Prolegomena profile picture

Prolegomena

the flames force no such commitment just yet

About Me

Pure reason requires us to seek for every predicate of a thing its proper subject, and for this subject, which is itself necessarily nothing but a predicate, its subject, and so on indefinitely (or as far as we can reach). But hence it follows, that we must not hold anything, at which we can arrive, to be an ultimate subject, and that substance itself never can be thought by our understanding, however deep we may penetrate, even if all nature were unveiled to us. For the specific nature of our understanding consists in thinking everything discursively, that is, representing it by concepts, and so by mere predicates, to which therefore the absolute subject must always be wanting. Hence all the real properties, by which we know bodies, are mere accidents, not excepting impenetrability, which we can only represent to ourselves as the effect of a power of which the subject is unknown to us.

My Interests

our laborious analytics of the understanding would be superfluous if we had nothing else in view than the mere cognition Of nature as it can be given in experience; for reason does its work, both in mathematics and in the science of nature, quite safely and well without any of this subtle deduction. Therefore our critique of the understanding combines with the ideas of pure reason for a purpose which lies beyond the empirical use of the understanding; but this we have above declared to be in this aspect totally inadmissible, and without any object or meaning. Yet there must be a harmony between that of the nature of reason and that of the understanding, and the former must contribute to the perfection of the latter, and cannot possibly upset it.

I'd like to meet:

The solution of this question is as follows: Pure reason does not in its ideas point to particular objects, which lie beyond the field of experience, but only requires completeness of the use of the understanding in the system of experience. But this completeness can be a completeness of principles only, not of intuitions and of objects. In order however to represent the ideas definitely, reason conceives them after the fashion of the cognition of an object. The cognition is as far as these rules are concerned completely determined, but the object is only an idea invented for the purpose of bringing the cognition of the understanding as near as possible to the completeness represented by that idea.

Music:

Godspeed You Black Emperor, Sun Ra, Ekatree, Red Sparrows, Origin, Malignancy, Ravi Shankar, Antennas to Heaven, Xihilisk/Arctica, Rumah Sakit, Sigur Ro`s, Art Blakey/messengers solo bands, Shai Hulud, Dying Fetus, old Sick of it All, Isis, Grails, Explosions in the Sky, Shakti/all of J Mclaughlin's collaborative bands and solo albums, Return to Forever/Chick Corea, Coltrane, Pelican, Muddy Waters, Let Airplanes Circle Overhead, Cynic/Portal, Blood for Blood, Do Make Say Think, Tchaikovsky, Tool, Figure Four, Shutdown, Despised Icon, Hank Mobley, Hendrix, Sparrows Swarm and Sing, Enablers, Yanni, Malevolent Creation, A Silver Mount Zion, Siant Rorsarch, This Will Destroy Us, Remembering Never, Chemtrail, Tony Williams, The Roots, Sleeping People, Suffocation, Marely, Max fuckin Roach, Quiller memorandom, Winter Equinox, Evesham Dub Collective, G-love, Teri Bozzio, Chilli Peppers, Poison the Well, Misery Index, Jamie Cullum, CCR, the Drift, flying luttenbachers...

Movies:

though we may call this thinking self (the soul) substance, as being the ultimate subject of thinking which cannot be further represented as the predicate of another thing; it remains quite empty and without significance, if permanence--the quality which renders the concept of substances in experience fruitful--cannot be proved of it.

Television:

Such hyperbolical objects are distinguished by the appellation of noumena, or pure beings of the understanding (or better, beings of thought), such as, for example, "substance," but conceived without permanence in time, or "cause," but not acting in time, etc. Here predicates, that only serve to make the conformity-to-law of experience possible, are applied to these concepts, and yet they are deprived of all the conditions of intuition, on which alone experience is possible, and so these concepts lose all significance.

Books:

There is no danger, however, of the understanding spontaneously making an excursion so very wantonly beyond its own bounds into the field of the mere creatures of thought, without being impelled by foreign laws. But when reason, which cannot be fully satisfied with any empirical use of the rules of the understanding, as being always conditioned, requires a completion of this chain of conditions, then the understanding is forced out of its sphere. And then it partly represents objects of experience in a series so extended that no experience can grasp, partly even (with a view to complete the series) it seeks entirely beyond it noumena, to which it can attach that chain, and so, having at last escaped from the conditions of experience, make its attitude as it were final.

Heroes:

These are then the transcendental ideas, which, though according to the true but hidden ends of the natural determination of our reason, they may aim not at extravagant concepts, but at an unbounded extension of their empirical use, yet seduce the understanding by an unavoidable illusion to a transcendent use, which, though deceitful, cannot be restrained within the bounds of experience by any resolution, but only by scientific instruction and with much difficulty.