Epistemology: Critique of Pure Reason Morals: Groundwork to the Metaphysics of Morals Politics & History: Perpetual Peace, What is Enlightenment, The End of History Religion: Religion with the Boundaries of Mere Reason

On Kant's terms, that cannot be subsstantiated. We know not what things are in themselves. We are confined to the form of our experience.

If you're reading the CPR fresh and you don't think it's intimidating, then it's very likely you're not understanding some very basic points in it and assuming things that Kant isn't assuming. What Kant is doing is not really intuitive. Aside from Heidegger or obscurantist philosophy like post-structuralism, Kant is pretty much the hardest to fully grasp. The reason being is because so many new terms are introduced and the modern conception of what an object is that comes from Descartes is abandoned. I would suggest you read the Prolegomenon first, as it is much more accessible. If somehow you are among those gifted to understand Kant easily, the worst that can happen by reading the Prolegomenon first is that you say to yourself "yep, that's the stuff I read in the CPR; and philosophy is a subject which requires repetition.

Dialectical Materialism Thanks for the tip. i'm trying to get some background to Hegel, and thought I'd start with Kant. Philosophy is difficult and I tend to get easily confused. Have you read Adorno's published lecture on Kant? That too helps, but I'll look up the Prolegomenon and see if it makes Kant more accessible.

***** Knowing Kant wouldn't be an absolute requirement to understanding Hegel, but it would definitely help. A lot of secondary readership on Hegel would give a basic introduction on the points in Kant that Hegel disagrees with. Yeah, I love Adorno's conclusion in it to. He basically says, "yeah. Kant was right and scientism is wrong." To which all other academics, particularly other Neo-Kantians said "yeah, right. we're going to keep demanding that Kant be understood without a ding an sich because it sounds too mystical." I particularly adore his work with Horkheimer on the culture industry. It really provides a large basis for modern Marxist theory like Marcuse and such. The Prolegomenon is Kant's way of summing up the main arguments and conclusions of the CPR. The reviews of the first CPR weren't particularly good, and a lot of people misunderstood what Kant was trying to deduce, particularly in the Transcendental Deduction. If you read the B deduction, he flips the argument and argues backward from the categories to experience.

I've always been a big fan of Adorno and really like how he critiques pop music especially jazz. However, I've always avoided reading the 19th century philosophers (except Nietszche) and would like to read Hegel's Phenomenology of the Mind -- first in English and then once more slowly in German. Have you read any Lacan?

***** Lacan is obscurantist, but still not as obscurantist as post-structuralists like Derrida and Lyotard. It's strange, but I actually enjoy reading Lacan once you understand all of the terms he introduces, or the definitions of Freud's terms that he re-appropriates for his own project. I can't even remember the title of the paper from his Ecrits that I remember reading last because the title was hilariously obscurantist. It was something like "The Mirror Stage as a formative function of the I" or something like that. Considering that I was studying M&E, this paper seemed like it made the most sense to read. I've read others, but that one hit me as the most philosophic, whereas the others just struck me as critical theory in general.

The same way we know anything about the physical world, through our senses. We sense time in a similar way to the way we experience sound or space.

The same way we know that we were made to look like our parents...which universally is true

why do you use the word "fucking,"? Do you mean it somewhere?

Candace Owens

Not really, Kant's theory on the noumenal/phenomenal world states that as soon as we experience something it becomes part of the phenomenal world. That everything (Including space and time) are all a priori concepts There is no way to get access to noumenes because we are humans, and us humans can only perceive through the phenomenal world. As far as us having empirical evidence about all these new discoveries solves nothing. We can be totally wrong about everything, just because we have all these cool new telescopes doesn't mean we debunked Kant, don't overestimate our scientific discoveries, we are just human, all too human

Yes, but had you read more carefully you would have known that in " La critique de la raison pure" Kant explicitly states that Men will never reach and understand the noumenal world. Yet, with scientific and technical progress we're slowly getting to fathom the noumenal world !

Immanuel Kant impresses me as somewhat of a great Mystic. His notion about "[humans] never reach[ing] and understand[ing] the noumenal world" is a highly mystical concept, not new to Western or Eastern religious traditions. As these religious traditions are constructed to provide the necessary conditions for the human being to experience a noumenal experience, inwardly. But, the human body cannot transcend into the realm of noumenal experience because the experience(s) are Inside and occurring in Consciousness. The consequences of this noumenal experience producing phenomenal experiences in Matter, externally, physically, materially afterwards. Noumenal is of the Mind. Phenomenal is of the Body and Brain. Constructive thoughts? Feelings? Insights?

AARON VAN DOORN That makes complete sense, and is a really impressive insight. Although, it just sounds strange to hear Kant called a mystic - lol. My only gripe would be that while Kant seems content to stop his inquiry after discovery of the existence of mystical (or noemenal?) knowledge, which is opposed to other mystics (especially Eastern) who might teach methods of discovering mystical knowledge.

***** Take this example : Phenomenon ( from ancient greek : what you see ) Noumena ( from greek, the substance, the essence, the thing in itself) Phenomenon : light, as we see it Noumena : definite wavelength composed of photons which are invisible, and untouchable that is just one example of course we have way much more

i hate deontologists more than nazis hate jews.

In sum, he is the representative of the rule based literally bloody disaster of the modern world. He destroyed all virtues into a rational pile of horse shyte that naturally follow virtue ethics. In other words, an overthinking dumba**.

A piss poor channel you got there too bud

....says the crackpot conspiracist.