[ 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.19979823 [View]
File: 225 KB, 1296x632, kant circus.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
19979823

>>19978386

>> No.19928454 [View]
File: 225 KB, 1296x632, kant circus.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
19928454

>> No.19728076 [View]
File: 225 KB, 1296x632, kant circus.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
19728076

>> No.19450078 [View]
File: 225 KB, 1296x632, 1615753498401.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
19450078

>>19449966

>> No.18779073 [View]
File: 225 KB, 1296x632, 1615753498401.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
[ERROR]

>> No.18668201 [View]
File: 225 KB, 1296x632, 1615753498401.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
18668201

>>18668128

>> No.18560467 [View]
File: 225 KB, 1296x632, kant circus.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
18560467

>>18554265
>>18559184
>>18559316
Underrated posts.

>> No.17782308 [View]
File: 225 KB, 1296x632, kant circus.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
17782308

>> No.17508658 [View]
File: 225 KB, 1296x632, kant circus.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
17508658

>> No.17401146 [View]
File: 225 KB, 1296x632, kant circus.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
17401146

>>17399864
>Hegel was a gigachad and right about basically everything.
>Kant and Schopenhauer were both 100% on the spectrum though.
Correct.

>Also their ideas are retarded too
Wrong. At least for Kant.
Schopenhauer was a bitter incel with maybe some solid ideas, but Kant was a genius. I don't think that his possible autism has anything to do with his ideas, only his lifestyle.

>> No.17351402 [View]
File: 225 KB, 1296x632, kant circus.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
17351402

>> No.16920671 [View]
File: 225 KB, 1296x632, kant circus.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
16920671

>>16920665

>> No.16071233 [View]
File: 225 KB, 1296x632, kant circus.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
16071233

>>16070877

>> No.15910306 [View]
File: 225 KB, 1296x632, kant circus.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
15910306

>> No.15783224 [View]
File: 225 KB, 1296x632, kant tuck duty.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
15783224

I'm interested in the doctrine I've heard attributed to kant that "being is not a predicate". I'm interested in classical metaphysics, and this doctrine seems to oppose all metaphysics that posit the real existence of things like essence, existence, actuality, and potentiality. I want to check out this argument of Kants, but I hate his writing style, and I don't know where to find it. Can someone tell me where it exists in his writing so I can check it out? Also, if anyone knows of some rebuttals, and places I can find conversation on the subject of the possibility constituent ontologies to matter like essence and existence.

>> No.15767218 [View]
File: 225 KB, 1296x632, 546668CC-58BF-43BC-AA9C-D9E9B14B872C.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
15767218

>>15767210

>> No.14893033 [View]
File: 225 KB, 1296x632, 1578062406621.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
14893033

>> No.14466120 [View]
File: 225 KB, 1296x632, 84293084294.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
14466120

>>14466090

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