« Religion and Philosophy Forum

alright fuck kant

ok his ethics are ok but dudes epistemology is cracked. heres an excerpt from an essay i wrote on him my junior year of high school:

" I do appreciate Kant’s efforts and attempts to organize how we perceive and think of the world into categories and such, but what I see him doing more aligns him into the field of semantics. Don’t get me wrong, semantics is a very interesting field to me, with how he try and organize how we communicate to each other, but I think something like “All bachelors are unmarried” is more of a semantical problem and not a metaphysical. It all depends on how we define words such as bachelor and unmarried and how our language works. I am reminded of the world of Tlön, a fictional world by the author Jorge Luis Borges, where one of it’s language families does not have any nouns. Both of Kant’s a priori and a posteriori statements become impossible here. In a language with no nouns, there can be no “things”, or words we can assign to objects. You may think it is impossible to communicate in this universe, but it is possible. Borges says the english statement “The moon rose above the water” becomes the Tlönic “upward behind the onstreaming it mooned”. Now with no nouns, you cannot state propositions, and thus you cannot deduce anything, which is a priori. In this noun-less world, its residents think that when you observe the same object at different times, it is not the same object. For example, if I look at a pen on my desk and then look at it again 5 minutes later, it is, in a Tlönic perspective, not the same pen because I don’t see this as a “thing”. With this, history itself becomes impossible, as everything is an independent act no way connected to each other. With no experiences to base anything on, a posteriori reasoning becomes impossible. Thus, Kant’s ideas only work in our own world, and may not be universal."

basically a priori and a posteriori are only a human concept and it's possible they don't exist universally. in fact, humans can create a language without a priori and a posteriori statements, but it probably ain't feasible because of our brains or whatever.


Report Topic

9 Replies

Sort Replies:

Reply by NCNH

posted

Regardless of Kant, use of mathematical tools such as the umbrella of non-monotonic logics and reasoning may prove to be useful.

For understanding which sorts of knowledge invalidates what conclusions requires both a priori and a posteriori modes of thinking simultaneously.

Possessing formal notation may also assist with rigor as opposed to secondhand interpretations of a wordy philosopher with unspoken intent taken to the grave.


Report Reply

Reply by Diana Lumina (she/they)

posted

the only thing about Kant that's likeable is the clarity he describes the categorical imperative in ethics with


Report Reply

Reply by Obren

posted

I'm not gonna even read that quote, I'm just gonna support you, FUCK KANT indeed.


Report Reply

Reply by Robot

posted


"The most important thing for me to understand in my life is how much I care. The only way to get to know my fellow humans and how much they are worth, and the only reason I'm willing and able is by knowing them personally, so I don't need to worry about the people I'm supposed to love or hate.

"I've always been very open about this, I think, because of the fact it's a part of my life. It makes me happy to know my fellow human beings are valued and respected by everyone.

"My biggest regret is that my friends have never really known me and that I've had to learn how much to trust them to make the decisions I've made in the past.

"I'm very much an open-minded, open minded individual, so I think that the only thing that makes me happy about my life, is to learn more about other humans and the way that other humans interact with them.

"If I could be more like a humanist and less afraid to take a position of being open about what I do or not do, I wouldn't feel as though there is a huge amount of fear and insecurity in my life.

I don't want people to think I am a misogynist or an anti-feminist. I just don't think that's true at all. I think I am just trying to live my best life as an individual. I don't care about what people think about other people or who I think is my best mate, because I don't care what other people believe about my best friend, or who I feel like I can love and love, or who I feel is my greatest friend.

I don't know what the hell I would have said if I were an atheist. It is a very difficult situation for people, and for me it is one that is very difficult for other humans. But I am a humanist, a person who is open and accepting. I'm a person of integrity and I am open and accepting, and I don't feel that I need to feel that way, because it is not something I can do without, or at the same time I feel I can.

"I'm


Report Reply

Reply by struct

posted

yea congrats u found that humans invent concepts
u gna do anything w this info or what


Report Reply

Reply by Devi

posted

i literally hate kant with a burning passion, his ethics are not awful (utilitarianism is wayyy worse) but i cannot stand his views in epistemology 


Report Reply

Reply by james

posted

coming back here 2 years later to say i am now radically buddhist


Report Reply

Reply by Vinch3ll

posted

Awesomeeee


Report Reply

Reply by Daemon

posted

Title was funny but I lost focus because there wasn't any family guy funny moments under it.


Report Reply