The Antinomies of Pure Reason | Immanuel Kant | Keyword

[@dennisdeslager3382]

Excellent explanation, makes me want to continue in Being and Time

[@kylieh155]

This was so helpful!! I'm taking a class on puzzles and paradoxes and this is helping me understand antinomies so much better!!! Your ability to explain it was extremely helpful

[@anonymos874]

Bro, I'm currently reading the first critics and it's very taugh, I hope you'll keep uploading such short videos on Kant, it really helps.

[@Zing_art]

He has also done longer videos on the first critique which he is not quite satisfied with himself...but you could check the playlist out

[@tyrdunbar]

I somehow understand this but the implications throws my entire explanation for our world into question lol

[@tan-xyz]

Great explanation. Thank you.

[@christophergould8715]

Sting sang "We are spirits in the material world"

[@journalofwildculture]

Really good, clear and well presented. I’m in.

[@burraboy00]

legend dude, keep doing your stuff

[@emmanuelfideliskashumba8802]

Thanks brother!

[@dubbelkastrull]

5:26 bookmark

[@jaimeroberts]

By focusing on the actual document and not the concept in its entirety, I'm left wanting a broader analysis. What was this document in relationship to Kant's other critiques for example? What was the philosophical impact of this document on later thinkers? I'd like broader context, and perhaps less detail of the specific document. Kant set the trajectory of Western philosophy towards Idealism, and it is important to understand why.

[@IndustrialMilitia]

The Transcendental Dialectic, specifically Kant's Antinomies, is the starting point for Hegel's Dialectical Idealism. Hegel talks about this in the Lesser Logic.

[@trumpsupporter1016]

Kant's version of idealism is really a bit on the dualist society, onely the dualism is between phenomena and noumena

[@dubbelkastrull]

6:01 bookmark

[@Megaghost_]

Thanks for your videos!

[@spikehayward3266]

Thank you this is great!

[@milesdavis5326]

Thanks for this

[@zacheryhershberger7508]

Awesome bro

[@manwithplan5251]

Very good video!

[@abdolh2664]

Hi sir. Coukd you upload a video about tge ninth chapter on the Location of Culture The Postcolonial and Postmodern: Tge Question of Agency

[@TheoryPhilosophy]

Hi I've covered the entire book :)

[@abdolh2664]

@@TheoryPhilosophy alright I will watch it. Thank you so much

[@trumpsupporter1016]

Really good over all, but since you are writing on Critical Philosophy, I will be a bit critical. I think a bit ot the language could be refined, for instance saying 'sensible world' instead of 'matter'. No, you can't say the world is the 'existeence of matter' - at best you can say the world is what appears to us as matter, energy and animated/conscious beings. This may seem trivial, but it isn't, because when most people hear 'matter' they think they know what you're talking about - 'yeah, matter are things made of atoms and have mass' but that creates two problems, one is for Kant - it seems to takee a postion that we should come down on the side of the 2nd antinomy that there are indivisible parts. The other is for our understanding of Physic, because, ofc, not only are atoms divisible into electrons, neutrons and protons, but the neutrons and protons can be broken down into about 3 quarks each, but also, the vsst majority of mass does not come from the quarks -they have some mass, but quite little, but rather from the strong nuclear force which binds everything together. Incidentally, Physics provides a working example of the 2nd antinomy in action. One set of scientists are supporters of one side, annother set supporters of the other. There are supporters of the standard model who believe that the two dozen or so elementatry cannot be further subdivided. On the other hand, string theorists and m-theory supporters say that strings or branes are more fundamental than quarks and the other elementary particlss.

[@christophergould8715]

Kant seems to me to be like a Christian who does not want to talk about the Trinity .In his discussion of phenomena and neumena he recalls for me the puz,le medieval theologians had with the duality of Jesus- was he a God in a human body or was he simply a spirit who looked human.There was🎉m😢 .onophysitism and its opposite.Kant comes close to saying everybody has this duality.

[@ahmedmahmud4238]

@4:55 it doesnt make sense, ..i think you mis paraphrased

[@timothywise9731]

I am sorry but your explanation makes no sense. I had to revert to ChatGPT to carry on a dialectic to better understand Kant's Antimonies.

[@MS-fg8qo]

The second antimony sounds much more like a problem for physicists than for philosophers.

[@groghaus1549]

Physics lends it's history to philosophy, Leibniz had a theory of composition: the monads. He also had a hand in the creation of calculus. So too has Aristotle dealt with problems we'd now ascribe to the field of physics. Imo that division between science and philosophy is very recent.

[@zacheryhershberger7508]

David is cute in this one

[@szhhh1326]

What a load of horseshit.

[@jarrodyuki7081]

you should go to jail.

[@thespicyonion3362]

no u

[@threeblindchickens]

why