Anonymous 20-01-24 05:55:59 No. 21415
When I got to Kant, I couldn't understand a thing, not a single thing: "transcendental idealism," "numena," "phenomena," "antinomies," "categories"-they all danced in my head like mysterious monsters. I grasped some of what Kant said about "man as an end in himself" and the "categorical imperative." But this categorical imperative looked to me like a cold piece of intestine, which you could fill with whatever you wanted, there was nothing living or vital here, nothing that would give a living answer to living questions. Or maybe, it's just that I don't understand. Maybe my own intestine is too frail, maybe I'm not up to it. The pages of the book seemed to me an elaborate code I would never be able to decipher.
Anonymous 20-01-24 09:15:53 No. 21420
>>21419 >Don't bother understanding it. You'll only be trying in vain to understand basic and obvious truths contained within a gigantic mess of utter schizophrenic nonsense. You may as well read ancient scripture. Lol how I feel about every wanna be
prophet Euro philosopher who makes up pages of jargon..