[ 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: 89 KB, 625x1000, PortableSecondCritique.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
23378207 No.23378207 [Reply] [Original]

...attention is directed to purity of will, first only as a negative perfection, in so far as in an action done from duty no motives of inclination have any influence in determining it. By this the pupil's attention is fixed upon the consciousness of his freedom, and although this renunciation at first excites a feeling of pain, nevertheless, by its withdrawing the pupil from the constraint of even real wants, there is proclaimed to him at the same time a deliverance from the manifold dissatisfaction in which all these wants entangle him, and the mind is made capable of receiving the sensation of satisfaction from other sources.

>> No.23378215
File: 128 KB, 470x640, johann_gottlieb_fixe.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
23378215

>fixes your philosophy in you're path

>> No.23379275

So what's the gist of his argument against reason?

>> No.23379648

>>23379275
the pure concepts of the understanding only apply to concrete instances of possible experience so metaphysical arguments like arguments about a first cause or ontological argument are invalid because they attempt to apply pure concepts beyond what can actually be experienced

>> No.23379661

>>23379648
nein! lesen es wieder!

>> No.23379670

>>23379661
I assume you're talking about some technicality like only the ontological argument and not the antinomies are result of application beyond experience but I don't give a fuck and I'm not going to read it again

>> No.23379674

>>23379670
look closely at the OP image

>> No.23379685

>>23379648
This makes sense, somewhat. I just figured the only reasonable answers to such things was, "I dunno" or "We don't have enough evidence to overcome the uncertainty and make any logical conclusions" or something along those lines. Granted, the book is about a critique, rather than a refutation.
Thanks for clearing that up.

>> No.23379688

>>23379674
that guy wasn't talking about your post you autist

>> No.23379690

>>23379685
no anon that other anon isn't even talking about the right book

>> No.23379694

>>23379688
this thread on the second critique. that's the context dotard.

>> No.23379703

>>23379694
that guy clearly knows nothing about Kant and was just using your post to ask a general question, no one cares about practical reason except you. "argument against reason" obviously refers to the transcendental dialectic. you are just autistic.

>> No.23379704

>>23379690
So what's the gist of this one then, if the last one was about Critique of Pure Reason?

>> No.23379732

>>23379703
>argument against reason" obviously refers to the transcendental dialectic. you are just autistic.
says the autist

>> No.23379742

>>23379704
Pure Reason tells us what to do irl and also we have free will and also we can prove God and the immortal soul exist from the fact of free will.

>> No.23379799
File: 496 KB, 1064x1064, 1B273F1C-9BD7-4D54-A845-89DFA06039D3.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
23379799

>>23378215
>fixes his philosophy in his path

>> No.23379805

In the beginning was the medicine and the medicine was the beginning I am the medicine Where the medicine ends the world ends you cannot go forward in an absence of space repeat.

>> No.23379961

>>23379742
>implying free will isn't an illusion fabricated from our ability to make predictions
Alternatively, free will could have just emerged from biology. Don't need some supernatural mumbo jumbo to explain it.

>> No.23380114

>>23379961
>free will could have just emerged from biology. Don't need some supernatural mumbo jumbo to explain it.
oh the irony you sweet summer child

>> No.23380130

>>23378207
Should I even bother with the Greeks if I can't understand what's going on here?

>> No.23380300
File: 93 KB, 655x1045, IMG_1748.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
23380300

>>23380130
start here

>> No.23380446

>>23380130
If you worked through Plato & Aristotle thoroughly, then through to the Late Platonics (ending with Eriugena), that would suffice for a lifetime. You have second hand Kant and Neo-Kantianisms just by being present currently.

>> No.23380951

>>23380114
Pure condensation with 0 point. Typical.