/lit/ - Literature

>>14789596
Protip: you Kant*

I have read Descartes, Hume and Berkeley. How do I start with kant? Should i start with the prolegomena? Please someone help me

>>14789636
missed opportunity.

>>14789596
Holy fuck. What made Kantians seethe so hard that they're spamming all the time?

>>14789643
Not for a Kantian. The lack of both foresight and handsight is necessary for its ethic.

>>14789604
That’s not a trilogy, it’s a duology (Torah is part of the Bible)

>>14789596
>>14789604
A New Hope, Empire Strikes Back, Return of the Jedi

>>14789660
Then he should have showed a NT stand alone. But don’t forget that Book of Mormon. It’s cannon too.

>>14789660
Mein Kampf is part 3: Revenge of the Germans

>>14789656
topkek

>>14789640
Read the preface to the critique of pure reason then you read the introduction and so on

>>14789596
Funny, I just bought these books... in what order should they be read?

>>14789702
Funny. You want to read Kant yet you don't even know how to use google.

>>14789705
cope

>>14789648
Hegel administered a lethal blow that they still haven't finished bleeding out from, whining about, denying the existence of, etc

>>14789702
You start with the one that lays down Kant epistemology and metaphysics

Hmm I wonder which one of those three books might be?

>>14789710
It is indeed cope, I won't deny. But you're still retarded.

>synthetic a priori judgements
why is this so significant

Forget the theories, head right for Applied Kant:
https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/26187256-the-thing-itself

>>14789752
Because we want metaphysics, retard. Not everyone is a soulless physicalist.

>>14789730
ok so you're saying start with the greeks
got it thanks

Maybe you guys can help me: In the preface to my edition of the Critique of Practical Reason, Kant makes reference to a work (presumably his) called the Critique of Speculative Reason. Is this a standalone work that has been published, or is it contained in another of his books? My apologies if this is a stupid question.

>>14789887
He's probably just referring to the first Critique.

>>14789596

>>14789904
Okay. Thank you.

>>14790060
He was just doing his duty, anon. No need to thank him.

>>14790066
;D

>>14789713
Hegel was a fucking charlatan. Read some Schopenhauer, you dogmatic faggot.

>>14789656
Based

>>14789648
Common sense and Aristotle retroactively refuted him.

>>14789596
I'm usually all for primary sources, but seriously fuck Kant. I dragged my dick through the first 100 pages of the Pure Reason critique and dunked the book in the dumpster in rage. This faggot can't talk, or at least can't write. Maybe it's better in german, but the english translation makes Pynchon sound coherent.

>>14790402
>Common sense
This is the most Anglo-Saxon expression that it is possible to utter

>>14790419
wait until you see Hegel

>>14790419
What edition were you using? I hope you were using the authoritative one. Also

>reading Kant without a Kant dictionary and a Companion to Kant.

>>14790424
I know I hate it so much
I hear it every day and it makes me want to move to a different continent

>>14789596

It's a quadrilogy my dear fellow, it's just that the fourth installment was written by a second author.

>>14789640
I went to Harvard for a semester on a program at my redneck-tier state school and the entire time I was there I spoke in a heavy hick accent and referred to the prolegomena as the "progleglognama" just to watch the eggheads squirm. Was great fun and never broke character even once.

>>14790618
Give me the idea of that book in a nutshell

>>14790633

I haven't read it but I have a copy handy and I've read some others who refer to it. Basically, it (appears to be, I haven't read it, take my description with a grain of salt) is a fun cultural criticism romp where Sloterdijk considers "classical" cynicism (Diogenes, etc) and contrasts this classical idea with "modern" cynicism, which is authoritarians, drug lords and other jerks being jerks and simply wielding power, not caring about any principles.

The text is regularly interspersed with interesting/titillating/sometimes edgy illustration, including Playboy ads, Otto Dix artworks, medieval artworks (to illustrate old European cultural notions) and a still from Salo.

>>14789640
Good idea to start with the prolegomena. It's an introduction to CoPR that Kant wrote as a consequence of even famed contemporary philosophers of his getting lost throughout this book.

>>14790659
does he think such "jerks" didn't exist in ancient times or something?? has he never read about any of the caesars? genghis khan??

>>14790419
You're probably not familiar with scholastic terminology. If that's the case you literally don't know what most of the words used by Kant actually mean.

>>14790620
based

>>14790720
wait wait wait, are you trying to tell me kant is going to be full of scholastic terminology? what the fuck, i thought that shit ended after descartes. i just ordered the prolegomena. i don't want to read scholastic autism. what the fuck am i getting into

>>14790392

>>14790739
What are you implying with this post? It's not like you've read any of these authors (e.g. Hegel, Schop, Kant etc)

What have you done today to attain the Kingdom of Ends?

>>14790419
The Transcendental Aesthetic is very easy compared to the Logic.

>>14789596
I know, technically the "first" one is a sequel made in retrospect, but it's pure genius in combination