Immanuel Kant Vs Me

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

I started reading Immanuel Kant last night. He makes no fucking sense at all, because every sentence he wrote is larded with nominalizations, terms that have no corporeal existence, theyre processes used as things. So what he said makes no sense. Like...mind shapes experience. But there is no such animal as mind. It has no physical form. Hands shape experience.

JBJ The Great says the meaning of anything is outcome, its results. Our opinion of results is irrelevant, because mind is easily soluble in experience.

 

[SamScribble]

JBJ The Great says the meaning of anything is outcome, its results. Our opinion of results is irrelevant, because mind is easily soluble in experience.

You may be right, JBJ, but I find that my mind dissolves more readily in red wine.

 

[PS_Alexandria]

Kant believes that not all existence is corporeal. The statement "all existence is corporeal" is a positive truth claim and a blanket statement. As such, it requires justification.

The number two is an objective concept, and yet no pair of items is going to be identical with the number two itself. Is that not an example of incorporeal existence?

 

[Everyday_Man]

You may be right, JBJ, but I find that my mind dissolves more readily in red wine.

Exactly, I don't understand a word JBJ said ... but my vice is vodka. ... I just looked up Nominalization, what the fucked did I just read?

and PS Alexandria just fried my mind ...

My guess is he writes for the crowd that likes to 'think' and 'question' everything and discuss anything that a person can turn into a question. ... Why did I put those words into quotes?

Someone tell me if I'm wrong, but use little words.

 

[Carnevil9]

Immanuel Kant was a real pissant.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

Immanuel Kant was a real pissant.

He was illiterate.

 

[Tio_Narratore]

He was illiterate.

Told you you were a behaviorist, James. Now pass me a tumbler of good Irish whiskey.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

Told you you were a behaviorist, James. Now pass me a tumbler of good Irish whiskey.

Behaviorists are blindmen and an elephant.

 

[Tio_Narratore]

Behaviorists are blindmen and an elephant.

Then why do you keep spouting behaviorist observations/analyses/solutions? You started this thread with a behaviorist critique of Kant. (There's a bit of non fiction for me to write- "A Critique of Pure Unreasonableness: Plogemena to JBJ's Physics,")

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

Then why do you keep spouting behaviorist observations/analyses/solutions? You started this thread with a behaviorist critique of Kant. (There's a bit of non fiction for me to write- "A Critique of Pure Unreasonableness: Plogemena to JBJ's Physics,")

Behaviorists and epistemologists share the construct of outcomes but behaviorists have no clue what comes before the outcome, and epistemologists don't define what the optimal outcome oughta be. That is one group has no idea how to get there, and the other has no idea where there is.

 

[R. Richard]

Isn't Immanuel Kant the one who developed the philosophical relationship, "The angle of angle is directly proportional to the heat of the meat, but the mass of the ass remains constant?"

Truly words of wisdom.

 

[49greg]

A little deep for me. I just Kan't wrap my mind around it.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

A little deep for me. I just Kan't wrap my mind around it.

I prefer simplicity. When anyone takes the long way round I wonder if they know what they claim to know.

 

[49greg]

I prefer simplicity. When anyone takes the long way round I wonder if they know what they claim to know.

I am the bologna/bullshit master, or was in college. One day the History proff came in to our mid-term and said his office had been broken in to. Because someone might have seen the test he gave us a new one, just wrote one essay question on the blackboard.

I aced it. Knew a little bit about what he asked and padded it out to the minimum page count he wanted.

Normally a hard assed perfectionist he somehow didn't see though my fluff.

But I hate reading stuff like that. I like to read stuff that gets to the point.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

I am the bologna/bullshit master, or was in college. One day the History proff came in to our mid-term and said his office had been broken in to. Because someone might have seen the test he gave us a new one, just wrote one essay question on the blackboard.

I aced it. Knew a little bit about what he asked and padded it out to the minimum page count he wanted.

Normally a hard assed perfectionist he somehow didn't see though my fluff.

But I hate reading stuff like that. I like to read stuff that gets to the point.

I have a knack for writing legal, especially probable cause petitions. Judges and lawyers love'to the point' with all the ducks in a row. They hate 10 pages of goo and filler and fluff. So our legal department brought me plenty of petitions and orders and judicial reviews to write. My daughter makes major bucks doing the same thing for a law firm. She not even a paralegal. She knows how to write clear and succinct legalese.

 

[lovecraft68]

A little deep for me. I just Kan't wrap my mind around it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9CdVTCDdEwI