Immanuel Kant - Epistemology

[@cg_elf2625]

My heart dropped when i heard the dog barked. Was listening to this using headphones at 4:14AM LOL

[@evitavee]

amazing video, youre saving my life rn

[@onixtheone]

EARPHONE WARNING 3:35

[@KreatorSchool]

Oh my God, the dog bark almost gave me stroke!

[@komasaeufer]

The dog barked right when he talked about the "world in itself". That's undeniable proof (just trust me on this one) that dogs can experience the world in itself.

[@1Itsyasr]

Great explanation ❤

[@aysecoban6531]

Great explanation👏 thanks a million

[@75spinoza]

Lucid explaination, thanks!

[@pyromelonz9020]

Thank you so much! Very good video.

[@anwarullah9663]

Knowledge is not possible without experience. Actually knowledge comes not with any sensory experience but rather reflecting on experience. Animals have experience but no knowledge. They cannot form concepts whereas humans can. Mind is foundational not matter.

[@asyetundetermined]

You’ve never had a pet, huh?

[@anwarullah9663]

@@asyetundetermined No, I never had a pet. If I were to have one it will be a wolf. But the irony is you can never tame a wolf. Wolves are unique.

[@komasaeufer]

"Animals have experience but no knowledge." You just think that without having any proof, right?

[@Rico-Suave_]

Great video, thank you, note to self(nts) watched all of it 9:49

[@SocialScienceSchool]

Informative

[@canwelook]

I'm understanding that, in Kant's view, we do not have knowledge of reality as it is, only to things as they appear. So knowledge can never be certain, or even approach certainty, and can only be apparent. And I'm hearing Kant placed god outside the realm of this knowledge. Logically this would mean we cannot 'know' god, or even "know of" god. If so, this would be a very tricky position for Kant to politically navigate because at that time denial or querying of god was well beyond a career limiting decision.

[@arjundandekar392]

I don’t understand one thing. One of the examples of categorization is “there is a potential for 100s of different dimensions to exist yet our brain categorizes it into 3”. However, kant doesn’t believe that we can know the Noumena exists because there isn’t a potential experience possible. Doesn’t that mean that we can’t know about the 100s of other possible dimensions since there is no possible potential experience?

[@sonpollo8995]

Did Kant think ones phenomena included the existence of a soul which contains various lived experiences.

[@markhughes7927]

Just from their meaning alone as words I would have thought phenomena were located ‘in the world’ and noumena located ‘in consciousness’ the other way round from what is here presented.

[@canwelook]

My understanding is that phenomena (originally as well as now) refers to things as they appear, become visible to the senses. At 3:00 Mike is saying that Kant is using this term to not just refer to the sensory experience of objects, but to "ideas" in the mind. If these "ideas" include associated casual interpretations then I'm surprised/confused with this wider definition. Noumena, according to Kant, refers to the real world objects themselves... as contrasted with the sensory experience (causal interpretation?) of those objects.

[@mayurdongardive614]

The best part of your video is your hand writing 😂

[@hiramahesar2500]

rip the dog barking in such a smooth studying environment !!.. its a big distraction

[@komasaeufer]

That's why you faild your exam and work at McDonald's now.

[@sixtysecondphilosopher]

I am a set of a’ priori modes, not a body of limbs and organs. We need to move beyond the notion of “We”. Human is a loose notion at best. In essence, the body/conduit has no fixed predicate in the abstract lens so the premise is incorrect. What is it of us, that knows this? Until we know more, we are a set of a’ priori modes trying to stabilise our line in an ocean of dissipating variables. We should define ourselves in this manner. We are a set of modes that allow for systematic alignment. A set synthesised with realities structures and stresses. Understanding this is the next step. Everything else is tied up in a field of inverted axioms and that path is a dead end. Human is not part of the way I think. I’m beyond it. I don’t know what I am only that I am not the body. I am a set of modes as I said and until I know more…

[@daniellerossouw8227]

High key going to help me pass my exam.