/lit/ - Literature

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

>>21371974
The normie is usually taken to be superior to the retard, autist, and schizo in normie metaphysics. However in actual metaphysics the normie can be considered engrossed in Kants empirical intuition, which is why she is adapted to the physical world. She is actually the lowest stage of human evolution. The next stage is the schizo, who is becoming engrossed in imaginal intuition and thus becomes lost in his confusion of the imaginal and the sensible. Next comes the autist who has been born with intellectual intuition and is higher or lower functioning in the sensible or physical world depending on how developed his intellectual intuitionis, with high functioning autists having a lesser developed intellectual intuition and low functiong autists having a more developed intellectual intuition culminating in the absolute retard who is so engrossed in intellectual intuition he has lost touch with physical reality. Thus as you see in the hierarchy of human being the absolute retard has the highest being and is closest to God while the normie has the lowest being and furthest from God. The normie is also known by the term of midwit.

I would like to add that autist, schizo and retard are normie terms developed by normies to understand nonnormies from within the normie metaphysic and therefore carry with them the negative connotations normies associate with these nonnormies. In actuality however these connotations are contingent overtones of the normie metaphysic which is a faulty metaphysic grounded on the lower empirical intuition as opposed to the higher intllectual intuition, giving direct knowledge of reality. But we must communicate to the normie on his terms if we are ever to communicate with him at all.

>>21364391
The normie is usually taken to be superior to the retard, autist, and schizo in normie metaphysics. However in actual metaphysics the normie can be considered engrossed in Kants empirical intuition, which is why she is adapted to the physical world. She is actually the lowest stage of human evolution. The next stage is the schizo, who is becoming engrossed in imaginal intuition and thus becomes lost in his confusion of the imaginal and the sensible. Next comes the autist who has been born with intellectual intuition and is higher or lower functioning in the sensible or physical world depending on how developed his intellectual intuitionis, with high functioning autists having a lesser developed intellectual intuition and low functiong autists having a more developed intellectual intuition culminating in the absolute retard who is so engrossed in intellectual intuition he has lost touch with physical reality. Thus as you see in the hierarchy of human being the absolute retard has the highest being and is closest to God while the normie has the lowest being and furthest from God. The normie is also known by the term of midwit.

I would like to add that autist, schizo and retard are normie terms developed by normies to understand nonnormies from within the normie metaphysic and therefore carry with them the negative connotations normies associate with these nonnormies. In actuality however these connotations are contingent overtones of the normie metaphysic which is a faulty metaphysic grounded on the lower empirical intuition as opposed to the higher intllectual intuition, giving direct knowledge of reality. But we must communicate to the normie on his terms if we are ever to communicate with him at all.

>>21216312
>t. hasn't even read who he's (retardedly) attempting to criticize

Kant literally explains in detail. You would've known if you actually read him. Why are midwits like this?

>>21211888
>He thinks that kant is trying to "prove" the antinomies, and positions his argument that the antinomies are predicated on a wrong question as a refutation of kant
Wow. Guenon is a midwit if this is true. No wonder he appeals to midwits, if true.

>For that the concept precedes the perception signifies the concept's mere possibility; the perception which supplies the content to the concept is the sole mark of actuality. We can also, however, know the existence of the thing prior to its perception and, consequently, comparatively speaking, in an a priori manner, if only it be bound up with certain perceptions, in accordance with the principles of their empirical connection (the analogies). For the existence of the thing being thus bound up with our perceptions in a possible experience, we are able in the series of possible perceptions and under the guidance of the analogies to make the transition from our actual perception to the thing in question. Thus from the perception of the attracted iron filings we know of the existence
of a magnetic matter pervading all bodies, although the constitution of our organs cuts us off from all immediate perception of this medium. For in accordance with the laws of sensibility and the context of our perceptions, we should, were our senses more refined, come also in an experience upon the immediate empirical intuition of it. The grossness of our senses does not in any way decide the form of possible experience in general. Our knowledge of the existence of things reaches, then, only so far as perception and its advance according to empirical laws can extend.

>For that the concept precedes the perception signifies the concept's mere possibility; the perception which sup-
plies the content to the concept is the sole mark of actuality. We can also, however, know the existence of the thing prior to its perception and, consequently, comparatively speaking, in an a priori manner, if only it be bound up with certain perceptions, in accordance with the principles of their empirical connection (the analogies). For the existence of the thing being thus bound up with our perceptions in a possible experience,
we are able in the series of possible perceptions and under the guidance of the analogies to make the transition from our
actual perception to the thing in question. Thus from the perception of the attracted iron filings we know of the existence
of a magnetic matter pervading all bodies, although the constitution of our organs cuts us off from all immediate percep-
tion of this medium. For in accordance with the laws of sensibility and the context of our perceptions, we should, were our senses more refined, come also in an experience upon the immediate empirical intuition of it. The grossness of our senses does not in any way decide the form of possible experience in general. Our knowledge of the existence of things reaches, then, only so far as perception and its advance according to empirical laws can extend.

>When reason employs conceptions alone, only one proof of its thesis is possible, if any. When, therefore, the dogmatist advances with ten arguments in favour of a proposition, we may be sure that not one of them is conclusive. For if he possessed one which proved the proposition he brings forward to demonstration—as must always be the case with the propositions of pure reason—what need is there for any more? His intention can only be similar to that of the advocate who had different arguments for different judges; this availing himself of the weakness of those who examine his arguments, who, without going into any profound investigation, adopt the view of the case which seems most probable at first sight and decide according to it.

How does Aquinas even recover?

>>21208884
>If we were not distrustful even of the clearest abstract theorems, if we were not allured by specious and inviting prospects to escape from the constraining power of their evidence, we might spare ourselves th e laborious examination of all the dialectical arguments which a transcendent reason adduces in support of its pretensions; for we should know with the most complete certainty that, however honest such professions might be, they are null and valueless, because they relate to a kind of knowledge to which no man can by any possibility attain. But, as there is no end to discussion, if we cannot discover the true cause of the illusions by which even the wisest are deceived, and as the analysis of all our transcendent cognition into its elements is of itself of no slight value as a psychological study, while it is a duty incumbent on every philosopher—it was found necessary to investigate the dialectical procedure of reason in its primary sources. And as the inferences of which this dialectic is the parent are not only deceitful, but naturally possess a profound interest for humanity, it was advisable at the same time, to give a full account of the momenta of this dialectical procedure, and to deposit it in the archives of human reason, as a warning to all future metaphysicians to avoid these causes of speculative error.

>>21041617
The normie is usually taken to be superior to the retard, autist, and schizo in normie metaphysics. However in actual metaphysics the normie can be considered engrossed in Kants empirical intuition, which is why she is adapted to the physical world. She is actually the lowest stage of human evolution. The next stage is the schizo, who is becoming engrossed in imaginal intuition and thus becomes lost in his confusion of the imaginal and the sensible. Next comes the autist who has been born with intellectual intuition and is higher or lower functioning in the sensible or physical world depending on how developed his intellectual intuitionis, with high functioning autists having a lesser developed intellectual intuition and low functiong autists having a more developed intellectual intuition culminating in the absolute retard who is so engrossed in intellectual intuition he has lost touch with physical reality. Thus as you see in the hierarchy of human being the absolute retard has the highest being and is closest to God while the normie has the lowest being and furthest from God. The normie is also known by the term of midwit.

I would like to add that autist, schizo and retard are normie terms developed by normies to understand nonnormies from within the normie metaphysic and therefore carry with them the negative connotations normies associate with these nonnormies. In actuality however these connotations are contingent overtones of the normie metaphysic which is a faulty metaphysic grounded on the lower empirical intuition as opposed to the higher intllectual intuition, giving direct knowledge of reality. But we must communicate to the normie on his terms if we are ever to communicate with him at all.

The normie is usually taken to be superior to the retard, autist, and schizo in normie metaphysics. However in actual metaphysics the normie can be considered engrossed in Kants empirical intuition, which is why she is adapted to the physical world. She is actually the lowest stage of human evolution. The next stage is the schizo, who is becoming engrossed in imaginal intuition and thus becomes lost in his confusion of the imaginal and the sensible. Next comes the autist who has been born with intellectual intuition and is higher or lower functioning in the sensible or physical world depending on how developed his intellectual intuitionis, with high functioning autists having a lesser developed intellectual intuition and low functiong autists having a more developed intellectual intuition culminating in the absolute retard who is so engrossed in intellectual intuition he has lost touch with physical reality. Thus as you see in the hierarchy of human being the absolute retard has the highest being and is closest to God while the normie has the lowest being and furthest from God. The normie is also known by the term of midwit.

Books that expand consciousness?

"Indeed, it would be a great stumbling-block, or rather
would be the one unanswerable objection, to our whole cri-
tique, if there were a possibility of proving a priori that all
thinking beings are in themselves simple substances, and that
consequently (as follows from this same mode of proof) per-
sonality is inseparable from them, and that they are conscious
of their existence as separate and distinct from all matter.
For by such procedure we should have taken a step beyond
the world of sense, and have entered into the field of noumena;
and no one could then deny our right of advancing yet further
in this domain, indeed of settling in it, and, should our star
prove auspicious, of establishing claims to permanent posses-
sion. The proposition, 'Every thinking being is, as such, a
simple substance', is a synthetic a priori proposition; it is syn-
thetic in that it goes beyond the concept from which it starts,
and adds to the thought in general [i.e. to the concept of
a thinking being] the mode of [its] existence: it is a priori,
in that it adds to the concept a predicate (that of simplicity)
which cannot be given in any experience. It would then follow
that a priori synthetic propositions are possible and admis-
sible, not only, as we have asserted, in relation to objects of
possible experience, and indeed as principles of the possibility
of this experience, but that they are applicable to things in
general and to things in themselves -- a result that would make
an end of our whole critique, and would constrain us to ac-
quiesce in the old-time procedure"
CPR B409-410

Well get to it boys...

Would Kant look on in approval of RICHARD B WELLS ' The Critical Philosophy and the Science of Mental Physics'? Would Bernado Kastrup look up in wonder at RICHARD B WELLS magnum opus ' The Critical Philosophy and the Science of Mental Physics'? Does /lit/ read?

Here we discuss books on metaphysics and related subjects

>>20656068
>The supernatural is only the natural of which the laws are not yet understood.

Anyone whose read Kant can only laugh at the midwits quoted in picrel

> A substance which would be per-
manently present in space, but without filling it (like that
mode of existence intermediate between matter and thinking
being which some would seek to introduce), or a special ulti-
mate mental power of intuitively anticipating the future (and
not merely inferring it), or lastly a power of standing in com-
munity of thought with other men, however distant they may
be -- are concepts the possibility of which is altogether ground-
less, as they cannot be based on experience and its known laws;
and without such confirmation they are arbitrary combinations
of thoughts, which, although indeed free from contradiction,
can make no claim to objective reality, and none, therefore, as
to the possibility of an object such as we here profess to think.

Spirit real ok. It just isn't ok.

Anons who think Kant was autism incarnate are just coping with being midwits who got filtered. Also coping with Kant actually having a social life unlike the filtered midwits of /lit/. That is all.