quote of the day:"...many superstitious means for attaining in a natural way impossible purposes, point to the causal reference of representations to their Objects; a reference which cannot at all be checked by the consciousness of the inadequacy of the effort to produce the effect.—As to why there should be in our nature this propensity to desires which are consciously vain, that is an anthropologico-teleological problem. It seems that if we were not determined to the application of our powers before we were assured of the adequacy of our faculties to produce an Object, these powers would remain in great part unused. For we commonly learn to know our powers only by first making trial of them."—Critique of Judgement The esoterik kantians hold to the spirit of the kantian philosophy if not the letter. although in fact the results for the possibility of the older metaphysics of wolff turned out negative after the first critique, this was not known beforehand, and prior to that critique the result may have just as well have been positive and confirmatory in support of the established metaphysics.and even if the critique in fact did produce negative results, that in no way precludes the esoterik kantian from re-critiquing pure reason in search of the key to metaphysics proper. as kant himself says in the prolegomena:"...he who undertakes to judge, or still more, to construct a system of metaphysics, must satisfy the demands here made, either by adopting my solution, or by thoroughly refuting it, and substituting another. To evade it is impossible."to outdo the master, in homage to the master, is the task of the esoterik kantianism. kant as a reformer and securer of wolffian metaphysics as a science, giving metaphysics a securer foundation.
>The esoterik kantians hold to the spirit of the kantian philosophy if not the letterThis is mystic gnosticism, the ape of true religion. It's been done a million times, but this "Esoteric Kantian" nonsense is the most tedious version of all.>"...he who undertakes to judge, or still more, to construct a system of metaphysics, must satisfy the demands here made, either by adopting my solution, or by thoroughly refuting it, and substituting another. To evade it is impossible.">One v. one me broNo, you belong in a nuthouse or the circus.
>>25613739o7THE KING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>>25613739Thought you were too bust trying to ingratiate yourself with your desired twitter social circle to post here anymore. Shameless opportunism btw.
>>25613932i grow tired of scrolling on twitter. it gives me a headache.
Let's go!I'm locked in.Pic related.
the major distinction of analytic and synthetic judgements must be one of the first things to be addressed in the system of esoterik kantianism. key to the matter is the recognition by kant himself that analysis makes explicit what is already contained in a concept implicitly. this implicit content is not recognized beforehand as belonging to the concept to be analyzed. which leads me to kant's notion of synthesis, where something, supposedly, NOT already contained in the concept implicitly is connected to and added to the concept. BUT, with kant's own recognition that the implicitly contained content of the concept to be analyzed is not recognized as contained in the concept before hand, the explicit connection of this content to the concept itself comes across as a synthesis.kant's own example of an analytic judgement "all bodies are extended", makes explicit that which is obviously implied in the concept of body, but then his example of a synthetic judgement "all bodies are heavy" takes it for granted that the concept of weight, and consequently mass, is not already contained in the concept of body, and that this synthesis is not just a concealed analysis. the ground of most synthesis of concepts is experience, which shows the matter of fact connection between concepts, by showing for example that bodies have weight, BUT because kant allows for concepts to contain other concepts covertly, the concept of weight may have already been contained in the concept of body implicitly, experience merely giving the occasion for that implicit content to reveal itself, but in no way contradicting the view that that content was already inherent in the concept of body although concealed.that same result, the judgement "all bodies are heavy", which being a universal judgement could NEVER be confirmed empirically anyway (at best empirical synthesis only shows THIS body is heavy), could therefore in principle be lying concealed waiting for a deeper analysis of the concept to reveal it's relation of identity with the concept of body, and could only ever achieve such universality through that identity.this shows that the empirical synthesis is superfluous, and does not yield what it pretends to. we can induct from experience a judgement, but this will always suffer from the humean problem of induction which does permit the passing of truly universal judgements, but only the pretension of such.therefore, all real universal judgements can only be analytic, and the synthetic a priori judgements are just well concealed analytic judgements mistaken for a synthesis.
>>25613932also i didn't ingratiate myself to anyone. people just follow me because of my charisma and scientifically metaphysical obscure knowledge.
>>25615797Sorry anon AI stole my attention span even though I barely use AI. It has an atmospheric effect. Gotta take the Fichtepill, he can create an atmosphere a priori by farting.
Hegel identifies THE concept with the transcendental unity of apperception. if as i have said above, synthesis is simply covert analysis, then all of the content of the concept, that is to say, the world and the soul as object of the subject, is already contained implicitly in the concept, waiting to be, as the master says "set out and made intelligible to me".and this ties itself with the platonic anamnesis, because what is this setting out and being made intelligible other than a re-membering of what was always already there in the pool of mnemosyne. important here is that remembering is synthesis, whereas my aim here was to show that synthesis of empirical judgements is really just a covert analysis. this contradiction is solved by kant's own principle that every analysis presupposes a synthesis and every synthesis presupposes an analysis. the apparently synthetic nature of remembering reveals itself to actually be the analysis of an anterior synthesis. it is the analytic activity that brings the content of the concept to consciousness, or rather the unit of pure apperception that is the concept per se.(to be continued)
too much words :(
Fart huffing: the thread
>>25617356thanks for the bump
