+- Lookism (https://bookism.net)
+-- Forum: Lookism Forums (https://bookism.net/forumdisplay.php?fid=1)
+--- Forum: Shitty Advice (https://bookism.net/forumdisplay.php?fid=2)
+--- Thread: Was kant right? Discuss (/showthread.php?tid=29910)
Pages:
1
2
Was kant right? Discuss - slop slinger - 15-12-2024
Kant
RE: Was kant right? Discuss - kathisterima - 15-12-2024
he kant be
RE: Was kant right? Discuss - Dreckssau - 15-12-2024
Ofc, look at the forehead on this guy.
![[Image: Immanuel_Kant_portrait_c1790.jpg]](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a2/Immanuel_Kant_portrait_c1790.jpg)
RE: Was kant right? Discuss - Honest - 15-12-2024
started reading cpr and it's mostly trying to remember the definitions for the convoluted jargon he employs; and then having to decode each convoluted, enigmatic paragraph of jargon; and then, after having decoded it, realise that you completely disagree with the point he's trying to make
but because it is so enigmatic, most people have to rely on academics to make sense of the work for them. and because academics are generally naive, credulous, cerebral people, they tend to have an affinity for figures like kant
of course, in actuality, the chinaman of konigsberg is deserving of ridicule, and exists for us as a prime example of a self-deluded sophist
RE: Was kant right? Discuss - Sexual chocolate - 15-12-2024
His moral theory is garbage. Copr is something a 10 yo would know intuitively, he just formalised it.
RE: Was kant right? Discuss - superiorpisspot234 - 15-12-2024
Cunt
RE: Was kant right? Discuss - slop slinger - 15-12-2024
(15-12-2024, 01:50 PM)Honest Wrote: started reading cpr and it's mostly trying to remember the definitions for the convoluted jargon he employs; and then having to decode each convoluted, enigmatic paragraph of jargon; and then, after having decoded it, realise that you completely disagree with the point he's trying to makeits ok to disagree
RE: Was kant right? Discuss - slop slinger - 15-12-2024
(15-12-2024, 04:51 PM)Sexual chocolate Wrote: His moral theory is garbage. Copr is something a 10 yo would know intuitively, he just formalised it.
what does 10 yo know
RE: Was kant right? Discuss - Insecurecel Incelcel - 15-12-2024
his book is written bad because he rushed it when he was delirious and thought he was gonna die soon.
the fact everyone in that field is supposed to slog through it to be considered really understanding the material instead of just learning the principles through a secondary source shows how fake philosophy is
no physics or engineering student is doing that
RE: Was kant right? Discuss - slop slinger - 15-12-2024
(15-12-2024, 11:28 PM)Insecurecel Incelcel Wrote: his book is written bad because he rushed it when he was delirious and thought he was gonna die soon.
the fact everyone in that field is supposed to slog through it to be considered really understanding the material instead of just learning the principles through a secondary source shows how fake philosophy is
no physics or engineering student is doing that
what's written bad about it
RE: Was kant right? Discuss - slop slinger - 15-12-2024
thoughts on the distinction between phenomenon and noumenon?
RE: Was kant right? Discuss - Sexual chocolate - 16-12-2024
(15-12-2024, 08:56 PM)HaughtyHotty Wrote: what does 10 yo know
Kant was brachy and his thoughts are worthless. Nietzsche had a better cranium
RE: Was kant right? Discuss - slop slinger - 16-12-2024
(16-12-2024, 12:11 AM)Sexual chocolate Wrote: Kant was brachy and his thoughts are worthless. Nietzsche had a better cranium
Pseudoscience. Opinion discarded.
RE: Was kant right? Discuss - Insecurecel Incelcel - 16-12-2024
(15-12-2024, 11:54 PM)HaughtyHotty Wrote: what's written bad about it
it's not in the official "for idiots" series
RE: Was kant right? Discuss - Honest - 16-12-2024
(15-12-2024, 08:56 PM)HaughtyHotty Wrote: its ok to disagree
no shit, thats why i made the post