The Critique of Pure Reason by Immanuel Kant (FULL Audiobook) - part (1 of 3)

[@Audio-Books]

SUPPORT OUR CHANNEL: - Try Audible and Get 2 Free Audiobooks: amzn.to/2OZUTib (Affiliate Link) - Buy in our store: www.amazon.com/shop/fullaudiobooksforeveryone (Affiliate Link) (Full audio books for everyone earns money off of the above links.)

[@Cantbuyathrill]

This is harder than the American Tax Code.

[@shadesmarerik4112]

This book is labelled incorrectly. The image of the video shows the title: Critique of PRACTICAL Reason, which is the 2nd critique by Kant, Critique of PURE Reason is the first critique

[@michaeljfigueroa]

I just discovered this channel. I will donate soon. I don't have much money.

[@grantray98]

Am I really the only one to notice that someone who was willing to post a 10 hour upload of The Critique of Pure Reason accidentally used a background image of the wrong book?

[@SaintSaint]

Yes

[@timeandattention3945]

Almost deleted it

[@SearchBucket2]

No

[@SearchBucket2]

..... but I knew someone would have noticed it😂

[@In_Rem]

earth is flat, if not, apply the reasoning of this book and prove me wrong

[@mjay9276]

0:34 Preface to the 1st edition 20:05 Preface to the 2nd edition 1:13:46 Introduction

[@somethingfunny666]

Right on.

[@hsiehkanusea]

TRANSCENDENTAL DOCTRINE OF ELEMENTS (A) Transcendental Aesthetic 2:06:54 - Introductory 2:13:10 - Of Space 2:27:38 - Of Time

[@nonamehere-y2t]

So necessary is this upload. Thankfully, some selfless genius put this here. May he praised for this.

[@Jimmawww]

1:13:35 Introduction

[@metabee6539]

Holy shit 1h for the begin of the book.

[@albertluke545]

Ur a saint

[@ginadamn1714]

@@albertluke545 i came here to say the same thing lol

[@authenticallysuperficial9874]

lmao

[@Cocodelrae]

The first time i read this book, i was in tears. I felt someone finally had verbalized that which kept me in serious anxiety for a decade. Also,any things he talked about has the same message as thr Buddhist precepts, about time, space, causality, of things not in and of itself but of arising and passing...still my favorite book to this day.

[@Cantbuyathrill]

There is something comforting and reassuring and calming in listening to these great audiobooks read in a British accent (or by Morgan Freeman!!

[@tattoofthesun]

thank you for adding this to youtube

[@hannahnichols7461]

19:50 end of 1st preface

[@TheParadiseInc]

Mwah

[@clothildecook6497]

thank you, do you have the timestamp for the end of the 2nd preface? trying to follow along in a book, and it only has an excerpt from the 2nd preface

[@anhumblemessengerofthelawo3858]

_the right voice speakingly, the very voice of reason, is a necessary precondition for the authentic showing of this simple but obtuse text._ _Very adequate. You are appreciated._ _Well, go forth then, rejoicing, in the Power, and in the Peace, of the One, Infinite Creator. Adonai._

[@MrParlophone1992]

This is amazing. Suggestion for improvement: add time-stamps inthe descriptions. :)

[@rinchuimy1292]

Yeah ☺️

[@gisforgirard]

IV. Of the Division of Transcendental Logic into Transcendental Analytic and Dialectic. 3:37:35

[@joshpowers4795]

Analytic of Principles - Of the Schematism of the Pure Conceptions of the Understanding - 6:17:55

[@BCantley]

I'm sorry, but I don't believe anyone is able to comprehend this content via an audiobook like this.

[@yaakovfreidman8743]

True. But if you read the text along with the audiobook it makes the reading much less tiring and more comprehensible. Still, with a book like this, (which really is the best philosophy book ever written-in terms of content, not prose) you don't quite understand it unless you hit the pause button flabbergasted a number of times..

[@sambanks760]

haha I clicked on this by accident and that was the first thing that went through my mind. CPR worst read of all time for me, and would certainly be the worst audiobook. props to anyone who can digest everything using it though.

[@mickmcknight162]

Excuse me! I understand every word of it. In fact i can recite this book word for word. :) lmfao

[@thunorwodenson]

Brantley Moore I think that you're projecting your own shortcomings or more likely simple prejudices on people whom you do not know and have never met. I listen to these complex books hundreds of times until I get it. There is no reason why a person cannot absorb an idea auraly instead of visually. In fact the oral tradition had a much longer reign in human history than the recent development of letters.

[@AlexandrePorto]

I am

[@gisforgirard]

Second Part-TRANSCENDENTAL LOGIC 3:11:30

[@subkontrabasklarinet]

This is my bedtime reading.

[@aLby_doira]

zzz....zzzzz.......

[@TheUnseenRapper]

This is my stay up all night thinking reading. ;)

[@ToriKo_]

1:30:00 to 1:35:45 examples of synthetic a posteriori and analytic a priori

[@Twostrafe]

I’ve been studying this book for quite some time now and only really, now do I want to input a comment, just to share my recent stories and bravery with this book. Kane’s metaphysical ability is hard to understand. You must understand that it’s actually a critique of pure reason, so anecdotal to the field, the pure reason presuppose/s something greater in our will. It’s never really about divine intelligence, or an author but the sheer resistance to will, to be able to cope with the beauty and with their way of the world. It’s also very prejudice, as in its metaphysical ability is very stunning, thus contradicting the actual play on words. It’s also stale, but bold and rational. It teaches us what philosophy should be, but that we should also make our own judgments about it

[@joshpowers4795]

4:25:00 Section 8 First Div 2nd - Of Principles Trans Deduc General

[@foryouamanda]

This is wonderful. Thank you.

[@foamersimpson6690]

2:38:41 page 58

[@joshpowers4795]

Subsection 10 - Conclusion of the Transcendental Aesthetic - How are a priori synthetic judgements possible ? 3:10:13

[@viralnature19]

Isn't it Critique of Pure Reason. You uploaded almost a ten hour long video with a wrong title.

[@andrewtannenbaum1]

Nice job. With certitude and clarity. Thanks for the footnotes. Listened up to 1:13....so far.

[@dianeoheron596]

Thanks for the encouragement....

[@joshpowers4795]

Introduction of the transcendental faculty of judgement in general - 6:22:40

[@MackLarry]

So grateful for these videos but I need the readers to speak up

[@wayofspinoza2471]

Martin is giving us wonderful words of wisdom; however, how can we apply reason and understanding when we are rooted in old patterns of thinking and behavior? How is this transfer of being possible?

[@B10Esteban]

00:00 preface to first edition 20:20 preface to the second edition

[@clothildecook6497]

thank you so much. wondering when the preface would end

[@mantoleung]

0: 0: 0 - 0: 20: 05 Preface to the First Edition 1781 0: 20: 06 - 1: 13: 20 Preface to the Second Edition 1787

[@ToriKo_]

2:06:51 end of introduction a

[@mariog1490]

3:11:30 transcendental logic 3:50:00 4:15:30 4:25:00

[@larbado9575]

8:22:48. A. First analogy {A182, B224}

[@sumantagoswami-pk5im]

Would you fix the dropped sound, specially for this kind of class lecture...

[@joshpowers4795]

Section 12 TDE PT 2 Tl 1st TA - Book 2 Analyof Princ TDFJ CH2 System of All Principles of the system of understanding section 1 & 2 - 7:03:10

[@ReneePsalm18]

personal bookmark 1:00:54 1:02:45 1:04:29

[@richardclark1879]

thank you libriVox

[@davidmcclean8811]

This is really good! just a heads up. Just a heads up "Transition of the transcendental deduction of the categories subsection 10" is missing from the recording :-)

[@flochartingham2333]

I am so glad that I live in the computer age and can put together logical functions however NOT a priori and know that is how logic functions. The rest of the time life is about conditioning myself to expect that nothing conforms to logic. Aside from the voices of some of the readers, this is very hard to follow for its context, but every now and then a nugget jumps out and makes me wish I was reading instead of listening to reread those passages.

[@everydaystuffandthingsguy4554]

If a tree falls in the forest, does it make a sound? Is 2+2 really 4? If so, why?

[@ToriKo_]

3:11:24 section 6, TDofE, part second TLogic, idea of a TLogic

[@AwesomeWholesome]

1:50:24 footnote Permanence of matter over time Equality or action and reaction 1:51:10 metaphysics as a necessity 2：14：10 what are time and space

[@joshpowers4795]

Of the schematism of the pure conceptions of the understanding ch1 6:33:42

[@quinnsine1650]

This is SO FUCKING GOOD

[@gisforgirard]

I. TRANSCENDENTAL DOCTRINE OF ELEMENTS. 2:06:55

[@Swagg494]

THANK YOU

[@rizzamaeong]

everyone, what's the best audiobook in here?

[@samisiddiqi7814]

rizza mae ong The critique of pure raisin.

[@mr.froglegs]

Oh boy, do i love someone reading 10 hours of fucking gibberish.

[@derekmeyer3213]

So the fundamental principles are metaphysical understanding and understanding as a person in the cosmos

[@meursault7030]

Bookmark 19:00 Lol @ when he says something like "I'll try to be clear in terms of logic and discourse" Terrific job on that second one, mate. Your prose is almost conversational. Almost feel as if you're gonna offer me a fucking beer, don't I?

[@christopher.2042]

he was famously a good dinner party host

[@meursault7030]

@@christopher.2042 What's that got to do with how he writes?

[@joshpowers4795]

What then are time and space? Are they are real existences, or are they mere relations, or determinations of of things ... 2:14:09

[@AmadeusD]

Any reason chapter four repeats w/another reader?

[@joshpowers4795]

How can the subject have an internal intuition of itself ? 3:02:37

[@regmorusmath]

This book can serve as a magnificent source of improvement of the instrumentalization of the subcounsciously known thinking techniques. However, it must be pointed out that the contents can be deemed highly debatable for they themselves make use of non-proven suppositions which are regarded as unquestionable facts without direct mention, while being, in truth, mere reflections of the way of functioning of our own thinking. In fact, even assuming a possibility of proving their validity would lead to a struggle without a definite end. Hence, the exposition in question must be regarded as a systemic treatment of some potentially discernible, but in no way uniquely to determine as valid, connections between entities by using self-sufficient system of rules of thinking, which is based on an arbitrary collection of presuppositions about what conclusions allowing for drawing the respective conclusions in the first place should be permitted, more precisely, what respective mode of the interpretation of the partial informations encoded within entities (method of analytical judgement according to Kant) shall be regarded as the primary ones for the focus of thinking in the moment of drawing the respective conclusions. The seeming self-containment and autoconfirmation due to abundance of self-related connections of the (strongly though not purposely factually exhibited) modality of validity confirmation do, however, in no way justify regarding this work as an unquestionable or ultimately discovered truth. Rather, the number of elements of the system construed by the body of the work and the number of interconnections drawn between those elements while abiding the rules established by the system itself allow such an informational density of intersystemic validity that a human mind can't help but to be persuaded into believing the validity of the system whereas the only truly valid things is the high informational density of a perfectly self-consisted system. There is a room for some irony in this observations, for the attetive observer should have noticed a striking similarity to the essence of Kant's own views regarding incompleteness or respectively need for incorporation of certain methodology of conventional sciences. Indeed, the blame addressed to those has to be inveriably applied to the grounds of reason of the Kantian own thinking methodology by which he attempts a relativization but fails to give it the extent of mental space it deserves. For the extent of necessity of relativization is the larger the higher level of generalization is aimed to be achieved so that a truly self-contained treatment of the grounds of thinking has to be subject to it's own application (regarded as whole and also with a special look at the validity of its own structure on the ground of its own to establish newly theory) within itself, to an internal viewpoint on itself instead of a purely external one - relentlesslyand without any compromises. This crucial aspect seems to be vastly lacking at least in this part of the book. Though I might have missed it also:) For I was only able to follow some of the ideas after 9 hours of listening due to the lack of sufficient listening comprehension. But what I took from it did suggest a lack of the self-regard together with what remained from the former part in the subconscious.

[@fyodor8008]

this guy has a gigantic brain.

[@albondiga4975]

Psalm 94:11 KJV [11] The Lord knoweth the thoughts of man, that they are vanity.

[@dubbelkastrull]

3:37:50 "division.." 4:42:20 bookmark 5:01:04 Space 5:21:34 bookmark

[@joshpowers4795]

9:34:35 Section 16 The Postulates of Empirical Thought

[@kw5961]

I slept to this 😄

[@gisforgirard]

end of preface 1:13:10

[@clothildecook6497]

THANK YOU

[@PraetorClaudius]

Thank you sir.

[@neobourgeoischristum5540]

My bible. Really cuts a swathe through the madness of the indoctrinated, crazed and energyless herds of sapiens I cross paths with daily.

[@maryannking5491]

Are you trying to say that the common man is comatose!😉 Automatons at work...

[@goyonman9655]

@@maryannking5491 In this day and age This is the most comatose opinion to hold

[@yankumar5280]

thanks for sharing FULL audio books for everyoneFULL audio books for everyone

[@joshpowers4795]

It is impossible for a thing to be, and not to be, at the same time 7:08:42

[@Jasitus]

This was disproved later through Heisenberg.

[@christopherwalsh3101]

I read this book in two weeks, it was okay.

[@hillehai]

But did you understand it?

[@danboakye]

14:57: Examples and Illustrations always appeared to me necessarily...

[@joshpowers4795]

9:47:39 Refutation of Idealism

[@joshpowers4795]

All empirical laws can exist only by means of experience 9:30:24

[@kapital6501]

1:17:57 Voice crack

[@holm81]

WHY IS IT READ SO PAINSTAKINGLY SLOW?!

[@khaledyasser8293]

holm81 speed up the video?

[@jim.....]

if you want a general overview of the ideas go watch one of those 'kant in one minute' videos. otherwise, gather some patience and make sure you're comprehending what is being said, otherwise you are wasting your time... making the whole process even slower.

[@ПолинаУсольцева-ю5з]

It's the exact same speed of my silent reading of this.

[@joshpowers4795]

Section 2 of Time 2:27:50

[@jatayubanger]

Finished within 7 days

[@biglouch91]

Am I the only person who finds this audiobook hard to understand, not because of it's content but because of the speaker's lisp??

[@Secret_Lizard]

I can hear exactly how much spit is in his mouth at a given time lol

[@Dragon-ul8fv]

Who in their right mind thought it would be a good idea to narrate the most dense book in philosophy with someone who had a lisp...

[@MistressDay]

I thought I was the only one. I don't know if it's the lisp so much as the pace and tone he's using. I'm looking for a British reader.

[@ToriKo_]

Magum Opus are you talking about the first guy? He was great

[@DaveBrownScienceandphilosophy]

Great up, I'm loving it, listen hard with wiki at the ready..

[@KnowbodyNose]

Listening to this book is like giving somebody the red pill lol

[@duskhorizon4791]

For a good explantion on Kant look up the video: The Metaphysics of Immanuel Kant Explained Simply | Kant Vs. Hyperianism by MorgueOfficial

[@jarrodyuki7081]

it should be against international law to teach kant philosophy.

[@ToriKo_]

End of B preface 1:13:30

[@TheRawmackaw]

1:13:00

[@joshpowers4795]

3:110:30 Transcendental Logic

[@joshpowers4795]

3:11:30

[@joshpowers4795]

3:24:31 🅱️lassic line

[@joshpowers4795]

3:27:10 What is truth

[@joshpowers4795]

4:02:46 this process I call synthesis

[@joshpowers4795]

End of Section 13 8:42:15

[@dubbelkastrull]

9:20:22 bookmark

[@cyberneticsiren]

2:07:06 the transcendental aesthetic

[@joshpowers4795]

2:07:07 TA

[@joshpowers4795]

9:20:40 Coexistences

[@djonez85]

That's a long prelude for someone who wants to hear the answer.

[@notoriousphenomenon1228]

please tell me u said this because of plato

[@thefinnishbolshevik2404]

03:22:00

[@ouroboser]

Virtual bookmark 1:54:01

[@joshpowers4795]

5:25:13 Section 19

[@alannigenda3920]

I am way too dumb for this, but at least I'll give it a try.

[@asantekapesa2965]

No you are not. True wisdom is supposed to be simple, complexity is stupidity

[@stiltofficially]

bookmark 1:52

[@aLby_doira]

i thought i was a native english speaker..don't pretend u guys all understand these run on senences..it's like playing blind chess...every sentence is like 30 moves ahead of itself...geez

[@thunorwodenson]

alby Some things you gotta read 30 times to get bro. Take it slow bit by bit. You'll be better for it in the end.

[@samisiddiqi7814]

Read at speed 2.

[@apes4days254]

Pretty straight forward to me pal

[@jaysonhatton6981]

a methodology no doubt that requires a non linear reading 🧭 📐 ...in theory and practice...

[@jaysonhatton6981]

theres a reason for everything...

[@ToriKo_]

20:01 end of preface

[@gisforgirard]

FULL TEXT TO READ ALONG WITH: www.gutenberg.org/files/4280/4280-h/4280-h.htm

[@fishface45]

Read the book lol. Or read along with this.

[@Cocodelrae]

Best listened to at 1.75x speed ... otherwise the mind can wander and not focus. Or maybe its just my autism.

[@ToriKo_]

3:1105 end of section 5

[@ToriKo_]

2:24:00 ish