Why does /lit/ hate Kant so much?
because the phenomenology is a better transcendental deduction than the transcendental deduction and kant is an autism slave to his newtonian weltanschauung
>>8253810
Because Kierkegaard is bae.
>>8253819
But Kierkegaard, like other existentialists, has committed philosophical suicide
>>8253826
Go away frog.
>>8253826
Sisyphus is sad
how many people here have actually read the metaphysics of morals and not just the groundwork
>>8253810
he's an insecure manlet
Because he's a Chinaman from Konigsberg obviously.
>>8253810
I love Kant and would love to talk about Kant with anyone else who is interested :)
>>8253920
How come Kant was so influential?
>>8253810
/lit/ wants to justify all their actions through nihilistic moral relatvism
>>8253959
but what's wrong with that?
>>8253949
Because he made the subject qua self-conscious-knower the center of philosophical enquiry. plus his methodology etc. anyway it is almost impossible to imagine any decent philosophy after 1781 that isn't post-kantian in some serious way.
>>8253949
>>8254001
His ideas were unique for the time, and, while open to sometimes back breaking criticism, those ideas remain poignant for students of philosophy to build their knowledge base just like the works of plato and others.
I don't want to compare him to Newton since Newton's achievements are possibly unrivaled throughout all humanity, but his concept on gravity could be likened to Kantian notions. Guiding for a time, important within the framework of the study, and good food for thought when supplemented with more current knowledge.
>>8254032
yeah, um, kant has not been superseded......
Because he Kant be stopped.
>>8253810
because much of his philosophy is rule-based, technical, and doesn't have much overlap with the sloppy inhumane art that existentialists and absurdists seem to like so much, which for the average underachieving 20-something that frequents /lit/ equals "muh no fun allowed." plus no-one here actually is interested in the history of ideas or reads at all
>>8253856
I have.
Kant has no poetical value whatsoever and ethical imperatives are gay
>>8253856
I have. took a grad seminar on it.
>>8254107
>no poetical value
Representation, freedom, and ethics have no poetical value?
Cause he's methodical af
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3SUWK_pWrbw
This covers it pretty succinctly.
>>8253856
Ich habe so getan.
>>8253826
Amen.
I love Kant. Don't agree with his meta-ethics but Inclination vs Duty, kantian retributionism and contradiction of the wills and reality are all grouse concepts with profound and workable insights.
>>8253810
>can't have access to noumena
>but noumena are accessible through reason
>>8253826
Life is not absurd. Camus is absurd.
>>8253959
Nah. Immoralism.
>>8254706
amen
>>8253810
I thought /lit/ liked Kant, whence all the tsun Schopenhauer posters.
>>8253826
>But Kierkegaard, like other existentialists, has committed philosophical suicide
explain
>>8253959
everyone justifies themselves to something they believe in
>>8254869
Not him, but i'd assume he meant taking a leap of faith, rather than acknowledging skepticism and retaining intellectual integrity.
Because Ayn Rand hates him, therefore I hate him as well.
I used to be a deontologist using applied Universality until I realized that it's based on the concept of duty rather than rationality.
>>8253826
>others commit philosophical suicide by not retaining integrity
>we must imagine Sisyphus happy
umm
He just makes shit up as he goes. total bananas
