[ 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


View post   

File: 1.24 MB, 1125x1411, 1541266400753.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
16397906 No.16397906 [Reply] [Original]

>Kant does not give one straightforward criterion for distinguishing between analytic and synthetic propositions; he gives two distinct criteria, which are by no means equivalent. Thus his ground for holding that the proposition ‘7 + 5 = 12’ is synthetic is, as we have seen, that the subjective intension of ‘7 + 5’ does not comprise the subjective intension of ‘12’; whereas his ground for holding that ‘all bodies are extended’ is an analytic proposition is that it rests on the principle of contradiction alone. That is, he employs a psychological criterion in the first of these examples, and a logical criterion in the second, and takes their equivalence for granted. But, in fact, a proposition which is synthetic according to the former criterion may very well be analytic according to the latter. For, as we have already pointed out, it is possible for symbols to be synonymous without having the same intentional meaning for anyone: and accordingly from the fact that one can think of the sum of seven and five without necessarily thinking of twelve, it by no means follows that the proposition ‘7 + 5 = 12’ can be denied without self-contradiction. From the rest of his argument, it is clear that it is this logical proposition, and not any psychological proposition, that Kant is really anxious to establish. His use of the psychological criterion leads him to think that he has established it, when he has not
HOLY FUCKING SHIT KANT WAS A LEGIT RETARD LMFAOOOOOOOOO

>> No.16397924
File: 272 KB, 575x620, OP.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
16397924

>>16397906
Begone

>> No.16397929

>>16397906
Great picture anon so lit

>> No.16397938

>>16397906
>by intellectually honest englishman
Nice oxymoron KEK

>> No.16397948

Yes coffee is good for you.

>> No.16397960

>>16397906
Annoying picture. Thread hidden and not read.

>> No.16397985

>>16397906
Need to fuck more black women desu

>> No.16398004

>>16397906
But couldn't we use a psychological criterion for both cases, thereby not running into any problems? We can think "7+5" and the subjective intension of that proposition does not necessarily include the subjective intension of the proposition "12". But we can't think of "body" without having the subjective intension of that proposition include the subjective intension of "extended", because a body is nothing else other than what is extended. The contradiction is not in denying the proposition " all bodies are extended", but in affirming that the subjective intension of "body" does not include the subjective intension of "extended", because if it doesn't include that, then it would have no subjective intension at all.

>> No.16398083

>>16397906
Where is this from?

>> No.16398210
File: 21 KB, 400x333, 1503260782500.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
16398210

>>16397906
>Ayer's and Kant's arguments are logical and psychological to the same degree. Both thinkers refer to their intuitions concerning the meaning of the statement "7+5=12," but since these intuitions are different, they arrive at different results concerning its semantical status.

>> No.16398248

>>16398083
Not op but from an essay by Ayer called On A Priori I believe. It's not nearly as damning as OP believes, either in itself, when viewed through philosophy of language, or when compared to Kant's understanding of the relationship between psychology and logic, and I'm sure in many other ways as well.

>> No.16398262

>>16398248
Thanks, I'll get there in due time. I'm on Locke right now.

>> No.16398263

>>16398210
APU! put down those soul stealing substances noa!!

>> No.16398283

>trying to refute kantianism as a kantian
The absolute state of the moderns

>> No.16398289

>>16398248
No I mean the black girl.

>> No.16398324

>>16398289
this is her onlyfans https://onlyfans.com/psypherrae

>> No.16398338
File: 104 KB, 551x491, Yuck!.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
16398338

>>16398324
>OnlyFans

>> No.16398351

>>16398324
>nosering
Who could've known

>> No.16398357

I got banned simply for posting a picture of blm on topic. Your pic should be a permaban

>> No.16398359

>>16398289
>>16398324
>>16398351
https://www.suicidegirls.com/girls/psypher/

>> No.16398362

>>16398357
>jannies
>existing on /lit/
LMFAO

>> No.16398603

>>16398004
you're missing the point. kant was a retard who thought he presented a philosophical argument but he was just doing psychology. psychology is an empirical science and can't be used in philosophical arguments.

>> No.16398622

>>16398603
based retard, "psychological criterion" has absolutely nothing to do with psychology, in fact Kant purported to prove that psychology is impossible

>> No.16398623

>>16398362
Yes xer even seethed at my post before applying for the ban

>> No.16398642

>>16398262
If you enjoy Locke you might like Ayer. Through his own philosophy he's a good historian of British empiricism. (In fact, a good part of his work, of the kind shown in OP, is a bit weasely in that his characterisation of past philosophers clearly proceeds in the direction of his preference for establishing the analytic as the basis of 'real' philosophy. As such he doesn't spend as much of his time doing philosophy so much as he does rewriting past philosophers to fit this preconceived mold. Talk about a priori.)

>> No.16398723

>>16398603
Ayers whole project is based on his intuition that all ideas result of material impression on the mind, so everything 'true' is verifiable or analytic. Ironically for both yourself and Ayer, this is the type of psychological predisposition to material impressions that Kant would deride since it would require a transcendental psychology, which for Kant is impossible.

>> No.16398806

>>16398622
>how people think about something and basing your argument on it, isn't psychology
>>16398723
kant was a retard.
>psychological predisposition to material impressions
empiricism isn't merely a psychological predisposition, it's a philosophical position with real arguments. smugly saying it's "a psychological predisposition" isn't an argument.

>> No.16398829

>>16398642
yeah he did a short summary of the great philosophers of the past intending to show that what they mainly did fit into his definition of philosophy and he only looked at the major british ones. Which I thought was based because all g*rms and fr*nch are intellectually dishonest charlatans.

>> No.16399207

>>16398806
>>how people think about something and basing your argument on it, isn't psychology
exactly, this isn't "doing psychology" as an "empirical science", how confused are you?

>> No.16399249

>>16397906
Even if this is true, it obviously doesn’t mean that Kant wasn’t a massive genius and that there isn’t a lot (A LOT) to learn from him even today. I think it is you who are retarded if you think that Kant’s work can be reduced to the analytic-synthetic distinction

>> No.16400605

>>16397906
>Black
>But really cute though
>But still black
My brain is short-circuiting. I don't know how to respond to it.

>> No.16401007

>>16398248
Thanks.

>> No.16401050

>>16397906
God damn I'm keen for a rumble in the jungle.
Any advice from anons experienced with black girls?

>> No.16401092

>>16401050
lure them with kfc and watermelon

>> No.16401255

>>16397906
The first isn't defined by psychological intension but by logical intension. Nothing logically predicated in either 5 or 7 entails 12. This isn't a psychological truth. Addition is a synthetic operation.

>> No.16401703
File: 92 KB, 1080x1313, 1591090462384.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
16401703

>>16397906
Girl could be cute for a negress but
>cow ring
>tattoos
>terrible anime whatever it's called face
Hard pass on this coffee. Posting better picture for the fine art of bleaching.

As for Kant, his retardation in logic is not subject to debate. If you want to read the definite BTFO on this point and many others, go for Bolzano's New Anti-Kant.
Springer has an English edition but it comes with the usual Jewish prices and some retarded angles like describing Bolzano as "analytic". Just don't read the side material like with all Anglo academia ramblings.
>https://link.springer.com/book/10.1057/9781137312655
Much cheaper in og German or French/Italian translations. Or pirate.

>> No.16401739
File: 577 KB, 2149x1649, Kant btfo.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
16401739

>>16401703
Confirm it's on libgen, just search for New Anti-Kant. These pages are relevant to OPs topic.

>> No.16401743

>>16399249
The need for synthesis can be dispensed whilst maintaining the ideality of time, space and causality. Schopenhauer taught us this.

>> No.16401746

>>16397938
K E K
E
K
>>16397985
don't we all

>> No.16402253

>>16400605
>girls cant dislike me if i dislike them first

>> No.16402256

>>16401703
forgot the weed bag on the bed