/lit/ - Literature

Kant created a distinction between Pure and Practical Reason, why does he create this distinction and what are the differences between Pure and Practical Reason? He also further creates a distinction between Pure Practical Reason and Impure Practical reason, what are the differences between them? This Pure-Impure distinction is especially confusing to me considering he created this distinction with a priori knowledge. When Kant claims a priori knowledge is pure or impure are the words pure and impure stand ins for Analytic and Synthetic? Does that mean the pure and impure distinction in reference to Practical Reason is the Analytic-Synthetic distinction, is there such thing as Analytic and Synthetic Pure Reason or is he just reusing terms? I'm confused and would be happy if someone can explain this.

I asked on /his/ but all I got where people making jokes and memes so I came to /lit/ I guess the books related would be Critique of Pure Reason, Critique of Practical reason, and Groundwork for the Metaphysics of Morals.

>Proves the existence of the synthetic a priori

>>15544763
my 9 inch pussy destroyer is objective

>The biggest pseudo intellectual philosopher was a lanklet
>the objectively greatest philosopher of all time was 5'2"
Short Men Stay Winning

>Philosophy is so powerful that 95% of humans alive today follow it even if they don't know that they do

>Proves that the synthetic a priori is possible

>>15047583
>hint: you will not, you are too much of an animal
Nice projection coomer. The superego possesses a priori dominance over the ego and the id. Upon the recognition of one's own agency, only the weakest of the weak remain animals. There is nothing stronger than the ideal as the ideal is omnipresent and exist both within and above you irrespective of what you choose to exalt. If you don't live for your ideals and ideas, you're simply an animal - a machine responding to stimuli utilizing your subconscious, algorithmic response to internalized information in the form of stimuli

>>15036162
>based, Vergil exceded his predecessors, even Homer himself

How can one man be so based?