/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.20825570]

>2022
>still not refuted (and never will be)

[Anonymous No.20825578]

>>20825570
If the liberal world order is to be destroyed at some point in the future, then his moral system will become irrelevant. It doesn't need refuting

[Anonymous No.20825583]

>>20825578
what are you talking about?

[Anonymous No.20825606]

>>20825583
Can't you see?

[Strange Love No.20825631]

>>20825570

[Anonymous No.20825652]

Op is right. Fucking Hegel can talk all he wants but there’s no reason to believe anything he says besides “UHHH UHHH IT JUST SOUNDS RIGHT OK?” Or you could have a mental breakdown like Nietzsche after realizing you’ve been doing the literal devil’s work for the last 30 years. Either way all we can say about the universe is that our senses can only tell so much. Space and time are apriori, and you will never

Never


NEVER

Be a woman.

Red Fox OUT!

[Anonymous No.20825657]

>>20825652
You will never be with a woman

[Strange Love No.20825690]

>>20825652
>>20825657

Both appear to be factual statements.

[Anonymous No.20825701]

>>20825583

Kant is product of the secular ''''enlightenment'''' and he invented the concept of '''''''''''''''human dignity'''''''''''''' in order to impose humanism as true. ZOMG EVERYBODY IS CREATED EQUAL FROM NOW ON, BECAUSE.... THEY JUST ARE OKAY CHUDD!!!1111!!1 DEMOCRACY AND RATIONALITY WORK OKAYY BIGOT!!! MY MIND TOLD ME SO!!! I AM LE COPERNICUS OF MORALITY!!!
It's all retroactive though.
So for Kant, after he has been a racist piece of shit for 60 years and publishing his racist rants all over Prussia, he decided that humanism was so trendy that he wanted to be part of it. He created a whole propaganda from his intellectual atheist head and he came up with the categorical imperative and the transcendental idealism.
Of course, he was an atheist, so he is a cunning little bitch and his hypocrisy shows up when he talks about white lies for instance. Kant like any atheist is desperate to be seen a good boy, but since atheism has no morality and no truth, he had to go about virtue signaling. His little trick for lying is this: ''lying is bad my fellow atheists, but hey if you lie to somebody who expects you to lie, then you're still a good humanist boy''.
And all his crappy mental gymnastics was after he seethed hard due to Hume.
All of this because atheists want that Humanism be true, so they have to kill Christianity for instance, but they do it by using relativism. then the atheists are fucked, because relativism applies also to humanism, so they have to build a narrative where humanism is true even though relativism is true too.
Also Kant was the useful idiot to come up with a the whole apparatus for the atheist propaganda. He jumped in the bandwagon about ''''''''maths'''''''.
Kant was a piece of shit and did not understand a single line of maths. He was like the atheists today , the punk ass bitch who raves '''''''I FUCKIN LOVE SCIENCE NOW ZOMG''''''''' even though he never did a single scientific experiment and never studied maths ever.
So this kunt said ''omg newton is like my idol now'' and guess what, his little atheist gymnastics is a vain attempt to justify newton as the guy who got it right FOREVER.
look I am going to be clear. The atheists rejected god and the theist scholars. Instead they replaced god with something else: society. They replaced religions with ''''''''''ideology'''''''''. The priests in atheism are the ones who ''''''''''study society''''.
And the language of the atheists is maths. So the priests must use maths all the time.
Of course this son of a bitch was later on RKT by other atheists who went all ''oomg einstein is so right guys, he's our jew idol now'' with the exact same reasoning lol.
Ultimately Kant is part of the atheist canon. But like with anything atheist, you know it's created for bugmen by bugmen in order for them to dive deep into self indulgence. Egalitarianism is true because WHY WONT EVERYONE WANT IT TO BE TRUE. SO it's just is OKAYYYY. There that's fucking Kant for you.

[Anonymous No.20825719]

>>20825570
only the skeptical parts. otherwise hes presupposing like the rest

[Anonymous No.20825773]

>>20825652
space is an empirically acquired concept, only time is a priori. read Heidegger

[Anonymous No.20825778]

>>20825773
Heidegger has no idea what hes talking about, he misunderstood both Kant and Nietzsche and who knows how many other philosophers, he has almost nothing of value to say

[Anonymous No.20825782]

>>20825773
Space is not an empirically acquired concept though. Please point to the argument in Heidegger’s work that says otherwise.

[Anonymous No.20825786]

>>20825782
Or that it is, I meant

[Anonymous No.20825791]

>>20825773
>Space is not a conception which has been derived from outward experiences. For, in order that certain sensations may relate to something without me (that is, to something which occupies a different part of space from that in which I am); in like manner, in order that I may represent them not merely as without, of, and near to each other, but also in separate places, the representation of space must already exist as a foundation. Consequently, the representation of space cannot be borrowed from the relations of external phenomena through experience; but, on the contrary, this external experience is itself only possible through the said antecedent representation.

[Anonymous No.20825799]

>>20825570
*blocks your path*

[Anonymous No.20825825]

>>20825701
This is your mind on internet politics. Just wow anon, go to internet addiction rehab. Seek treatment. Your mind is poisoned lol.

[Anonymous No.20825837]

>>20825701
pills. NOW.

[Anonymous No.20825893]

>>20825570
Why would anyone care? He's not famous or anything.

[Anonymous No.20825898]

>>20825825
I dunno it has to be bait or something I refuse to believe someone who actually has read kant can think like this

[Anonymous No.20825957]

>and that's how you critique pure reason
Wow really???

[Anonymous No.20826151]

>>20825701
>ZOMG EVERYBODY IS CREATED EQUAL FROM NOW ON, BECAUSE.... THEY JUST ARE OKAY CHUDD
The people who say this (who argue against this, i mean) never realize that they would be the first people collared and thrown into a mine.

>little atheist values
Also your anti-equality stance is in dire contrast to the fact that the most intelligent and world-shaping people are generally not docile jesus followers nor believe in jewish supremacist theologies. The paradox or dissonance of the worst of the worst avocating that they be enslaved by people like me is really quite incredible EXCEPT that I know all about this from S+M and recognize it as emergent homosexuality.

Nice talking to you, slave.


>>20825570
>Kant Cook Won't Cook
Thanks for the summary of this book, OP, what a valuable contributor you are.

>>20825957
>>and that's how you critique pure reason
Is that what this book is about? It's ambiguous as fuck.

I only slightly clicked here out of curiosity whether Kant and figured out and made some German-level efforts at copying down the discipline of Logos in Rhetoric, making the title the critique 'of Pure Reason' w/ Pure Reason as the weapon.

Either way, fuck these swamp dwelling Germans.

Rome Invicta.

[Anonymous No.20826158]

>>20825799
literally who?

[Anonymous No.20826165]

Dunks on reason using.....REASON. The guy wasn't too bright.

[Anonymous No.20826213]

>>20826165
nigga shoulda been contented with
>Dunks on dips using CHIPS

[Anonymous No.20826858]

>>20825570
>not refuted
Nigga, he refuted himself, he himself said that there are some real life scenario's where his logic/reason or whatever falls apart.

[Anonymous No.20826896]

Didn't hegel btfo him?

[Anonymous No.20826918]

>>20826896
Hegel is nothing without Kant.

[Anonymous No.20827004]

>>20826918
At least he got beyond the "we can't get an understanding of the infinite because....we can't,okay"

[Anonymous No.20827875]

>>20825782
Not OP, but newborns lack depth perception. If we had a priori knowledge of 3D space, wouldn't this not be the case. Saliency can be empirically learned and based on correlating it with tactile data, we should be able to determine 3D space.

[Anonymous No.20828018]

>>20826858
>he himself said that there are some real life scenario's where his logic/reason or whatever falls apart
nope