason, by alleging the inability and limitation of the faculties of the mind; I have, on the contrary, examined them completely in the light of principles, and, after having discovered the cause of the doubts and contradictions into which reason fell, have solved them to its perfect satisfaction. It is true, these questions have not been solved as dogmatism, in its vain fancies and desires, had expected; for it can only be satisfied by the exercise of magical arts, and of these I have no knowledge.
>>25292051>and of these I have no knowledge.
>>25292040What makes you say that?
>"Transcendental philosophizing must thus be constantly accompanied by intellectual intuition: all the alleged non-comprehension of this philosophizing is due, not to its own unintelligibility, but to a want of the organ required to comprehend it."Who was the bigger Esoteric Kantian, Fichte or Schelling?
>>25292242late Fichte and late Schelling, also late Kant
>>25292242this is from system of transcendental idealism isn't it?
Is this an esoterik kantian literature?
>>25293060pinteresting
>The post-Kantian philosophy inaugurated by Reinhold’s Essay on a New Theory of the Human Capacity for Representation and carried further by Fichte and Schelling still strikes Hegel as suspect. He is not impressed by Fichte’s and Schelling’s central conviction that philosophy must proceed from the unconditioned, thus making ‘the idea of God as the absolute I’ the necessary first principle of all philosophizing. He thinks that the sublimity and radicalism of this appropriation of Kant by Fichte’s and Schelling’s ‘esoteric philosophy’ is unparalleled. Yet he also holds that their philosophy fails to account for the needs of the age and for enlightened pedagogical requirements. He certainly does not wish to distance himself entirely from this esoteric Kantianism beyond Kant. After all, his friend Schelling had vigorously embraced this cause and Hölderlin had given an enthusiastic account of Fichte’s Wissenschaftslehre as well as of the relation of Fichte’s ‘I’ to Spinoza’s substance. Turns out the Bloomsbury Companion to Hegel (2013) coined Esoteric Kantianism, not /lit/
LLM thread
>>25293766based. this just further supports our movement.
follow me on twitter
