/lit/ - Literature

>>17725762

>>17725767
>getting your philosophy from a cartoon

Actually it was Plato and Wittgenstein

>>17725762
Read Deleuze, Heidegger and Hegel to find out

>>17725762
>was wrong about each of his positions

>>17725762
that isn't marx

Why did anybody bother trying in the first place?

Read Nietzsche

>>17725987
Wittgenstein was kind of a retard when it came to reading philosophy though, Plato included, I believe he called him a swindler.

>>17726060
>and Hegel
This is a philosophy thread, not a charlatanism one

noumena a shit, embrace noesis

>>17725762
refuted by Guenon (pbuh)

>>17726408
I would assume thats because much of Kants philosophy is still a matter of debate. Also, das ding an sich wasn't properly understood until Schopenhauer identified it with the will.

>>17727868
>das ding an sich wasn't properly understood until Schopenhauer identified it with the will.
That's because it wasn't meant to be, that's the whole god damn point. God I hate the Plato-wannabies trying to make a god, Will or GEIST out of Kant's noumena. Kant explicitly states at the end of the Analytic that there is a distinction between positive and negative noumena (ding an sich), which is that a positive one (which he rejects) is an actual determination of a property of the transcendental object, whereas the negative one is acceptable, but only exists as the bounds of knowledge totally outside of what we can ever possible know or understand (it is a placeholder for further empirical/intuitive enquiry). Schopenhauer DID NOT understand Kant, he just interpreted Kant the way he wanted. This is extremely obvious when you look at how Schopenhauer picks ONE of Kant's antinomies and proves it against the other. This totally misses the point of what Kant was doing with the Antinomies.

>>17725762
Is this Can't or hegel?

>>17725762
you need to read the neokantians. The Critiques are really just the Prolegomena to a new Critical philosophy

>>17727902
>for further empirical enquiry

>>17725762
He wasn't even able to refute Hume.

>>17725762
Plato's real heir is Schopenhauer

>>17728067
Are you talking about the problem with induction thing? because he did refute that

>>17728426
You could at least skim a Wikipedia page before trying to talk about philosophy.

Kant's attempted resolution of the Third Antinomy through the phenomenon-noumenon distinction, and more broadly the realm of natural necessity vs the realm of freedom, is the foundation of Hegel's speculative philosophy. Kant's argument in the Critique of Pure Reason that the causation-vs-freedom problem is soluble if we assume two relatively isomorphic and compatible realms does not solve the diremption of freedom and necessity, it just displaces the contradiction from the world to consciousness. And since Kant is an idealist, the very core of his system remains contradictory. This is why Hegel attempts to supersede the Third Antinomy by explaining that the necessity of the contradiction which lies within it is actually the way to resolve it. How he does this is spectacularly complicated and difficult.

>>17728579
Contradictions are not solutions, they are problems.

>>17725767

>>17725762
Trying what?

>>17725762
>le Kant touch this huehuehuehue

>>17726060
>Deleuze and Hegel
You’ve never read Deleuze

>>17730165
>spookposters can only communicate in low effort memes
color me surprised

I love Kant so much. I would walk on foot into that war occupied Königsberg, dig him out of his grave and weep in his hands if it meant I could find the resolve for philosophical intellectual restraint as he had in his writings.

>>17732402
based

>>17725762
>solves philosophy

>>17732159
Low effort OPs get answered easily with simple replies. No reason to get salty