What was that thing Kant came up with that halted most metaphysical inquiry because you cant rationalize nor sense transcendentals accurately in discursive terms? Are there any criticisms against it? Is it still accepted today?
>>2457702
noumenon, not transcendentals i mean
>>2457702
Reason. Subjectivity. Autonomy.
it's a supraphenomenological assumption. it's religious at best. there is no evidence within your perspective that there exists aspects of a thing unattainable through your perspective.
kant was talented at being eloquently wrong.
>>2457917
>le Kant is wrong because his methodology is useful for religion
euphoric, I bet you also think you're smarter than Kant, eh?