Kant & the Death of Western Philosophy

Kant and the death of Western Philosophy from the point of view of the history of philosophy.

This video is stupid, but this correlation is probably worth a deeper investigation in meta-philosophy.

Category:

Entertainment

Tags:

• kant
• western
• philosophy
• death
• meta-philosophy
• history

[ParrhesiaJoe]

Wise philosophy abhors categorical statements, except in special circumstances. I think, therefore I am. Cogito ergo es, or whatever.

This is Kant twisted slightly to make the point of the Thesis. There are genuine analogues to Kant. You could say that the Categorical Imperative is simply a reducto ad absurdum of the golden rule... Kant's own universality.

Kant's Imperative is itself categorical, and therefore suspect. You can NEVER lie... EVER. But Kant isn't the first Categorical Philosopher

[bhigr]

@maksiiiskam2 Well then you misunderstood Kant. Because he was not saying that the transcendental argument proves the existence of space and time in the "world". The word as it is, the thing in itself, may not be derived from the transcendental argument. But, the transcendental argument proves that space and time must be part of the world as it appears to us (humans), i.e. the world of experience.

[MoonMankkkkkk]

Some people maintain Ayn Rand grossly misunderstood Kant and his influence on Western philosophy. If words from the horse's mouth, (words from a postmodernist), can't contradict this stance, nothing will.

[maksiiiskam2]

I do not actually think that Kant killed philosophy and this is not what I mean about transcendantal arguments. I'll rephrase myself:

"An element that must logically accompany thinking does not _have to be_ metaphysical".

Them Germanic modals are a pain in the ass for us Italics :)

[ogirv101]

@maksiiiskam2:

You consider that transcendental arguments miss the point because it doesn't adhere to the empiricist dogmatic view? Human psychology has nothing to do with the foundations of an argument, especially when people like Hume and Descartes led themselves to intellectual suicide with either pure rationalism or pure empiricism. Kant didn't end western philosophy, he saved it... He ended the little 'feud' between these two groups and provided a new way.

[maksiiiskam2]

Regarding Kant's philosophy seriously, I consider that transcendantal arguments miss the point in that , e.g. showing we have to think in space and time is not indicative of the world, but of human psychology. An element that must logically accompany thinking must not be metaphysical.

But in all honnesty, I hope this does not derive into an argument; this is not a particularily interesting subject to me.

[maksiiiskam2]

This video expresses a stupid thought I had after I felt curious enough to read a book from eastern philosophy and little subsequent research showed close equivalent for many pre-kantian

philosophers (though, neither Hume, Descartes, or Spinoza have any that I know of, which I purposefully (or maybe not it's being a long time) left out.

(cont)

[maksiiiskam2]

Please don't take this video so seriously :) I certainly recognise Kant's contribution to philosophy in initiating modernity and do not think philosophy can meaningfully "die".

(cont)

[danielsondanielson]

Quite peculiar, if not wayward, interpretation of Kant.

[TheFaustianMan]

Wow! You're saying about counterparts of western philosophy his me like lightening. You're quite smart.

[BrianTheMusicMan]

You have a great mind, you just need to work on your English!

[maksiiiskam2]

In short and honnestly, I hate linguistic prescriptivism. Thanks for watching and for the comment about Kant!

[maksiiiskam2]

If you refer to "pretentious diction", generally I have a much better understanding of these words than the "normal" equivalent: I actually purposefully avoid monosyllables, because I just cannot remember their meanings, since generally they have several and depend on the region, which I find impractical. If it concerns the words he finds meaningless, I'd invoke a "abusus non tolit usum".

(cont)

[maksiiiskam2]

Which of Orwell's remarks do you say I trangressed? I do not recognise myself in the verbosage. If it concerns the dying metaphors, anyway I disagree with Orwell. If it concerns the "operators", it is due to my speaking French: in French, no one ever discussed that these were preferable to simple verbs.

(cont)

[maksiiiskam2]

Maybe (I never noticed that), but one must admit that English-speaking thinkers have been more interested in sciences than in philosophy for the last centuries (since pragmatism, I guess).

For example, I could hardly name a reknown English-speaking existentialist (one: Hazel Barnes). There are non-philosopher writers who had existentialist influences (Samuel Beckett, Harold Pinter, Joseph Heller), but English-speaking post-modernist philosophers are quite few.

[randyhelzerman]

I think Kant was the last Continental philosopher who read anything written by an English-speaking philosopher...

[maksiiiskam2]

lol, yes propaganda! The world would be a better place if Kant was not taught in philosophy classes, isn't it?