Thread 24467262

Definitely the most underwhelming of the trilogy. It was a slog. At least now I can say I've read all three critiques.

what have you learned?

>>24467262 (OP)
It's the least well-founded too.
>dude beauty is what's the most popular
Damn, I guess Kant would have listened to Drake or some shit

>>24467299
beauty will save the world - dostoevsky

>>24467303
>DUDE DOSTOYEVSKY LMAO
What's next, a quote from Finnegans Wake?

>>24467296
Kant argues aesthetic and teleological judgments are a priori forms of the human mind, therefore there is, at least for humans, beauty, and we must think of organization in terms of final causes, in addition to efficient causes; all this filtered through the lens of his transcendental idealism. It had a few interesting bits here and there, but definitely my least favorite of the three critiques.

>>24467306
do you even like books? why are you on this board?

>>24467299
>>dude beauty is what's the most popular
Not quite.

>>24467312
I don't like pseuds who quote the same fucking authors over and over again. It's like there is a hive mind whose bookshelves all consist of like five authors max.

>>24467314
He uses the term "universal". He claims that beauty is somehow objective. But the only ones who can judge beauty are humans. And it clearly shows that he was an antisocial autist, because he has this bizarre idea that humans agree on what's beautiful or not and that your average Joe can have an appreciation for Michelangelo's David or Rembrandt's The Night Watch.

>>24467315
you have no clue who I am, or what I read

tf r u on about

>>24467321
I know who you are just by the fact that you quote le Dostoyevskiy. Go ahead and quote Camus for the full picture.

>>24467324
Can't, I've never read Camus

>>24467326
You'll like his Stranger. Now do us all a favor and contribute something meaningful to the thread or gtfo.

>>24467331
Are you gonna acknowledge that you were wrong?

>"I know who you are. Quote Camus for the full picture!"

Womp womp...

>>24467335
As I said, this is a thread about Kant's CJ. Not your personal blog post. Fuck off.

>>24467339
awwwwwwwwwwwww

so assertive and judgemental, but then got proven wrong, so now you're all "umm can we get back on topic pls guys?"

>>24467344
At least post your saggy fucking tits, jesus christ. Literal noise.

I read all three critiques front to back. That means I'm a real Kantian now.

>>24467365
why is Critique of Pure Reason the big, notorious one? is it just the most difficult?

>>24467307
>Kant argues aesthetic and teleological judgments are a priori forms of the human mind, therefore there is, at least for humans, beauty, and we must think of organization in terms of final causes, in addition to efficient causes; all this filtered through the lens of his transcendental idealism. It had a few interesting bits here and there, but definitely my least favorite of the three critiques.
cringe

>>24467372
It’s the most influential. His ethics are just a very autistic version of Aristotelean ethics and his aesthetics are just dogshit. I have never heard a single author say or mention Kant’s aesthetics influenced him.

>>24467375
I didn't think it was cringe, it's actually interesting, but it just felt underdeveloped, especially the aesthetic part. The teleological part was good too, it makes sense, in the context of the system, but naturally it will upset both theists and atheists, since in the typically Kantian manner, we must think universally in terms of purpose, but can never cross into whether or not the beauty and purpose actually exist independent of the human experience and so on and so on.

>>24467372
Honestly, yes.

But for me Kant is always more interesting for how clearly he delineates and points out what we can't do, as if he's teasing us, tempting us, someone, anyone, to challenge him.

>>24467390
by cringe i meant the way u write. it's like u purposefully try to make things longer and harder to understand

>>24467262 (OP)
Are you going to read Kant’s other work?>>24467365
>That means I'm a real Kantian now.

Nope. Kant has written much more.

https://www.cambridge.org/universitypress/subjects/philosophy/series/cambridge-edition-works-immanuel-kant

>>24467413
I make no apology

>>24467453
did i ask for one?

>>24467469
did I tell you to post in this thread?

shut up

don't talk for atleast 3 days

>>24467470
i was trying to help u