[ 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: 28 KB, 220x287, 2F964ADE-7AE8-4448-8571-B636A3E45E5D.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
12006880 No.12006880 [Reply] [Original]

>start with Kant/Hume and go from there
you people need to stop giving advice like you know shit about anything

you memeing tards literally made me waste my money and my time on this goddamn autist that is beyond outdated. this idiot literally believes in a world where things *really* are conducted based on the understanding that people have inherent value. and the icing on the cake? he gives absolutely no proof whatsoever. and every. single. idea. is nothing but an alternation of rationalization and words. I literally sat through 8+ pages of this guy ramble on about the categorical imperitive, planting his philosophy in a rational basis.

I'm just making this to let other anons know not to fall for this meme. these people are not smart. /lit/ needs to stop recommending them. they have absolutely no value in the modern world and to call it "philosophy" is an insult to the actual field of study.

go with guys like Forest Gump and Rainman. they are far more pertinent and potent in their respective autism.

>> No.12006889

Sorry for the self-esteem shilling, anon

>> No.12007129

Philosophers have, ever since the days of Plato, thought that there is a world of pure ideas independently from the world of sense.
Although throughout much of Antiquity and the Middle Ages, people, starting with Aristotle did not normally think that there was a gap between the Understanding, which analyses objects of experience, and reason, which relies on ideas and logical order, Descartes opened the way for pure skepticism about the reliability of one's senses, and led to the revelation of this distinction by Kant.
Kant called himself an empirical realist and transcendental idealist. He doubted not the senses, but did believe that understanding relies on the use of a priori categories. Therefore, there is no understanding of objects just by the means of experience. Since perceptions may vary, and are sometimes not exactly reliable, it seemed to him that the use of reason was the most perfect way of figuring out the truth, yet reason, if allowed to run freely, may produce many false or chimeric statements.
Kant's work is a philosophical work, and not a scientific work, I must remark.