Yes, you can learn a lot from German idealism. It has plenty of good things from it, you shouldn’t pre judge it because Sargon said it was bad

Kant and Schopenhauer are good starting points for German Philosophy

<:hyperdoubt:657356297553051728>

Kant is a fucking joke, not even worth reading at all.

You’re a joke

Well this is amazing

I like neither of them

Kant is basically the stupidest genius that has ever lived and the entire body of his work is trash.

It strikes me that nowadays people everywhere are trying to direct their gaze away from the real influence which Kant exercised on German philosophy, that is, cleverly to slip away from the value which he ascribed to himself. Above everything else, Kant was first and foremost proud of his table of categories. With this table in hand, he said, "That is the most difficult thing that ever could be undertaken on behalf of metaphysics."- But people should understand this "could be"! He was proud of the fact that he had discovered a new faculty in human beings, the ability to make synthetic judgments a priori. Suppose that he deceived himself here. But the development and quick blood of German philosophy depend on this pride and on the competition among all his followers to discover, if possible, something even prouder - at all events "new faculties"! But let's think this over. It's time we did. "How are synthetic judgments a priori possible?" Kant asked himself. And what did his answer essentially amount to? Thanks to a faculty [Vermöge eines Vermögens]. However, unfortunately he did not answer in three words, but so labouriously, venerably, and with such an expenditure of German profundity and flourishes that people failed to hear the comical niaiserie allemande [German stupidity] inherent in such an answer. People even got really excited about this new faculty, and the rejoicing reached its height when Kant discovered yet another additional faculty - a moral faculty - in human beings, for then the Germans were still moral and not yet at all "political realists." Then came the honeymoon of German philosophy.

All the young theologians of the Tubingen seminary went off right away into the bushes - all looking for "faculties." And what didn't they find - in that innocent, rich, still youthful time of the German spirit, in which Romanticism, that malicious fairy, played her pipes and sang, a time when people did not yet know how to distinguish between "finding" and "inventing"! Above all, a faculty for the "super-sensory." Schelling christened this intellectual contemplation and, in so doing, complied with the most heartfelt yearnings of his Germans, whose cravings were basically pious.9 - The most unfair thing we can do to this entire rapturously enthusiastic movement, which was adolescent, no matter how much it boldly dressed itself up in gray and antique ideas, is to take it seriously and treat it with something like moral indignation. Enough - people grew older - the dream flew away. There came a time when people rubbed their foreheads. People are still rubbing them today. They had dreamed: first and foremost - the old Kant. "By means of a faculty," he had said, or at least meant. But is that an answer? An explanation? Or is it not rather a repetition of the question? How does opium make people sleep? "By means of a faculty," namely, the virtus dormitiva [sleeping virtue], answered that doctor in Moliere.

Because it has the sleeping virtue

whose nature makes the senses sleep.10

-Nietzsche

Fucking WRECKED HIS ASSHOLE

Imagine shitting all over a 400 page book and a man's lifelong career in just a couple fucking paragraphs.

Kant is irrelevant and nobody intelligent enough to read philosophy should even bother with him.

Apparently using graphical aids can be used to help certain individuals write. Also, remember to take short breaks when writing- don't go too crazy and check to see if what you've written flows well and looks well-structured.

Who tf are you even talking to, rere?

@Hexidecimark ??

If I had to guess, I'd say the person who replied to less than half a sentence with over two paragraphs

That's a quote by Nietzsche.

About Kant.

You just pretended a quote by Nietzsche was me and tried to criticize the writing of one of the greatest philosophers to have ever lived.

I'd be flattered if I wasn't so disgusted by your stupidity @Hexidecimark

Man, you have some significant issues here if that's the work of someone whom you consider to be among the greatest philosophers

Throwing out philosopher names like gang signs

@Hexidecimark Nietzsche had an IQ of about 180, roughly double yours, which is why you don't understand his writing.

It's also why you don't understand my writing.

Where I don't understand your writing, it's because your writing is poorly written nonsense

But do go on with the "UR JUST 2 DUM 2 SEE HOW SMEART I IS", it's absolutely entertaining.

>criticizes Nietzsche's writing because he thinks it's me
>Continues pretending to not be an absolute imbecile

Dude, the idea that your criticism means anything at all to me, at this point, is ludicrous. You essentially look at extremely complex philosophical writing and project your own extreme idiocy onto it, assuming that because you can't make sense of it that it doesn't make sense.

Honestly, after this hilarious self own of yours I am 100% convinced that speaking to you further is unnecessary and am just going to block you so that I don't have to be exposed to your trite bullshit. @Hexidecimark

Tell me, how many seasons of Rick & Morty do I have to watch to be fully capable of grasping your points? How many books prior to my being able to reason the right way, and at what point will I be so enraptured with your statements as to venerate you as an immortal God? Do you perhaps have a threshold for IQ before you're willing to interact with another human being in good faith?

Oh dear me, seems he's too much of a snowflake to even answer that.

*Nietzsche was wrong*

One of the most overrated philosophers of all time

Am not gonna say Kant was teh shit either, but the fact that Nietzsche criticized Kant doesn't mean anything.

Sounds like someone needs to watch more rick & morty pal. Phaedraddeausadaa has so many IQ points that he's considered the most intelligent man on earth

Nietzsche thought he could present a solution to the dilemma of the dissolution of religion. In his quest he came up with the concept of the eternal return, so that people who lose their religion can see their finite timespan as more meaningful than it really is when embracing the nihilist mindset. However, he failed to realize that this works neither on people with low intellect (because they don't grasp his ideas) nor high intellect (because they do grasp it and see its holes).

Since the eternal return is a complete failure, his idea of the superman fails as well, because to attain it you must delude yourself into thinking far beyond your existence in the physical realm. You'd have to consider yourself an eternal being that keeps returning and improving (the most stupid idea I've ever heard, yet even some quite educated philosophers fall for it).

Nietzsche thought he had a solution for that, too. He thought that you could simply see your limited timespan as a living creature as part of the eternal return. Your efforts would have to show in this life, but not actually in this life. The idea itself would have to become your goal. The goal becomes that you delude yourself.

Basically religion 2.0, but way way way more illogical.

Nietzsche's superman can therefore only lead to delusions of grandeur. You can't keep trying to improve yourself for eternity, all while believing you're actually stuck in a loop. And since the only object of worship would become you yourself (because self-improvement replaces heaven as the ultimate desire), you can only become a self-deluded egomaniac.

tl;dr Nietzsche was a fraud. In his works there are several points where one could argue that he even recognizes that he's a fraud.