The Critique of Pure Reason by Immanuel Kant (FULL Audiobook) - part (2 of 3)

[@dubbelkastrull]

3:11:55 Second Book of the Transcendental Dialectic. First Chapter. The paralogisms of Pure Reason. B399 3:59:56 "Community of substances" 4:00:43 The Transcendental Dialectic. Second Book. Second chapter. The antinomy of pure reason. 3:31:30 bookmark 3:33:20 bookmark 3:54:15 bookmark 4:21:35 Infinite Regress 4:27:40 The Antinomy of Pure Reason. Second Section. Antithetic of pure reason. B449 4:47:59 Kant satisfied with Liebniz's ideas 5:07:02 The Antinomy of Pure Reason. Third Conflict of the Transcendental Ideas. B472 5:16:52 Prime Mover 5:19:19 Change 5:20:55 Fourth Conflict of the Transcendental Ideas. Thesis: "There exists neither in the world or in connection with the world, a necessary being." 5:28:37 Necessary Existence 5:35:56 End of chapter/section 5:36:45 The Antinomy of Pure Reason. Third Section. On the interest of reason in these conflicts. B490 5:37:50 "There are neither more or less than these 4 problems of reason" 5:38:38 bookmark

[@TaranPerry]

Take a drink every time he says " cogitate "

[@carlos_herrera]

1:24:50 what we cognize in matter is nothing but relations

[@ELMUNDOACABA]

1:43:30 TRANSCENDENTAL DIALECTIC

[@JingleJangleJam]

Kant makes an interesting observation when he says that the empiricism of being attached only to our phenomenal consciousness leads to philosophical intemperance.

[@JingleJangleJam]

Humanity is so puzzlingly divided between the natural instinct to form whole systems out of our cognitions of thought, to make patterns out of which form a broad mental outline of the general meaning of existence, yet such an endeavour we try to attain is both philosophically and intellectually beyond our means of achievement, if we are to believe in Kant. We are torn and struck by the splitting divisiveness between fulfilling this need, and the antinomies that result by the problems our own inner necessity to form general meanings of existence impair us with. Human existence, when denied the pursuit of such a need, loses all meaning and becomes close to suicide. Considerations of those questions are necessities to the dignity of human life, and to deny such a side of a human would be to deprive their inner essence. ''a dogmatical solution is therefore not only unsatisfactory, but impossible. The critical solution, which may be a perfectly certain one, does not consider the question objectively, but proceeds by inquiring into the basis of the cognition upon which the question rests.'' - the last sentence of Section 4.

[@drew8570]

0:38 "This is a lie-bra-vox Libravox) recording..." You have to put some effort into getting it that wrong. 54:45 I've heard actual robots sound less robotic. Isn't there anyone in this guy's life to tell him he's terrible? (Multiple pronunciations of the word "phenomena" as fe-no-mi-NUH, I.e. 57:45)

[@vakhtangimagrakvelidze6661]

pure reason or pure qritique ? is there error?

[@JingleJangleJam]

Reality is an unknown object to us - It is not error, it simply is beyond the power of our reason, the sense of thought can't know something that is external to itself [the mind or subject who perceives experience through the senses], cannot be known because we presume that is an object is empirical, it is given to us, but what is given to us is conditioned by space and time, so the only pure ideas we can know, are space, time and phenomena are only given to us in perception, so we cannot ''seek an explanation'' of this ''beyond our perceptions''; we can only find truth, therefore, purely, in our mind, prior to any experience. The critique of pure Reason, therefore, is a critique of the pure forms in which we think any possible object of experience, without considering the composition, which is impure, since it partly comes from an object beyond the ability of our senses to know - of impure empirical knowledge. I think Kant defines empirical experience as impure and knowledge of reason liberated from the bonds of experience, as pure, before the object of experience and without the senses and forms of understanding, is void of qualities or attributes or notions, like our notion of how a world must have a ''beginning'' for instance, requires a priori a notion of whole, which presumes a notion of beginning, middle and end that presupposes and is conditioned. The pure notion of ''beginning'', however, implies something that comes before, which must at some point be limited. ''Consequently, the finite world is too small for our conception'' - Immanuel Kant. ''The causality of a cause, must itself be an event, and necessitates a recourse to a still higher cause, and consequently, the unceasing prolongation of the series of conditions in operative nature, is therefore too large for every conception we can form in the synthesis of cosmical events.'' Knowledge of that sort, will lead people down rabbit holes toward whatever fantasy they imagine, or, as Hegel liked to say, ''whatever is behind the veil of appearances, is what the subject puts there.'' Immanuel Kant, though, maintained there is a type of ''pure'' knowledge that we can create of reality for ourselves. This pure knowledge of knowledge itself, the only part of speculative cognition that can grasp itself as object since it is itself its own object, and one who pursues this type of knowing, is attaining the only type of pure knowledge possible to man; the ideas of Transcendental philosophy. ''I maintain, that out of all speculative cognition, the peculiarity of transcendental philosophy is that there is no question, relating to an object presented to pure reason, which is insoluble by this reason.''

[@dinorivera9153]

What happened here?

[@deplorablekulak6823]

NO V EMBER V 2023 HOORAH HOORAH

[@JingleJangleJam]

Kant is very cruel to Leibniz's theoretical optimistic idealism of the synthesis of pure reason.

[@andrewtannenbaum1]

Middle c undertone. No way!