Translate

Powered By Blogger

10.1.23

Kant and Leonard Nelson

 I was at the beach and talking to people there about the importance of Kant and Leonard Nelson. I mean it is not as if these students are not learning hard things. One girl had read Hegel's Phenomenology. --[If anything at all of Hegel, I think that should be the last.]

[Nelson built on Jacob Fries. This approach has a third source of knowledge besides reason or sence perception; that is ''immediate non intuitive knowledge.'' But it is not infallible it jut gives the categories of Kant as starting axioms that can be modified by evidence --like space and time.]



  But the interesting thing is that one girl was complaining that Leonard Nelson's works are not in Hebrew,-- and that is a valid complaint. After all even when they {Springer Verlag}got around to publishing his stuff, it is all in German. Can you imagine that even in English,  they only published minor works.

  But just for now with my barely functional keyboard, let me give the basic outline.--but forgive me for leaving out the details. The basic point is philosophy in the last 100 years got to be a mess. Marcuse is juvenile. --''Just tear down everything, and utopia will magically appear,'' is his alchemy thesis--really, [And that is the "woke" (i.e. asleep), just Marcuse repackaged. ]] Analytic philosophy was harder to see the flaws until Jeremy Katz. then recently Robert Hanna dealt it the final blow in his book The Fate of Analysis: Analytic Philosophy From Frege To The Ash-Heap of History, and Toward A Radical Kantian Philosophy of The Future, by Robert Hanna, [https://againstprofphil.org/category/not-an-edgy-essay/page/15/].[I think now you need to buy the book. I had read it when it was still on line.] Existentialism was refuted by a child in the audience of one of the great names who was saying, ''What my words mean to me is not what they mean to you.'' So the child asked the natural question, ''So why are you talking? i.e. he is talking because presumably  he want to say something, not nothing. 

So like Robert Hanna says, ''Forward to Kant''. But then you get into the original problem in Kant, and so the modification of Leonard Nelson is needed.


[I also went into the development of  philosophy of the Middle Ages which for us Jews was neo-Plato until the Rambam who turned towards Aristotle. That Aristotelian  turn came from the Islamic world which had one school that was totally into Aristotle. Then soon after the Rambam, Thomas Aquinas also went to Aristotle. But this move towards Aristotle did not hold up under the scrutiny of Bishop Berkley [about the question how perception works,] that led to the conflict between the rationalists and empiricists until Kant found a solution to that dilemma.