Immanuel Kant

>>28902
This is the beginning of all degeneracy in the West.

Starting strength by mark rippetoe

>>28902
I know I'll get shit on for this, and rightfully so, but I just could not get through Kant. I tried, and it was very hard to understand. Do you need to work up to this or something? Or just take it very slow and with lots of notes?

>>28902
>continental philosophy
>modern philosophy
You wanna know how I know you're gay?

>>29315
>Uhhh
>yaaahh
>about that
>uhhh no.
We went down that road a long time ago.

>>29381
Only because it requires a bunch of self-referential nonsense to understand. He's not really saying anything new. But his followers think he's modernphil Jesus.

Kant was a fucking retarded

Stop reading this shit

>>29406
Yes, but when this cancer entered educated thought it gave rise to liberalism, Marxism, and the end of religion.

File: kantlet.png (88KB, 630x152px) Image search: [Google]

88KB, 630x152px

>Kantlet

>>29444
Oh I see what you mean. Carry on.

>>29437
This. He's overrated shit. If you really care about what he's talking about, Hume is superior in every way. But all of that shit is mostly uninteresting.

His categorical imperative is useless nonsense that people only pretend makes sense.

>>28902
Nice timing & Deontology too, A++

>>29477
>if everyone rode on the trolley free there would be no trolley lmao

that it belongs on /his/

None of you know the first thing about Kant.

Groundwork for the Metaphysics of Morals is a fantastic introduction to Kant and it's not hard to read at all unless you're just not trying at all. Prolegomena to Any Future Metaphysics is the next step. The critiques are longer and more difficult but groundwork and prolegomena provide a solid foundation. Anyway OP, don't listen to those idiots.

>>30026
t. Continentalfag

>>30488
kant is probably the most important philosopher in analytic philosophy since 1960

>>29444
lol liberalism existed long before Kantian thought

>>29444
Where did you learn this? It's completely incorrect on so many levels

File: KantBeer.jpg (28KB, 195x277px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 195x277px

>>29411

> He's not really saying anything new.

Gonna chill and wait to see if you can explain just what you mean.

*sip*

>>29444
>MUH LIBRUHLSSSSS

Haven't read him, but have a question. Isn't emotional, non logic driven ideas what we call people who don't use philosophy at all? I thought that's why we started searching for "truth."

If we are talking about truths which cannot be sensed, wouldn't that be plato's gig?

>>28902

Nice timestamp. Palate cleanse afterwards with some Thomas Aquinas.

>>32838
>emotional, non logic driven ideas
Are you implying this is what Kant was doing? Because that's completely fucking wrong, whoever told you that is a complete dumbass.

File: Juno Views Jupiter From Below.jpg (204KB, 1425x1869px) Image search: [Google]

204KB, 1425x1869px

>>32838

Kant's philosophy often involves emotions and other non-logical mental states - but these states are interpreted rationally, logically, and that's what makes the procedure philosophical. The objects of philosophical reflection do not themselves need to be philosophically reflective, as is obvious when we shift our attention from inner representations, like emotional impulses, to outer representations, like rocks and water and trees and planets.

Christcuck delusions and mental gymnastics to justify muh god in the age of Enlightenment
Read any contemporary response to Kant instead

>>34106
this t b h

File: Daphnis.jpg (100KB, 1041x1041px) Image search: [Google]

100KB, 1041x1041px

>>34106

This is simplistic. Kant did have an underlying bias towards monotheism that skewed his system, as can especially be seen in the Critique of Practical Reason - but how much of this was due to any sincere belief in orthodox Christianity, or due to the need to appease the piety of his audience, is less clear. Kant himself would not willingly enter a church (which is likely related to his upbringing among Pietists who were wary of organized religion), and he probably felt the need to dress his system in Christian garb so as to ward off suspicions of atheism; he published arguments for the naturalistic development of the solar system from a primordial nebula, for the possibility of an evolutionary process of species development, and against the need for a theistic foundation to morality.

And how well can anyone judge the reliability of a contemporary response without reading what it's responding to?

>>29445
topkek

it's like pottery

anybody has copypasta/comic strip/quick rundowns explaining kant and his influence?

To truly understand Kant, you must know his history, where he comes from.
Before reading his works, I would highly recommend reading up on his past, try out his wikipedia page for starters

File: image.jpg (293KB, 2309x1920px) Image search: [Google]

293KB, 2309x1920px

>>34694

You could try following this link, starting with the thirteenth post. If you read what follows twice, I hope enough will be clear for you to underestand many Kantian basics - though I didn't write it to be as intriductory as you're requesting. But you'll have to get used to some much denser writing if you want to dance with the man himself.

https://4archive.org/board/his/thread/771658