Excellent read and fantastic narrator. With all of Kant’s routines, social troubles, and strict preferences for how he wanted things to be done in his life, it sounds to me like he might have been autistic. It’s just a shame he discouraged his students from listening to music lest they become “effeminate”. If listening to music is for women, those women surely enjoyed life more than the men who refused to be like them.
Hilarious, though the sources of his life and work were never going to be able to compete with those of Hegel's, the account of which is the funniest thing ive read since Tom Sharpe.
@@comforth3898 Could be. But it still stands. Once we started thinking about things like morality and values from an evolutionary perspective, everything fell into place.
@@JavierBonillaC 'Evolutionary Psychology' rests upon, and is undergirded by, metaphysical presuppositions that it cannot justify. Human 'identity' across time/change, human 'nature', the principle of induction, the ontology of laws of logic, etc. all are transcendental prerequisites to any scientific empirical field like 'Evolutionary Psychology', which only can be justified/grounded through philosophical worldviews and epistemology. Most evolutionary psychologists don't know anything about epistemology.
@squidwardtennisballs3390 We know almost nothing about epistemology. We don't even know how an idea is create in the brain or how conciousness works. All knowledge about "how we know" comes from pwrceptual experiments. For example: What percentage of the reality that you perceive comes through your senses? 8%. That's how you form your knowledge.
@@JavierBonillaC 'All knowledge about "how we know" comes from our perceptual experiences' Does the truth value of that proposition itself, that 'all knowledge comes from perceptual experiences', also come from our perceptual experiences? It doesn't, because truth values, interpretive frameworks, first order and second order principles, axiological value judgements, etc do not come from strict empirical experience, so that is self refuting. If you had read Quine 'Two Dogmas of Empiricism' you would know this because he makes this exact point about meaning, classes, ontology of numbers, induction, etc. (As an empricist himself) By the way, what is your perceptual justification for the ontology of the laws of logic? Where can I observe that empirically?
Excellent read and fantastic narrator.
With all of Kant’s routines, social troubles, and strict preferences for how he wanted things to be done in his life, it sounds to me like he might have been autistic. It’s just a shame he discouraged his students from listening to music lest they become “effeminate”. If listening to music is for women, those women surely enjoyed life more than the men who refused to be like them.
It seems all the great minds were either mad, mentally ill, or very eccentric.
@@GreggMikulla Wittgenstein was a prime example of this eccentricity. The man seemed positively insufferable.
Kant seriously being considered autistic by a random TH-cam comment is some funny shit
Great video, thank you, note to self(nts) watched all of it 1:22:03
Hilarious, though the sources of his life and work were never going to be able to compete with those of Hegel's, the account of which is the funniest thing ive read since Tom Sharpe.
Thanks
That’s impressive
An excellent reading and reader! Thank you!
0:35 kant read the Enquiry, not the Treatise
Hernandez Linda Taylor Susan Moore Steven
Evolutionaries psychology has done more for the understanding of human nature in the last 30 years then philosophy in 2000 years.
Is psychology not a product of philosophy?
@@comforth3898 Could be. But it still stands. Once we started thinking about things like morality and values from an evolutionary perspective, everything fell into place.
@@JavierBonillaC 'Evolutionary Psychology' rests upon, and is undergirded by, metaphysical presuppositions that it cannot justify. Human 'identity' across time/change, human 'nature', the principle of induction, the ontology of laws of logic, etc. all are transcendental prerequisites to any scientific empirical field like 'Evolutionary Psychology', which only can be justified/grounded through philosophical worldviews and epistemology.
Most evolutionary psychologists don't know anything about epistemology.
@squidwardtennisballs3390 We know almost nothing about epistemology. We don't even know how an idea is create in the brain or how conciousness works. All knowledge about "how we know" comes from pwrceptual experiments.
For example: What percentage of the reality that you perceive comes through your senses? 8%. That's how you form your knowledge.
@@JavierBonillaC 'All knowledge about "how we know" comes from our perceptual experiences'
Does the truth value of that proposition itself, that 'all knowledge comes from perceptual experiences', also come from our perceptual experiences? It doesn't, because truth values, interpretive frameworks, first order and second order principles, axiological value judgements, etc do not come from strict empirical experience, so that is self refuting.
If you had read Quine 'Two Dogmas of Empiricism' you would know this because he makes this exact point about meaning, classes, ontology of numbers, induction, etc. (As an empricist himself)
By the way, what is your perceptual justification for the ontology of the laws of logic? Where can I observe that empirically?
Rubbish
Rubber