/lit/ - Literature

>>23463030
>an intuition can take place only in so far as the object is given to us. This, again, is only possible, to man at least, on condition that the object affect the mind in a certain manner.
In humans it is still passive and receptive because we cannot intuit at will whatever we want, as opposed to the spontaneity of thinking through which we CAN think whatever we want; we have FREEDOM to exercise our will upon thought which we cannot exercise upon intuition because (due to our having to apply the Categories of the understanding to even be having this conversation) we must think of it as DEPENDENT on and CAUSALLY DETERMINED by sensation.
Intuition does act upon that which is given it by sensation, but this act occurs regardless of our will, i.e., it is involuntary, and therefore passive and receptive in relation to some cause other than our personal will.

>>23444779
Our Critique would be an investigation utterly superfluous, if there existed a possibility of proving a priori, that all thinking beings are in themselves simple substances, as such, therefore, possess the inseparable attribute of personality, and are conscious of their existence apart from and unconnected with matter. For we should thus have taken a step beyond the world of sense, and have penetrated into the sphere of noumena; and in this case the right could not be denied us of extending our knowledge in this sphere, of establishing ourselves, and, under a favouring star, appropriating to ourselves possessions in it.

We should, therefore, have to regard the human soul as being conjoined in its present life with two worlds at the same time, of which it clearly perceives only the material world, in so far as it is conjoined with a body, and thus forms a personal unit.[9] But as a member of the spiritual world it receives and gives out the pure influences of immaterial natures, so that, as soon as the accidental conjunction has ceased, only that communion remains which at all times it has with spiritual natures.
- Kant, A Fragment of Occult Philosophy Aiming to Establish Communion with the Spirit-World

>>23367564
synthetic a priori knowledge

>>23334803
>He saying exactly how I quoted him
again refer to >>23332563

you keep quoting him out of context

>>23285821
>it works universally, not that it is necessary
universality and necessity are identical. you cannot have one without the other. if you say it works universally then you are also saying its necessary.

>we, however, have no possible means of verifying an a priori category for it.

literally the transcendental deduction of the categories lmfao

That's the price you have to pay for philosophy. You gotta no-life this shit. You can't have one foot in, other foot out. You're either an intellectual or a pseud. I gave up having sex so I could read. I gave up having friends so I could read. I gave up my sanity for the truth. Who am I kidding? You'll never be ready for Kant, you're not even ready for Plato... Get the fuck out of my board.

> Wissenschaft: propensity toward any rigorous practice of a poised, controlled, and disciplined quest for knowledge

Why do you guys hate the Kantfag do much?

You guys do know he btfo'd atheists and materialists right?

>>22865960
>His daily schedule then looked something like this. He got up at 5:00 A.M. His servant Martin Lampe, who worked for him from at least 1762 until 1802, would wake him. The old soldier was under orders to be persistent, so that Kant would not sleep longer. Kant was proud that he never got up even half an hour late, even though he found it hard to get up early. It appears that during his early years, he did sleep in at times. After getting up, Kant would drink one or two cups of tea -- weak tea. With that, he smoked a pipe of tobacco. The time he needed for smoking it "was devoted to meditation." Apparently, Kant had formulated the maxim for himself that he would smoke only one pipe, but it is reported that the bowls of his pipes increased considerably in size as the years went on. He then prepared his lectures and worked on his books until 7:00. His lectures began at 7:00, and they would last until 11:00. With the lectures finished, he worked again on his writings until lunch. Go out to lunch, take a walk, and spend the rest of the afternoon with his friend Green. After going home, he would do some more light work and read.

>>22822321
Did you not read Hume? Remember experience per Hume can never give us necessary truths. If we have them, where did they come from? Kant answers:

>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.

>>22789736
>transcendental

>I apply the term transcendental to all knowledge which is not so much occupied with objects as with the mode of our cognition of these objects, so far as this mode of cognition is possible a priori.

>>22789389
>don't know what to think.
sapere aude

>>22730933
>contemporary orthography
I hate this too. I think Fraktur is the best and makes reading German more fun but if you use it now ignorant retards think you are a Nazi. Such a shame.

But DeGruyter publishes 1902 Prussian Academy edition in Fraktur. I got lucky and found a relatively cheap ($30 USD) of the Second Edition Critique, but normally they are pricey. But they are available for free on google books methinks.

Here is first edition in original Fraktur:

https://books.google.com/books/about/Critik_der_reinen_Vernunft.html?id=TQHYROUGD4kC&printsec=frontcover&newbks=1&newbks_redir=0&source=gb_mobile_entity&hl=en&gl=US&ovdme=1#v=onepage&q&f=false

Here is second edition:

https://books.google.com/books?id=qZEPAAAAQAAJ&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage&q&f=false

intro to Kant
https://youtu.be/wlEMkAkGS1I?si=dLOnl6i7fZLnfs0L

>>22572667
>denying it is almost crazy.
A good metaphysician falls somewhere in between a mentally 'sound' person and a madman. He walks alongside the edges of the cliffs of sanity...

>>22563782
what part of
>a mere sketch PRECEDING the Critique of Pure Reason would be UNINTELLIGIBLE, UNRELIABLE, and USELESS,
was unclear?

>Read prolegomena first imo
your opinion is shit because it's a MEME. Kant said read the Critique first nooblet.

Kant:
>I offer here such a plan which is sketched out after an analytical method, while the work itself [the Critique of Pure Reason] had to be executed in the synthetical style, in order that the science may present all its articulations, as the structure of a peculiar cognitive faculty, in their natural combination.

>Our representations must be given previously to any analysis of them; and no conceptions can arise, quoad their content, analytically. But the synthesis of a diversity (be it given a priori or empirically) is the first requisite for the production of a cognition, which in its beginning, indeed, may be crude and confused, and therefore in need of analysis,—still, synthesis is that by which alone the elements of our cognitions are collected and united into a certain content, consequently it is the first thing on which we must fix our attention, if we wish to investigate the origin of our knowledge.

Analysis always presupposes an antecedent synthesis, and the Prolegomena (the analysis) presupposes it's antecedent synthesis (the Critique).

>>22550980
>What author masters this vision?

>No one, it is true, will be able to boast that he knows that there is a God and a future life; for, if he knows this, he is just the man whom I have long wished to find.
Amen.

>>22503202
A PRIORI FORMS OF INTUITION AND CONCEPTS

>If, by the complaint of being unable to perceive the internal nature of things, it is meant that we do not comprehend by the pure understanding what the things which appear to us may be in themselves, it is a silly and unreasonable complaint; for those who talk thus really desire that we should be able to cognize, consequently to intuite, things without senses, and therefore wish that we possessed a faculty of cognition perfectly different from the human faculty, not merely in degree, but even as regards intuition and the mode thereof, so that thus we should not be men, but belong to a class of beings, the possibility of whose existence, much less their nature and constitution, we have no means of cognizing.

>>22478646
A good metaphysician falls somewhere in between a mentally 'sound' person and a madman. He walks alongside the edges of the cliffs of sanity...