/lit/ - Literature

I did it again, /lit/.
I bought a bunch of books I'll put in a box and maybe read one or two someday

I cant go to the library anymore.
This cutie girl from my studies is there always and walks around bare feet.
I know she likes me since she started writing me randomly when we first got to know each other, laughs at all I say, and every time we see each other in the library staircase we pause and chat and when the library closes we walk home again towards the old dorms till our paths or plans separate us. She is really kind but her teasing me with her feet crushes me. I can’t focus after I have seen her prancing around our halls with her feet.
>bad feet only that she doesn’t care if they get dirty which takes away a lot, but still: her toes and arches ache me even then

Too based for his own good

>>13542592
>Der Geist Kants spukt immer noch durch die Straßen und dem Schloss Königbergs.
>Spät an Herbstabenden kommen hochmütige Privatphilosophen raus um ihre metaphysischen Schwärmereien zu verkünden, wozu Kant sein Urteil gibt.
>In der ersten Nacht kommt ein junger Mann und schreit: “Buddhistische Prozess Theologie!”
>Kants Stimme erwidert: “Dogmatiker!”
>In der zweiten Nacht kommt erneut ein junger Sprosse und ruft: “Haeckelischer Monismus!”
>Die Blätter säuseln und der Wind flüstert: “Dogmatiker!”
>In der dritten Nacht kommt ein exzentrischer Halunke und durch seinen Schnauzer deklamierter: “Deluzeianische Bergsonier!”
>Die gleiche Antwort hallt wider: “Dogmatiker!”
>Schließlich, in der vierten Nacht erscheint ein Mann, doch spricht er nichts.
>Nach langer Weile verwirklicht sich der Geist Kants, neugierig des Schweigens des jungen Herausforderers gegenüber.
>Kant frägt ihn warum er seine Metaphysik nicht teile.
>“Wovon man nicht sprechen kann, darüber muss man schweigen”.
>Kants Geist vergeht und endlich wurde er zur Ruhe gelegt.
>An der Stelle, noch Heute, kann, je öfter und anhaltender man vorbeikommt, das moralische Gesetz in einem und der bestirnte Himmel über einem das Gemüt mit immer neuer und zunehmender Bewunderung und Ehrfurcht erfüllen.

Hello friend! I see you're new here, but let me help you out.
Check the sticky.

>>13140047
I have no idea, but I want to know so I keep on reading philosophy and learning.

>>13064456

>>12994809
>morals is a relative, contingent, and human domain
spoken like a shit philosopher

Which works of german Idealism do I have to read before tackling this beast?
>exluding Kant’s KrV of course

Is there a survey or quiz I can find out to determine my personal philosophy?

>>12869019
me too anon, me too. we'll turn out okay eventually

What literature will help me get a girlfriend?

I'm interested in phenomenology.
Plz work your magic anons and recommend me essential phenomenology literature.

>>12365415
outed. (actually I have two copies of the groundwork for the metaphysics of morals in there). I studied Kant quite a bit in school, but I never ended up picking up the critiques. one day, anon...

>>12286768
right, but you understand that it is a geometric fact that the interior angles of a triangle add up to (the angle of a circle / 2). We didn't invent that, it's a truism that existed long before humans were around to define it. a triangle is a defined that way because IT MUST EXISTS IN THAT FORM. there is no way it could be any different. Now contrast that with another claim, "all cows are black and white". that statement, although also a definition invented by humans, it can be DISPROVEN through experience (e.g. finding a brown cow). there is NO WAY TO PROVE THE DEFINITION OF A TRIANGLE WRONG THROUGH EXPERIENCE.

>>12263960
what do i do if i dont love anything/anyone

>>12258203
Berkley BTFO
>In the analytical part of the critique it is proved that space and time are only forms of sensible intuition, and therefore only conditions of the existence of the things as appearances, further that we have no concepts of the understanding and hence no elements for the cognition of things except insofar as an intuition can be given corresponding to these concepts, consequently that we can have cognition of no object as a thing in itself, but only insofar as it is an object of sensible intuition, i.e. as an appearance; from which follows the limitation of all even possible speculative cognition of reason to mere objects of experience. Yet the reservation must also be well noted, that even if we cannot cognize these same objects as things in themselves, we at least must be able to think them as things in themselves. For otherwise there would follow the absurd proposition that there is an appearance without anything that appears.

>>12007600
Spinoza championed rationalism where Descartes failed
german idealism was right all along
praise Kant and sage

>Currently-Critique of Pure Reason
Struggling incredibly, only forty pages in and already re-reading the last twenty pages (Against my desire.)
>Last read- Prolegomena to any future metaphysics.
Easy read and a great piece of writing.

>>11746514

>>11662330
It's really not. I mean, I suppose it's a meme if you just want psude credits. Philosophy is a dialectic, everyone is constantly responding to everyone (spare a few outliers like Spinoza, Witty). Anti-Oedipus is an explicit dialogue with Freudian theory. For instance, this line from AO:
>In a word, the opposition of the forces of attraction and repulsion produces an open series of intensive elements, all of them positive, that are never an expression of the final equilibrium of a system, but consist, rather, of an unlimited number of stationary, metastable states through which a subject passes. The Kantian theory according to which intensive quantities fill up, to varying degrees, matter that has no empty spaces, is profoundly schizoid.
If you haven't studied Kant, you obviously miss the reference. You can google this one (although trying to understand Kant through a google search easier said than done), but literally the whole book does this with Freud. They even use the same case study he does (Judge Schreber), and they don't recount it because they expect you to be familiar with it. It's a good read, you can bluster through it and still have a lot of fun – just don't expect to get to the end and "get it".

>>11641585
>>11641586
>>11641590
rare based post, fuck compatablism