virtually every sentence of the critique 00:04:20 presents difficulties attempts have been made to provide commentaries comprehensively illuminating uh comprehensively illuminating each individual section of the work 00:04:33 and some of these run to several volumes without getting near its end and then one commentator com noting what it's like to read the critique of pure reason says it is quote 00:04:46 a disagreeable task because the work is dry obscure opposed to all ordinary notions and long-winded as well who said that 00:04:59 kant

can't face this in his own time after the first edition which came out in 1781 it was obvious in no time that both friends and critics 00:02:50 systematically misunderstood what he was trying to convey

the human mind will ever 00:00:59 give up metaphysical research is as little to be expected as that we should prefer to give up breathing all together to avoid inhaling impure air there will therefore always be 00:01:13 metaphysics in the world nay everyone especially every man of reflection will have it and for want of a recognized standard will shape it for himself after his own 00:01:24 pattern

even as you set out to ignore metaphysics you're probably engaged in some form of manifest physical speculation

in the Middle Ages, and still in the usual meanings of words in English, transcendent and transcendental are almost synonymous. It means beyond, beyond what? Beyond appearances. Beyond experience. Something that explains experience, but it's not directly experienced. But Kant distinguished between the two meanings. 00:08:30 He said, as soon as we posit with the unconditioned, outside of all possible experience, the ideas become transcendent. So this is the usual meaning of transcendent. Kant uses transcendental in a completely different sense. It's not what is beyond appearances. But what is below appearances. And becomes the condition of possibility 00:08:58 of these appearances. It's from where appearances appear. That is the new sense of transcendental by Kant.

a transcendental is something that is, or not a thing, of course, but it's very well known and it has been well known for a very long time.

what can you say about the transcendental? Can you speak of it? Can you use words to describe it? Can you characterize the condition of possibility of it? 00:09:24 And Kant says no. This, namely, the transcendental, cannot be further analyzed or answered because it is of such condition that we are in need for all our answers and for all our thinking about objects. So, the transcendental itself cannot be an objective thought. It is a condition for any objective thought.

Wenn es Fälle gibt, in denen ein Mensch kein Selbstzweck ist, dannkönnte es sein, dass es auch Fälle gibt, in denen Bildung kein Selbstzweckist.

the task of biology consists in expanding in two directions the results of cancer investigations by considering the part played by our body and especially by our sense organs 00:04:47 and central nervous system you can see the basic parameters of what we now call cognitive science are coming into being here and by studying the relation of other subjects to objects 00:04:59 it's the subject that kant wants to take seriously that notion is still very undefined and notice here the term animal other subjects so the 00:05:10 animal is a subject here he's trying to take a stance that is not that doesn't traffic in human exceptionalism that takes the embodied being seriously and for him that means something that's 00:05:23 straightforwardly an animal a dog a cat a scientist a limpet and he's going to consider them all with much the same theoretical vocabulary he's pitching in here in 1926

we need to understand what the tradition is that he is feeding from and how what his orientation is he is 00:01:21 taking his own work to be an extension of the work of immanuel kant now if you have not noticed anything in the history of philosophy of mind please 00:01:33 notice descartes and kant those are the two principal landmarks so many others but kant had died at the very start of the 19th century kant was working within a 00:01:46 physical framework that was newtonian in which space and time are simply blocks containers within which things unfold mechanistically that was the metaphysics available to 00:02:00 kant was asking with that metaphysics how do we come to know anything now he had the cogito of descartes very much on his mind but also the the empiricists 00:02:14 concerns with the role of the senses following the tradition of hume and kant attempted to resolve this by noting that there were some things that could not be learned from the world that had 00:02:27 to be in place before any knowledge of the world can happen at all he called these the synthetic a prioris those things that well nothing forces the manas but we can't begin to make 00:02:38 sense of the notion of knowledge without prior notions of time and space and causality this is a difficult position to occupy and can't argumentation was developed in very many ways and gave rise to very many 00:02:53 different kinds of science thereafter for the thing in itself this shell is not knowable rather i encountered a phenomenon of the shell the phenomenon of the shell 00:03:11 through mediated through the senses and the body and i can never thus get to the shell itself this is of course the paradox underlying all representational theories 00:03:22 of perception which is that they seem to leave you estranged from the world and not in contact with the world all knowledge seem to be mediated through the sensors so it need you need 00:03:34 to bootstrap knowledge with these synthetic api ras for accounts this is immanuel kant dies at the start of the 19th century and then about 00:03:45 1870 something like scientific psychology starts to emerge and there's a wide variety of approaches they're drawing among other things from kant but they're not following one 00:03:58 unified agenda funux comes in here and he sees himself as taking kant seriously and he's going to develop in his context in the 1920s and 1930s 00:04:10 the notion of a synthetic a priori changes now instead of the physicalist model of time and space and as containers that we have with kant the body is the ultimate synthetic a 00:04:22 priori for von neux cool epistemology or how a being comes to know the world will only be ever understood through careful attention to the structures of and processes of the body

Sendungen mit explizitem Gegenwartsbezug auszustrahlen, um so dieAktualität der Philosophie zu demonstrieren

aufklärung ist der ausgang des 01:15:15 menschen aus seiner selbstverschuldeten unmündigkeit

In a word thatKleist borrows from Kant: a “midwifery of thought.”45

Die einzigwahrhafte Kraft gegen das Prinzip von Auschwitz wäre Autonomie, wennich den Kantischen Ausdruck verwenden darf; die Kraft zur Reflexion,zur Selbstbestimmung, zum Nicht-Mitmachen.

Was ist Aufklärung?

Der Film zeigt eindringlich, wie Mux sich immerweiter von dem Ideal des Aufklärers entfernt und den kategorischen Imperativ soumdeutet, dass er schließlich davon überzeugt ist, die Gesetzgebung habe sichseinen Vorstellungen anzupassen

algorithmen zitat

Filed on a card under the key word cogitare, Blumenberg quotes Kant: “Thinking is conversation with oneself… Listening inside.”

In his “On the gradual fabrication of thoughts while speaking,” Kleist was in turn musing on Immanuel Kant’s metaphor of the teacher as the midwife at the birth of the student’s thought. When stuck in developing a thought, Kleist recommends, find an acquaintance to talk at. No responses are required. The mere presence of the silent interlocutor, and even more so the imminent threat of losing their attention during lengthy stretches of boredom or incoherence will trigger, or so Kleist claims, the “fabrication of my idea in reason’s workshop.”

he soul: the first condition of all mental properties

Something that is unconditioned does not depend on anything else. It is a first ground or first “principle”: something that explains why other things are the way they are, but is not itself in need of explanation. A “first explainer” (cf. the idea of an unmoved mover).This is what metaphysicsistraditionally concerned with

We can gloss this as ‘independent of experience’, ‘non-empirical’

Understanding vs. reasonUnderstanding is the capacity for unity of appearances by means of rules.Reason is the capacity for unity of the rules of the understanding under principles

Or global warming. I can’t see or touch it. What I can see and touch are these raindrops, this snow, that sunburn patch on the back of my neck. I can touch the weather. But I can’t touch climate. So someone can declare: “See! It snowed in Boise, Idaho, this week. That means there’s no global warming!” We can’t directly see global warming, because it’s not only really widespread and really really long-lasting (100,000 years); it’s also super high-dimensional. It’s not just 3-D. It’s an incredibly complex entity that you have to map in what they call a high-dimensional- phase space: a space that plots all the states of a system. In so doing, we are only following the strictures of modern science, laid down by David Hume and underwritten by Immanuel Kant. Science can’t directly point to causes and effects: That would be metaphysical, equivalent to religious dogma. It can only see correlations in data. This is because, argues Kant, there is a gap between what a thing is and how it appears (its “phenomena”) that can’t be reduced, no matter how hard we try. We can’t locate this gap anywhere on or inside a thing. It’s a transcendental gap. Hyperobjects force us to confront this truth of modern science and philosophy.

wonderful and sublime

contrecœur à prononcer le nom de Kant

dans mon impatience j’universalisais mon cas particulier

Cependant, si elle échouait à m’expliquer l’univers et moi-même, je ne savais plus trop que demander à la philosophie

Sa perfection excluait sa réalité.

J’avais imaginé que la loi morale tenait de lui sa nécessité : mais elle s’était si profondément gravée en moi qu’elle demeura intacte après [Page 183]sa suppression. Loin que ma mère dût son autorité à un pouvoir surnaturel, c’est mon respect qui donnait un caractère sacré à ses décrets.

dogmatisme

Of the Standard of Taste"

David Hume

tivity is not restricted to bound individuals, but is rather aco-operative trans-species e

Kantianism

Kant

Contrary to what many have criticised as anexcessively idealistic Kant in the (in)famous exampleof the Categorical Imperative requiring us to tell thetruth even to those obviously bent on harm, Myskjapoints out that in Kant’s later work, a more realisticunderstanding of human nature and thereby, a morenuanced understanding of the role of deceptionemerges. Briefly, deception may take place for lessthan ideal reasons – but as deception allows us tohide our more negative characteristics while none-theless developing more virtuous character, it canhelp us become better persons. This role of deceptionfits wonderfully well with what is otherwise oftenregarded as a highly morally problematic dimensionof online communication – precisely that we can therehide our real selves.

In particular, Myskjapoints out that the largelydisembodiedcharacter ofmost online communication thereby cuts us off fromimportant, perhaps crucial channels of non-verbalcommunication that may be essential to trust-building.

Kant’s basicthoughts on autonomy and the public domain arehighly relevant to challenges concerning modernsociety, particularly to communication in the publicsphere. Trust is but one important topic being dis-cussed here; openness another. Thus, our aim has notonly been to demonstrate how Kant can be produc-tively applied to new technology; in addition, it hasbeen to show how the basic philosophical queriesraised within this context can be fruitfully illuminatedwithin Kant’s conceptual frames.

This leads Kant to what he calls ‘moralgeography,’ which looks at the customs and characters ofdifferent peoples and some outdated and discreditedviews of race. K

Hume had denied that they were,whereas Kant thinks they are. For Kant, they are com-binations of concepts and particulars, of reason and ex-perience. While the Empiricists suggest all our knowledgemust conform to experience, Kant says all experience mustconform to knowledge

First, in terms of science, it now appears that his metaphysics has withstood the test of time. While traditional scholars largely dismiss his holistic ontology prior to the Critique, innovations in the environmental and physical sciences have validated Kant's claims as realistic insights in the workings of nature. His evolutionary theory of the universe is now seen as “the essence of modern models” in cosmology (Coles 2001: 240), and his natural philosophy is seen as the last milestone of western philosophy prior to its “comedown” to skepticism (Hawking 2003, 166). In light of climate change, it stands to reason that Kant's grasp on biospherical dynamics and sustainable policies may well spur a philosophical return to Kant in the near future.

Ultimately, there is nothing (no knowledge, that is) beyond this "text" of language.

ignorance or to vanquish error

. Sensual objects exist for real objects, namely, me, or some other perceiver. So I’ve got the caricature of the table and the caricature of the chair, those caricatures have no relation to each other. They have relation only for me, because my experience unifies both of them. So the real is always the bridge for the two sensuals; the sensual is always the bridge for the two reals. And that’s what we try to analyse in Object-Oriented Philosophy

Awe ofcourse is very important to Immanuel Kant who wrote an essay that differentiated in1764 the experiences of the sublime or awe from beauty which we’ll talk about.

Even compassion, the concern we feel for another being’s welfare, has been treated with downright derision. Kant saw it as a weak and misguided sentiment: “Such benevolence is called soft-heartedness and should not occur at all among human beings,” he said of compassion. Many question whether true compassion exists at all—or whether it is inherently motivated by self-interest.