/lit/ - Literature

No, I kant do that.

>>13877479
Kant always looked to me like someone put a wog atop that last, whithered grape you leave to the end of the bunch and consider not even eating.
Not commenting on his work here, just that he was a weird looking litttle grape of a man.

You, an ordinary metaphysician, wish to challenge me, the saintly infidel?

[groans]

>>13877549
>But, though all our knowledge begins with experience, it by no means follows that all arises out of experience. For, on the contrary, it is quite possible that our empirical knowledge is a compound of that which we receive through impressions, and that which the faculty of cognition supplies from itself (sensuous impressions giving merely the occasion), an addition which we cannot distinguish from the original element given by sense, till long practice has made us attentive to, and skilful in separating it. It is, therefore, a question which requires close investigation, and not to be answered at first sight, whether there exists a knowledge altogether independent of experience, and even of all sensuous impressions? Knowledge of this kind is called a priori, in contradistinction to empirical knowledge, which has its sources a posteriori, that is, in experience.

>>13877479
what was his problem?

>>13877548
>The feeling of ugliness must be properly based. Ugliness cannot be grounded on any definite concept or set of rules; such a judgment would not be aesthetic at all.
What did he mean by this?

>>13878002
Enough guys! This battle is a matter of only ideas and not personal aesthetics. Our friend from Konigsberg has put forward a good argument that I am going to destroy completely.

>>13877982
Didn't he die a virgin?