/lit/ - Literature

Why are there so many Kant threads on /lit/ these days? Is his work undergoing some sort of resurgence that I'm unaware of? It seems like everyone here is talking about him.

>>22790230
>>22790303
>the third demand I have to make on the reader might indeed be tacitly assumed, for it is nothing but an acquaintance with the most important phenomenon that has appeared in philosophy for two thousand years, and that lies so near us: I mean the principal writings of Kant

>Before reading Kant: transcendentally illusioned
>After reading Kant: Still transcendentally illusioned
Why is Reason like this?

>>22732134
*facepalm*
I give up. You retards are setting yourselves up for failure. Stick to one edition. I apologize for being an ass but I really want this group to succeed and you faggots are not making it easy.

Fuck K*nt. This gross goblin fucker is the sole reason the west has fallen. The only solution to the west’s nihilism and materialism is process philosophy, but because the west is unable to overcome the massive trauma singlehandedly inflicted on it by K*nt, we are still jerking ourselves over Kantians like Heidegger and Wittgenstein and completely ignoring the superior Whitehead. Instead, where is Whitehead popular? In China. China has 23 institutions devoted to studying Whitehead, the west has only one. The one cure to the west’s ailments and it isn’t even the west taking advantage of it. Because of this, China is destined to become the greatest civilization AGAIN while the west will decay and be conquered by barbarians. The west will not become prominent again until the barbarians that conquer us become more refined in the process described by Ibn Khaldun. K*nt singlehandedly destroyed the European man. Kant was Der Letzter Mensch. Even the supposedly vitalistic Hitler was corrupted by K*nt through Schopenhauer and this is why he ruined his own politics by injecting antisemitism into his mysticism. Because of the immense nihilism leaking into Hitler’s brain through Schopenhauer, he was totally distraught and lashed out on the jews because he could not identify the real problem: K*nt. Therefore, instead of a Cyrus the Great, we got Hitler. All the reactions against K*nt, speculative realism, Heidegger, Wittgenstein, Husserl, these are just decadent continuations of the K*ntian mind disease. There is literally zero hope for the west. Westerners believe that they have to read Kant to understand philosophy, but as soon as they study the Critique of Pure Reason, they are irreversibly traumatized. The reason you are atomized is because of K*nt. The reason you want to kill yourself is K*nt. If you don’t hate K*nt too, you are a retard.

>>22476073
>Wasn't he the ultimate coomer?
Sex is for materialist normalfags. It was the redirected orgone from his sex organs to his cognitive organs from voluntary celibacy that produced the supermind and the corresponding super thinking abilities of the great Kant. Develop the self discipline to resist sexual desire and thereby acheive the intellectual heights of the Empyrean like Kant did. The never ending chase on the hamster wheel of sexual gratification is mere cope for those that can't into Kant and their seetheposts against Kant are the only way they know how to release their pent up sexual frustration. I would tell them to kys but I am not so cruel, and instead I invite them to read a copy of the first critique today.

>be human
>be a load of experiences
>whenever something relates to me, I experience it.
>observe phenomenal things relating to each other
>remember that relations always entails an experience on my part
>realize that when I relate to something else, it is also relating to me
>use the faculty of empathy, the basis of science, to suppose that it must be experiencing me as well
>realize that whenever two things in the screen of phenomena relate, it must be a sign that they are mutually experiencing each other
>realize that I can sometimes observe a lack of relations between two things
>understand that there must then be no experience
>now I have a concept of non-being
>so I can accurately talk about what is not
>realize that whenever I experience something, I react to it in some determinate way
>realize this is inseparable from the idea of relations
>use empathy to determine that other things must also react in determinate way
>so law of causality is now valid for things in themselves, since I already got past phenomena by supposing other things are experiencing like me
>I can be sure that it was valid to suppose other things are experiencing like me because experience is the same as being and therefore existence itself entails experience.
>since whatever doesn’t exist doesn’t relate, it is impossible that the cause of my phenomena should not experience.

To conceptualize a thing in itsslf, simply conceptualize yourself as another thing. The world is essentially a community of minds like yourself and science is simply an extension of empathy. The most general form of our own experience is the most general form of existence and it is shared by everything. Kant, being a psychopathic, evil sperg, never saw this because he lacked the capacity of empathy entirely, and he had to create a solipsistic framework where the PSR is still somehow valid only in phenomena, despite the fact that it is derived from observing that its truth for our own affectations must extend to other things in themselves.

Guys, I finally did it. I found an inarguable error in Kant.

You can’t abstract color from space. You can only imagine space as black, which though in reality is caused by the privation of light, still manifests itself as a positive property. So space always has color. And the space you perceive when you locate sounds, if you imagine it you see it in black still, and if you don’t imagine it, then it is just empirically learned which way you point your head based on the relative volumes.

This means INDISPUTABLY that if space is a condition of sensibility, SO IS COLOR. That means not only space and time, but ALL PARTICULAR QUALITIES are conditions of sensibility, thus space and time are not “prior” to sense, and the only condition of sensibility is the faculty of the brain that produces sensible qualities from the peripheral nervous system impulses, which means ONLY SENSE ITSELF IS THE CONDITION OF THOUGHT/CONSCIOUSNESS TO RECEIVE SENSE. KANT IS AT LAST IRREFUTABLY REFUTED.

>space is a condition of sensibility
>how do I prove that space is transcendental? If space were empirical it would have to appear in space!
this is textbook circular logic lmao, space is a priori because it’s the consition of sensibility because… because it just is ok!

Why do people on this board still fall for this? Empiricism is obviously correct. The mind invents space in a creative act to organize sense data. It’s really the 21st century and you still believe that the brain comes pre-installed with space like an xbox? lol. Kant autists must die

What do I need to read before him?

>This fellow was quite black from head to foot, a clear proof that what he said was stupid.
OG chud

Does Kant ever explain how we get the categories or how we determine them like Plato did with his world of forms? I'm on Section 21 (Pg. 139 in Penguin) of Pure Reason

>i know things from the beginning
>but i don't know what i know
>so therefore go outside incel and learn about what ideals you have by how you perceive the world
there is no meme

People like to meme about how philosophy and metaphysics is stupid because we have physics now and some other people post the schizo infographic of Heisenberg talking about Plato and stuff, but doesn't philosophy have a long intimate relationship with physics anyway? I'm reading this guy and if I get what he's on about, while he is criticising traditional metaphysics for its use of unprovable a priori claims he is trying to set boundaries for metaphysics to exist as a genuine science and points out we can be aware of some things a priori rather than through sensible intuition such as space and time, and we can make synthetic judgements using reason with them. This stuff like time and distance is straight from high school level Newtonian physical laws, Kant himself was a physicist and I even heard a professor say his mission was to try and save Newton's physics from Hume (and in the process he dropped an autism bomb on the empiricism vs rationalism debate with criticism of them for using pure reason to make a priori judgements out of their asses without first asking if it's even possible for humans to know this stuff)

>>21797646
I've made 4 post in this thread so far (5 now). I just love making fun of review-hate-bro

>”The man who commits suicide “sinks lower than the beasts.” We “shrink from him in horror.”
>“Nothing more terrible can be imagined.” “We look upon the suicide as carrion.” And if a man attempts suicide and survives, he has in effect “discarded his humanity” and we are entitled to “treat him as a beast, as a thing, and to use him for our sport as we do a horse or a dog.”
>The Metaphysics of Morals, 1797
Woah so this is the power of german philosophy...

>>21680574
No. Kant was handsome

Out of these secondary literature on Kant (CPureR, more specifically) which one is the best:
Henry E. Allison’s Kant’s Transcendental Idealism
Frederick C. Beiser’s German Idealism (his chapter on Kant which is comprised of almost 200 pages)
Beatrice Longuenesse’s Kant and the Capacity to Judge
Paul Guyer’s books on Kant
Cassirer’s Kant’s Life and Thought

Join De Monarchia to discuss about literature, philosophy, religion, poetry and other related subjects.
https://discord.gg/NMRSjYRQ

>>21591608
I don't know man, The dude convinced the world that Objectification is a thing (but not when you do it for money) . It buffles me that there are no legit published counter-arguments to something so stupid.

Was he correct about objectification?
How come there is no legit counterargument to the whole thing even after all these years?

If you read manga, then you are not European.