/lit/ - Literature

only if you follow up with phenomenology of spirit

>>10369166
I only read through the transcendental deduction. I'm going to go back to it though

>>10369166
Not that translation

>>10369166
Yes, he's a philosopher with a clear and coherent system that you have to sit down and study to understand structurally as opposed to memers like Nietzsche you can just piece together from hearsay

>>10369166
>No; I think I see quite clearly what Schopenhauer got out of his philosophy -- but when I read Schopenhauer I seem to see to the bottom very easily. He is not deep in the sense that Kant and Berkeley are deep".

>>10369166
If you are a Kant scholar or interested in really digging deeply into his work. Otherwise just stick with a good secondary source.

>>10369255
>stick with a good secondary source
worst advice ever

>>10369255
*smacks with rolled up newspaper*

No!

>>10369255
>Implying you can be any sort of philosophical scholar without reading the CoPR

>>10369352
Not since Kant was btfo by Hegel

>>10369166

That depends on whether you'd enjoy having your mind inverted forever.

I think you might.

mandatory reading

>>10369362
You need to understand Kant's arguments before you even consider Hegel's response though

If you haven't read him before just make sure you're ready to spend sometime getting used to his autistic writing style.