/lit/ - Literature

>>22225014
>A general remark may be added about the outcome that has resulted from the critical philosophy with regard to the nature of knowing [des Erkennens] and that has gained the status of one of the prejudices, i.e. one of the general assumptions of the age. In every dualistic system, and especially in the Kantian system, its basic flaw reveals itself through the inconsistency of combining [vereinen] what a moment ago has been declared to be independent and thus incompatible [unvereinbar]. While what had been combined was just declared to be true, so now instead it is declared to be true that the two moments, whose separate existence on their own has been denied to them in the combination which was to be their truth, possess truth and actuality only insofar as they exist in separation. Such philosophizing as this lacks the simple consciousness that in going back and forth in this way each of these individual determinations is declared to be unsatisfactory, and the flaw consists in the simple inability to bring together two thoughts (and in point of form there are only two of them present). It is therefore the greatest inconsistency to admit, on the one hand, that the understanding acquires knowledge of appearances only, while maintaining, on the other, that this kind of knowledge is something absolute by saying that knowing cannot go further, that this is the natural, absolute barrier [Schranke] for human knowledge [Wissen]. Natural things are limited [beschränkt], and they are merely natural things, insofar as they know [wissen] nothing of their universal barrier, insofar as their determinacy is a barrier only for us, not for them. Something can be known [gewußt], even felt to be a barrier, a lack only insofar as one has at the same time gone beyond it. Living things have the prerogative over lifeless things of feeling pain. For the former, an individual determinateness becomes the sensation of something negative, because, qua alive, they carry within themselves the universality of the living nature that is beyond the individual, they maintain themselves even in the negative of merely themselves, and feel this contradiction as it exists within themselves. This contradiction is in them only insofar as both exist in the one subject, namely the universality of its feeling for life [Lebensgefühl] and the negative individuality opposed to this. A barrier, a lack of knowing is determined precisely to be a barrier or lack only through a comparison with the existing idea of the universal, of what is whole and complete. Therefore, it is merely a lack of consciousness not to realize that the designation of something as finite or limited contains the proof of the actual presence of the infinite, the unlimited, that the knowledge [Wissen] of a boundary can exist only insofar as the unbounded exists on this side, in consciousness.

>>20929806
It doesn't at all though, Aquinas' just shows the universe has a cause just like everything else, it doesn't prove that this cause must be a deity. Which he can't prove because there exists no such evidence and is why religion is about faith.

>Phenomenology of Spirit has also been called "a philosophical roller coaster ... with no more rhyme or reason for any particular transition than that it struck Hegel that such a transition might be fun or illuminating."

>>19203228
>this is absent