Thread replies: 5
Thread images: 2
Thread images: 2
File: C2D13E56-16C1-4C03-86D0-DE6BB4166FE8-5600-00000553C6983D89_tmp.jpg (446KB, 1110x1600px) Image search:
[Google]
446KB, 1110x1600px
Is it enough to be familiar with rationalist and empirical arguments to properly understand Kant's Critique of Pure Reason or should I actually read other philosophers first such as Hume? Also, I loved Spinoza's Ethics and I'm convinced that his moral system is perfect. Can you recommend me any other moral philosophy which I might like or will challenge my view?
>>
It's probably enough to be familiar with the arguments. You won't get the full sense of just how different it is what Kant's doing, but I don't think you'll miss out on too much.
You should probably read Descartes' meditations if you haven't though to be talking about all this modern philosophy. But apparently you've read Spinoza already?
>>
be familiar with early modern philosophers, read Hume.
>>
I read Critique of Pure Reason, but wasn't convinced by his arguments against it. I think especially now we need reason more than ever.
>>
File: 1442669455186.jpg (32KB, 400x300px) Image search:
[Google]
32KB, 400x300px
>>9161322
Stop.
Thread posts: 5
Thread images: 2
Thread images: 2