Dear Dr. Gijsbers, may I ask if you consider Kant's philosophy of mathematics possible to place within the contemporary debate? As you mentioned in a video, you have not talked about Kant's relevance today, mostly focusing on understanding the text itself, but this question interests me. It continuously fascinates me, as I labour through this text, how nuanced and provocative Kant's thinking remains today, how it makes me rethink concepts developed more than a hundred years after his death. His way of conceptualising mathematics appears directly opposed to later Frege and Russell formalism, which sees mathematics and (useful) philosophy as founded in the same postulates and formal logical grammar - perhaps Kant lies closer to the intuitionism that questions this basic assumption that is so prevalent in analytic philosophy? I also see a precursor to Husserl in this text, seeing mathematical concepts as essentially constructed Gestalts unable to tell us any universal truths about the human - even if Husserl is critical of Kant and understands "transcendental" differently. Sorry for the long rant-like comment here, there is just so much that this short text and your video triggers, and my brain is trying to fit this all together somehow.
![กี่หมื่นฟ้า | Your Sky Series EP.1 [1/4]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/vLGjxFL6U_I/mqdefault.jpg)
Dear Dr. Gijsbers, may I ask if you consider Kant's philosophy of mathematics possible to place within the contemporary debate? As you mentioned in a video, you have not talked about Kant's relevance today, mostly focusing on understanding the text itself, but this question interests me. It continuously fascinates me, as I labour through this text, how nuanced and provocative Kant's thinking remains today, how it makes me rethink concepts developed more than a hundred years after his death. His way of conceptualising mathematics appears directly opposed to later Frege and Russell formalism, which sees mathematics and (useful) philosophy as founded in the same postulates and formal logical grammar - perhaps Kant lies closer to the intuitionism that questions this basic assumption that is so prevalent in analytic philosophy? I also see a precursor to Husserl in this text, seeing mathematical concepts as essentially constructed Gestalts unable to tell us any universal truths about the human - even if Husserl is critical of Kant and understands "transcendental" differently. Sorry for the long rant-like comment here, there is just so much that this short text and your video triggers, and my brain is trying to fit this all together somehow.