>Yo I know that you need a posteriori knowledge in order to

>>9996441
Has anybody ever told you that you are an idiot?
If not then this will be a new experience for you.

>>9996454
not an argument

>>9996441

In order to determine the a priori conditions of experience via the transcendantal thought, you don't need any kind of a posteriori knowledge.

You obviously have no clue of what Kant said.

>>9996441
your post is really embarrassing considering the first sentence of the critique clarifies what you're supposedly pointing out. A priori knowledge is knowledge independent of any particular experience, of course you need experience for any kind of knowledge ("there can be no doubt...etc..")

>>9997531

The transcendental thought is about the cognition itself. In Kant's metaphysics, this is not an experiental being. Therefore, a transcendental thought is not about experience.

>>9997561
>Kant's metaphysics, this is not an experiental being

you're gonna have to elaborate on this. Preferably without hiding behind jargon

>>9997586

Kant's claim is that you can have a direct access to your cognition, without the mediation of experience.

I you can't get this, this is probably a matter of definitions. Just read Kant.

>>9996460
I am not surprised that a Molyneux fan doesn't understand Kant. Please defoo from this site.

>>9997705
okay, I'm still not sure what your issue with this is. I'm going to refer you to B116,A84-B129,A95 and then maybe we can pick up after that

>>9997737
I'm not the anon you replied to but maybe you should stick to fiction of you're not willing to learn a few new words.

>>9997762
>of you're not willing to learn a few new words.
that's the dumbest thing I have ever read in my life. Even dumber than a supposedly found inconsistency in Kant that is squashed in the book's first sentence and repeated ad nauseam throughout the work.

>>9997771
Was it because I made a typo? Go fuck yourself.

>>9997822
no you stupid retard. It's because you said that if I didn't want to learn new words I should read fiction. You fucking imbecile lol. If I want to go blind maybe I should pick up painting as a hobby too

>>9997832
>If I want to go blind maybe I should pick up painting as a hobby too

not him but what the fuck does this even mean

>>9997839
learning new words and word variation is integral to reading and writing fiction. Seeing is integral to painting and appreciating paintings. Not a great analogy desu but this is a thread filled with idiots and should be deleted

>>9997866
>learns new words from fiction
>calls others idiots

>>9998005
everybody learns new words from reading you absolute fucking retard

>>9998018
You're right. Learning the made up names of fake planets and dragons is real tough.

>>9998865
lel

>all bodies are extended

How can you know that all bodies are extended if you don't know what a body is?

>>9998895
dude god lmao

>>9998903
Explain it to me, how can we know that all bodies are extended if we do not have a previous understanding of what a body is and what extention is?

Who else here /categoricallyImpered/?

>>9996441
All modern philosophy is bullshit. The only philosophers who matter are the Greeks and people who seriously engage with the Greeks ie. Leo Strauss

>>9998895
All bodies are extended is ontological. Knowing what a body is is epistemological.

>>9996441
>dude empiricism lmao

>>9999055
How do you know how to categorize them that way? You must first understand them through experience to do that.