[ 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: 197 KB, 760x1165, kantreadthisshit.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
12238373 No.12238373 [Reply] [Original]

I'm 4 sentences in. When does it get intelligible?

>> No.12238389

>>12238373
Read the 4 sentences again, they're supposed to be intelligible.

>> No.12238424

>Almost 2018+1
>Falling for the Kant meme

>> No.12238462

Did you read Aristotle, Leibniz, and Hume before Kant like we told you do?
If not, do that and try to guess each word's meaning by its etymology, as well as its context.

>> No.12238472

>>12238462
I read up almost entirety of Aristotle, I'm not touching Hume since he was obviously retarded. Dunno about Leibniz

>> No.12238475

>>12238462
>>12238389
everyone who actually reads Kant knows the first critique is generally incomprehensible. even Kant knew this. fucking pseuds

>> No.12238487

>>12238373
learn how to read

>> No.12238500

>>12238373
read an overview and stop banging yr head against a brick wall dummy

>> No.12238508

>>12238475
I read the Critique of Pure Reason by going throught very slowly through it, about 20pgs per hour. It took me a month to read it from beginning to end, taking lots of notes along the way, but I'd say I understood it pretty well.
Kant's Critiques are kind of easy to understand in comparison to Hegel's Phenomenology of Spirit or D&G's Capitalism and Schizophrenia.

>> No.12238514

>>12238373
It is unreadable

>> No.12238608

>>12238373
When you stop reading it the way you've been reading it all this time. Instead try visualizing some structure of the book or get a notebook and write a schematic as you go reading it and correct your schematic based on what the book says and write any question you have. Read it with curiosity that is, developing models for what you're reading..

>> No.12238854

>>12238508
>20pgs per hour
oof that's a little too fast

>> No.12238961

>>12238508
>20 pages per hour
ahahahahha
Try a page a day. It's funny that you think you understand Kant.

>> No.12238981

>>12238373
try reading it like the japanese animes

>> No.12239006

>>12238961
>page a day
Dude one word a day is the fastest you should be reading Kant. Ideally take a couple days break between words to really absorb what's going on

>> No.12239021
File: 2.35 MB, 1803x2560, META.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
12239021

>>12238472
>I'm not touching Hume
The critique is a direct response to Hume and his pseudo BS. Read the Enquiry atleast
>Dunno about Leibniz
You'd be a fool not to read his philosophical writings. Read his metaphysics and the Monad just for starters.

I'd stop reading the critique and backpeddle just a bit if I were you.

>> No.12239785
File: 150 KB, 1192x338, LK.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
12239785

>>12239021

This, at least. What else were you even thinking, OP?

>> No.12239823

>>12238373
>I'm 4 sentences in
How about reading some fucking consecutive pages instead of stopping every twenty seconds to post on a cantonese marketplace forum

>> No.12239900

>>12238472
Hume and Leib are both god tier

>> No.12240314

>>12238373
This is an easy book to read, you're just a brainlet. If you want something unintelligible try Hegel.

>> No.12240317

>>12240314
is there people who can actually just read people like Hegel and Nick Land and comprehend everything?

>> No.12240395

>>12238373
shit like this is why I always try to fine the "read the first 40 pages for free" options on amazon or somewhere. Or find it at the library first

>> No.12240935

>>12238373
5 sentences in

>> No.12240996

>>12239006
Looks like the psueds are back in town. Ever letter in Kant's critique is worthy of a lifetime of contemplation. The revolutions of the karmic wheel are measured in the number of lives necessary to give the work its due consideration.

>> No.12241011

>>12240317
Hegel is mostly related to real things, but often goes deep into theoretical, abstract territory. Land is a failed philosopher who wanted to be a science fiction writer, which is why his work straddles between the two, and fails at being either of them.

>> No.12241164

>>12238475
Post a sentence or paragraph and I'll explain it lol.

>> No.12241168

I wish I could filter /lit/ to see only posts by people who have read the books they're talking about.

>> No.12241174

>>12241168
>thread count 0

>> No.12241176
File: 17 KB, 180x256, IMG_0048.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
12241176

>>12241164

This.

>> No.12241183

>>12238373
Put the CPR down and read the Prolegomena first. Also, you don't need to be a Hume or Leibniz scholar to start reading Kant but a basic understanding of them will help you a lot.
>I read up almost entirety of Aristotle
This is good. Aristotle is crucial.

>> No.12241193

>>12240317
Hegel is just magic nigger just turn your brain off bro. Believe in the dialectic and spirit

>> No.12241200

>>12241183
It takes less than a week to get through Leibniz's Discourse on Metaphysics, Monadology, and Hume's two Enquiries. It's not absolutely necessary to memorise everything they've got to say, but they do help smoothen the transition from Aristotle to Kant, especially when it comes to the a priori-a posteriori divide, the reason-understanding distinction, and the three proofs for God's existence.

>> No.12242100

Soon

>> No.12242130

>>12238373
Few people (if any) have understood the Critique through and through at their first go. Even if you did, you’re still going to have to revist it if you really care. Take it easy, feel your way through it at first. The further in you are in the Critique, the more it makes sense. It’s like learning a language, it’s very effortful at first (although the Aesthetic is admittedly the easiest part), but then you start getting better at understanding not only the jargon, but the manner Kant presents it. He admitted in several letters that the presentation of the Critique was far from perfect, but in his revisions for the second edition he changed very little. One of the oldest suggestions given to new readers of the Critique is to take a walk whenever it starts bogging you down. For the most part, the complications have to do more with Kant’s writing more so than it does with the concepts. I would suggest to read some secondary literature if it I didn’t think it was important to engage with the text itself before you start consuming readymade interpretations.

>> No.12242159

>>12238472
>>12239900
Don't trust /lit/izens on any subject. They are demons who try to make sure you fail in every step of your journey.

>> No.12242208

>>12241011
Does Nick land want to be Colin Wilson?

>> No.12242260

>>12238373
>>12242159
Also, don't listen to "you-can-do-it!" bros. You may not even know how to structure your learning let alone read the book in question. There is neither demon nor angel here that can know your comprehension. Philosophy like a trade has a specific trade language that must be learned, and unfortunately, you are likely to project your current understandings of terms on to Kant's in the beginning and then try to form logical opinions from those understandings rather then addressing the actual work. You probably wont even know you are acting almost solipsistically for years. What is really important is to actually be able to break free from your false consciousness about the world, to retrieve Kant's terms by the method he uses, and see how he sees. And I'm not sure you are going to get much from that if you are reading him as a base layer to reading anyone who responds to Kant now. Developing the context and truly understanding comes in the confidence of having done the readings and build up the lexicon so that you can go beyond being more than just a burnt out Sophist.

>> No.12242323

>>12240317
Some movements of thought are incredibly aesthetic and akin to perennial thinking about the nature of god in all systems. If you are interested in religion and religious texts, the final rationals of some philosophers thoughts are very predictable - as are humans. But having a generalists account of the history of philosophy is not worth much to you now, unfortunately. You should want to argue the details like a good technician, but getting back to the Greeks, Sophists get paid, and Phyrro > Stirner. Learn to write.

>> No.12242338

>>12242323
You mean as in writing is a form of learning write?

>> No.12242352

>>12242260
>you are likely to project your current understandings of terms on to Kant's

This is true for any communication.

>> No.12242400

>>12242260
You've got an example or just talking out of your ass. Critique is a very non-referential work, mostly because Kant considered every metaphisical work before his to be fucking pointless.

>> No.12242677

Just read it all, and he even says you won't understand it. But then read the prolegomena and reread the cpr again

>> No.12242693

>>12242677
just read is a meme. just comprehend is what you should say.

>> No.12242699

>>12242693
is that how you give people complexes that turn them in to systematizes.

>> No.12243514

>>12238373
Never...
>Penguin
And you probably bought a bad translation too.

>> No.12243543

>>12243514
The Translation is actually very readable and modern.