is transcendental idealism compatible with darwinian evolution ?

is this a serious question

transcendental idealism isn't compatible with reality, in fact it's the reason for a lot of anguish and depression

Stop smoking weed.

Transcendental idealism is a baseless assertion. Kant was a charlatan.

>>9120516
>is this a serious question
No, because it did not contain a question mark?

Thus ^^^ being an example of a serious question

>>9120438
yes. But it is incompatible with non euclidean geometries

>>9120529
So I guess you didn't read the book where he proves it?

>>9120525
[citation sorely needed]

>>9121002
didn't read the book

I don't even know what a comparison between the transcendental project and Darwinism would look like but both Kant and Schopenhauer had proto-Darwinian evolutionary theories.

>>9121562
Except he proved nothing and you know it.

Kant's philosophy, especially his practical philosophy, isn't at all compatible with Descent of Man or any Darwinist theory of the origins of morality for obvious reasons.

I talked to a Kant scholar once about whether Kant would have been an evolutionary epistemology type guy by default if he had known about Darwinian ideas, and he said "no, Kant would have hated Darwin" but we got cut off before I could ask why.

>>9120438
yes

>>9120438
Nope. Partly because of the liberal politics that come with it. Speculative Idealism on the other hand + dialectical idealism are fine with darwinism. Hegel has been accused of being the seed that would grow into nazism, if we believe the eternal anglo.

>>9121768
>Partly because of the liberal politics that come with it
wa
>Speculative Idealism on the other hand + dialectical idealism are fine with darwinism
the fuck
>Hegel has been accused of being the seed that would grow into nazism
who cares

I guess...?

The issue of Evolution is a meaningless Material formality anyway.

>>9121002
No it isn't

>be Christian

>spends his life constructing a system that proves its impossibility (killing metaphysics) and poses the nebula theory as a possible alternative to intelligent design

These are both true statements. What a strange paradox.

>>9121816
Now, now. Play nice.

>>9121768
Who's the 'Eternal Anglo?'

>>9121680
Well, shit. Go find him again!