>A categorical imperative commands unconditionally that I

>>9329273
No its rational, you have to understand the whole Critique to get it though

Kant was literally 5 feet tall. Is manlet philosophy applicable to people of normal stature?

>>9329283
it's rational in the system he sets up, you mean? where an experienced sense of guilt, etc. proves free will/choice of action? i'm not through the whole thing yet, but don't really see how that'd be resolved. i mean i get that it fits, am i still missing it?

>>9329307
>it's rational in the system he sets up
Both that and objectively rational, actually

>>9329303
Go back to /fit/

>>9329427
It's "objectively rational" in the same way the phrase "A = A" is objectively rational.

>>9329434
>/fit/ is the new boogeyman
at least it's more exciting than /pol/

>>9329447
Manlets are specifically a /fit/ meme.

Really obtuse way of repackaging
>Do unto others as you would have them do unto you

>>9329307
You don't need to get through the whole thing, you need to reread that part, or maybe the entire book really. It's clear that you did not get it because:

>where an experienced sense of guilt, etc. proves free will/choice of action

That's fundamentally the opposite of what he's saying. And that's a pretty big part on his philosophy.

>>9329545
Just because they arrive at the same conclusion it does not mean that they are the same.

>>9329574
maybe i wasnt clear. that is not the opposite of what he's saying, though it is circular, so the opposite is also true. will post quotes from my computer.

>>9329545
It's specifically a way of repackaging that kinks out the moral loopholes in the Golden Rule.

>>9329574
you didnt understand at all m8

Why are the double digit IQ posters on this board so infatuated with Stirner? Is it because they think that they can just use the word "spook" as a tool to avoid enagging with any argument in an even semi-serious way?

>>9330622
hello 110-120 IQ

>>9329574

I heard that Kant uses freedom as a given to support morality in Groundworks and morality as a givnen to support freedom in the second critique.

Any Kantfags who can clear this up for me?

>>9330650
this is true as i understand it

>>9330626
>tfw actually 140 iq and realize that Kierkegaard ended philosophy a while ago

>>9330622
Don't make me say it.

>>9331386
Kierkegaard didn't finish philosophy because he didn't talk about every subject. You can, however, say something along the lines of "Kierkegaard pretty much finished philosophy and Wittgenstein put the last nail on the coffin".

>>9331536
this