Every object of perception, no matter its name after its perception, is conditioned by space and time and is a mental content. Images in memory were o...
It may be too wide for all that the human intellect can do, sure. But with respect to space and time, experience is only ever going to be whatever the...
If perception is predicated on physiology, wouldn’t perception be possible even without things to perceive? Wouldn’t the senses still work, even if th...
True enough, and the bane of humanity in general. That notwithstanding, if you ever come to know what you shall do, or what you shall not do, then you...
Sure, but at the risk of detouring the thread topic? Up to you, of course; it’s you that called the meeting. Moral obligation relative to interest, in...
We know nothing better than we know our own will. If the world is will, then there is nothing we couldn’t know about the world. Kant’s “epistemic limi...
Negative on both. Moral obligations begin with interest in a principle, and one SHALL, not merely SHOULD DESIRE to, abide by a categorical imperative ...
….and both are no more than mere experience. Philosophy is a system, and a system is not an experience, even if all experience is by means of it. Ikno...
Same as it ever was, huh? “…. Human reason has never wanted a metaphysic of some kind, since it attained the power of thought, or rather of reflection...
While I agree morality is a covenant, I reject morality as having any connection with religion, insofar as the covenant holds with one’s self alone. I...
I can see that. Technically, we might say one is the aesthetic domain, one is the discursive domain, truth overlapping both, from pure practical reaso...
You have the searchable CPR, so for your own sake, check out “Of Reason in General”, around A299/B356 or so. For your own sake because I probably won’...
Shall we start over? I inject moral as a qualifier for obligation, because the topic is concerned with moral facts. I thought to continue the moral co...
That’s kinda the whole can of worms, innit? We’re going to bother with establishing a category, calling it “truth”, demand a certainty from it….then o...
Gotta be careful here. The nominal definition of truth, indicating merely an example of what may be a truth, is not the same as the logical criteria i...
Ok, but why are desires not simply synonymous with tastes? Moral obligation: that interest of will, by which the worthiness of being happy is justifie...
Your quote hits the sweet spot in me. Which is sort of a euphemism for spending a long time in the dark between the ears. But you and I both may have ...
All good, nevertheless my only objection is here: fundamental obligation is categorical, represented as a command of reason, re: shall, whereas hypoth...
According to You-Know-Who, only mathematics affords demonstration, as opposed those propositions that are “immediately certain”, which, I guess, just ...
Philosophizing is social. is doing the approach to philosophy; when such introspection arrives at a conclusion, philosophy is being done. Haven’t you ...
No heights. Depths. My thought for defining element was the intuitive use of pure reason. Step down: subsuming a possibility under a principle; Step d...
Yes, I get that, but the ask is….what is a defining element of the mind. I guess I don’t get how something every human mind can do, or there is someth...
I was wonderin’…..like…..why should we attribute to our minds a defining element given from our senses, when it is certain other animals have senses? ...
And I commented to the contrary, with consistent generality, the highlighted relevance not on rules. Your originating mention, as stated, is, ipso fac...
Ehhhh….only you says it wasn’t. At this point, it’s a tie, I think it was both clear and relevant and you apparently do not. Or at least question whet...
All I know of Quine is the Two Dogmas essay. Do you have some short article where he states, or some second order literature that recounts, the argume...
Not those idealists of a certain kind: “….. For although education may furnish, and, as it were, engraft upon a limited understanding rules borrowed f...
“…. All that in any way belongs or can belong to the world is inevitably thus conditioned through the subject, and exists only for the subject. The wo...
Oh absolutely. Simple complementarity principle: if we insist there is that which is knowable, that which is unknowable in itself is given immediately...
I meant the curtailment the extravagances of thought without stifling it. The subject imagining freely, but understanding he can only go so far with i...
I hear ya. My getting us clearer as subjects, is probably more closely related to metaphysics, which in turn is closer to your mention of critical tho...
Ahhh. All’s well that ends in reason alone. Still….bone of contention, due to my lack of sufficient study perhaps….seems odd Kant would declare it rat...
Good. Thank you. A response not loaded with useless metaphors, just straight answers to direct questions. ‘Preciate it. On “Religion Within the Limits...
What is bare reason? Place of reason. Is that supposed to indicate a condition wherein the faculty of reason is suited to be employed? So Kant's place...
Given my understanding of the conceptions the words “unworldly nonsense” represent, it is safe to say I’ve never spent one second of time on it. If it...
If one holds with the position that it is we who decide what reality is, or, perhaps, how the reality that is, is to be known as such, that says more ...
In the text, Descartes stipulates that the I exists….as a thinking thing. The common iteration of that stipulation only states “I am”, which does not ...
“…. The first pure cognition of understanding, then, upon which is founded all its other exercise, and which is at the same time perfectly independent...
Comments