[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

Search:


View post   

>> No.13830610 [View]
File: 395 KB, 607x608, e96.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
13830610

>>13829486

>> No.13733549 [View]
File: 395 KB, 607x608, e96.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
13733549

>>13733534
Reminder Griffith was right

>> No.13728902 [View]
File: 395 KB, 607x608, e96.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
13728902

Was there ever a philosopher or Kantian who didn't reject Kant, but thought that he didn't go far enough in his critique? That he needs to be radicalized into a form of radical skepticism and that the validity of the categories to guarantee objective knowledge itself must be doubted, that reason itself must be overcome? If I understand correctly Nietzsche thought something similar, but rejected Kant, and limited his criticism to practical philosophy

Navigation
View posts[+24][+48][+96]