Pill Pod 29 - Kant Get You Out of My Head (Exclusive)
Added 2021-02-04 21:23:48 +0000 UTCBefore we can get to the other stuff we like in 20th century philosophy, we have to go back to the synthesizer of modern philosophy, the philosopher's philosophy, Immanuel Kant, to lay some groundwork. This is our best attempt to liven up the very dry Critique of Pure Reason.
Comments
Two mice fall into a bucket of cream bahahaha what is existence
Alex Petty
2024-04-02 03:40:03 +0000 UTCI don't know about any other non-philosophy undergrads here, but this was one of the hardest episodes to follow, and I found I had to pause and rewind A LOT this time, not to mention watching some yt clips and reading bits of Stanford encyclopedia to feel like I got the most out of this episode. But it was worth it, cause I can really appreciate why Kant is such a big deal in philosophy now and what an influence he's been since. Not sure if I'm wrong by saying this, but I feel that Kant is the absolute foundation for Foucault's project. Otherwise great stuff as usual from you guys, you definitely made it interesting. Total Chad move from Matt re the traffic counting anecdote.
anacidcommie
2021-05-19 18:05:29 +0000 UTCThat's great to hear! Unfortunately there's no transcript, as we don't even write out point form for these--gotta keep that flow
Plastic Pills
2021-03-01 22:40:44 +0000 UTCThis is awesome, one of the best discussions of Kant I’ve been privileged to listen to. Is there a transcript?
Travis
2021-03-01 13:28:14 +0000 UTCWe'll get on it, have to get through some phenomenology first though
Plastic Pills
2021-02-19 07:40:52 +0000 UTCHey all, just putting it out there that I would love to hear more about speculative realism (now that you've mentioned it), especially in regards to Posthumanism and OOO
Austin Krieger
2021-02-18 19:26:14 +0000 UTCI read in one of the Kant bios from the 1990s that he wrapped his body up tight not to emit any body fluids in the night. Paranoid of liquids, he was indeed ever dry dry dry in all.
Zachary Manenti
2021-02-15 18:30:32 +0000 UTCThose tiers are meant for different content actually--one is video, one is audio (because the audio donations are split between the pod members and many patrons either only watch or only listen)
Plastic Pills
2021-02-07 20:26:43 +0000 UTCPills, I often find that I have to lower my subscription to audio only in order to unlock the pods. Not sure of the source of the problem, probably a glitch in patreon, but thought I'd let you know in case its on your end. Cheers
wermy
2021-02-06 11:01:05 +0000 UTCLove your content, finally caved and subscribed to patreon when I heard you did a Kant podcast.. not at all disappointed!
Morna
2021-02-06 09:15:55 +0000 UTCThis is good to hear because it's literally all we can do at this point
Plastic Pills
2021-02-05 17:12:18 +0000 UTCListening to your podcast is like tasting the tuna sushi of the philosophical food chain… reaping benefits from all your years of digesting and responding to the material, and how you’ve digested other people’s responses to it.
Michael
2021-02-05 14:32:08 +0000 UTCThe way I’ve summarized the Critique of Pure Reason to myself is that Kant was concerned with logical propositions that have universal quantifiers, such as “all” or “none”. The reason he isn’t merely a subjectivist is that he isn’t concerned with propositions limited to existential quantifiers: what difference does it make whether there exists at least one S that is P? (For the sake of argument, leave aside propositions supplying an existential as a counterexample to a universal proposition.) Kant, to refute Hume’s skepticism about causation, wants to validate claims of necessity. Kant doesn’t want to say merely that two and two have made four on every previous attempt, but that any time whatsoever that two and two are put together, they will necessarily make four. There is a very pragmatic bent in Kant’s thinking. It’s not that universally quantified claims (claims of necessity) correspond to noumena, that two and two make four because there exists a set of physical laws that make it so. It’s rather that such claims are needed to have any coherent knowledge whatsoever. The two plus two proof is cheap, because it’s merely analytic. Kant wants to ground synthetic a priori claims, such as those of causation. Causation cannot be established by experiment alone. Experiments have to be not only replicable, so that another may confirm in her experience what I’ve confirmed in mine. They also have to be grounded in statistical inference, which rests on formulaic a priori relationships among quantifiable variables. Kant wants to move us from the Humean null hypothesis (it can’t be proven that x is related to y) to justifiable correlation coefficients. Okay, done ranting lol.
Walker Goff
2021-02-05 02:19:31 +0000 UTCI still remember slick Vic saying « you were a fucking Kantian » at one of the earlier podcasts.
Gennadios
2021-02-04 21:56:02 +0000 UTCIf our podcast is cope for your alienated labour, we will stop making it
Plastic Pills
2021-02-04 21:52:42 +0000 UTCNow I'm mad I'm not working this weekend, since it's when I listen to podcasts
Aaron Cardona
2021-02-04 21:50:22 +0000 UTCThe dude achieved sexual abstinence of legendary proportions!
Dimitri
2021-02-04 21:34:07 +0000 UTC
