Vad består Kants storhet i?

Jag har inte pluggat filosofi och har haft grava problem försöka ta mig igenom 10 sidor av 'critique of pure reason'.

Finns det någon proffsfilosof här som har lust att beskriva vad storheten i Kants filosofi är samt varför han blev så inflytelserik långt in på 1800/1900-talen och kanske än idag? Vilka av hans tankar/koncept är det som är så viktiga?

Kant's comprehensive and systematic works in epistemology, metaphysics, ethics, and aesthetics have made him one of the most influential and controversial figures in modern Western philosophy.
He has been called the "father of modern ethics", the "father of modern aesthetics", and for bringing together rationalism and empiricism, the "father of modern philosophy".

Kant believed that reason is the source of morality, and that aesthetics arises from a faculty of disinterested judgment.

He hoped that perpetual peace could be secured through an international federation of republican states and international cooperation.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immanuel_Kant

två grejer tycker jag:
Kants kategoriska imperativ säger att vi ska handla enligt principer som vi kan vilja att alla andra också följer. Detta hjälper oss att tänka på konsekvenserna av våra handlingar och om de är rättvisa och universella. Behandla andra så som du själv vill bli behandlad brukar man väl säga.
Kants idé om att vi aldrig kan veta "tingen i sig" utan bara hur de framträder för oss påminner oss om att våra uppfattningar är begränsade av vår subjektiva syn. Du ser att din sambo bråkar med dig men vet inte orsaken bakom das ding an sich heter det väl. Dvs var mer öppen för andra tolknngar än din egen

Ok tack. Ding an sich är från 'critique of pure reason' men kategoriska imperativet är från hans moralbok som inte är mitt fokus. Det är just tankarna i den boken som jag skulle vilja förstå. Jag kanske är mer förtjänt av att bara be chatgpt summera det för mig än att skriva här.

Tack broder! Ah just hans estetik vill jag kolla in i ett senare skede också.Tack för att du påminde mig. Vill förstå bättre vad det är i critique of pure reason som gör att han anses vara father of modern philosophy. Som jag skrev ovan, jag borde vänja mig vid att fråga chatgpt i första hand

Det första jag kommer att tänka på när någon nämner Kant är en prefrontal cortex som är så utmärkande att hans panna utgör merparten av hans ansikte, samt ett moralsystem som bara fungerar åt människor som är 100% rationellt styrda hela vägen till reptilhjärnan, alltså bara Kant själv och några fåtal autister.

Samt att det är troligt att Kant aldrig ejakulerade, och varke fotsteg han tog på denna Jord följde till pricka sekundvisaren på allas klockor.

Tinget i sig själv, alltså vad Kants sexuella fantasier bestod av får vi aldrig veta, men representationen av Kant som vi kan observera utifrån är både mäktig och utomjordlig .Har det funnits någon bättre bevis på att naturen kan skapa en varelse som gör sig själv till något helt avskild från naturen som födde honom?

Jahap så lätt var det, nu finns det flera spår från chatgpt att utforska:

Immanuel Kant is often called the "father of modern philosophy" because his work, particularly Critique of Pure Reason (1781), revolutionized how we understand knowledge, reality, and the limits of human reason. His ideas bridged rationalism (Descartes, Leibniz) and empiricism (Locke, Hume), creating a new foundation for philosophy.

Key Ideas from Critique of Pure Reason That Justify the Title
The Copernican Revolution in Philosophy

Kant argued that instead of our minds conforming to the external world (as empiricists believed), the external world conforms to the structure of our minds.
This shift in perspective is as revolutionary in philosophy as Copernicus’s heliocentric model was in astronomy.
A Priori vs. A Posteriori Knowledge

Kant distinguishes between a priori (independent of experience) and a posteriori (dependent on experience) knowledge.
He claims that synthetic a priori judgments (new knowledge that is universal yet independent of experience) are possible, reshaping epistemology.
Phenomena vs. Noumena (Limits of Knowledge)

Kant argues that we can only experience and understand phenomena (things as they appear to us), but not noumena (things-in-themselves).
This refutes both the rationalist claim that we can know ultimate reality through reason alone and the empiricist claim that all knowledge comes from experience.
Categories of the Understanding

He proposes that the human mind actively structures experience using 12 fundamental categories (e.g., causality, substance).
This means that knowledge is not just a passive recording of the world, but an active construction by the mind.
Refutation of Skepticism and Dogmatism

Kant argues against Hume’s radical skepticism (which denied causality) and Leibniz’s rationalist dogmatism.
Instead, he offers a middle ground, explaining why certain fundamental principles (e.g., cause and effect) are necessary for experience.
Why This Makes Kant the Father of Modern Philosophy
He ended the long debate between rationalists and empiricists by showing how both reason and experience shape knowledge.
His ideas set the stage for German Idealism (Hegel, Fichte, Schelling) and influenced analytic and continental philosophy alike.
He laid the foundation for modern debates on epistemology, metaphysics, ethics, and even science.
In short, Critique of Pure Reason fundamentally reshaped philosophy, making Kant one of its greatest architects—hence, the "father of modern philosophy."

Bra trollning, du é en vinnare brorsan!

Det enda människan kan göra i tider då chatgpt ger svar på alla frågor är väl att trolla? Tror inte att vi rent filosofiskt kan finna ett högre syfte i livet år 2025.



Even if man really were nothing but a piano-key, even if this were proved to him by natural science and mathematics, even then he would not become reasonable, but would purposely do something perverse out of simple ingratitude, simply to gain his point. And if he does not find means he will contrive destruction and chaos, will contrive sufferings of all sorts, only to gain his point! He will launch a curse upon the world, and as only man can curse (it is his privilege, the primary distinction between him and other animals), may be by his curse alone he will attain his object--that is, convince himself that he is a man and not a piano-key! If you say that all this, too, can be calculated and tabulated--chaos and darkness and curses, so that the mere possibility of calculating it all beforehand would stop it all, and reason would reassert itself, then man would purposely go mad in order to be rid of reason and gain his point!

-Dostojevskijs svar till både Kant och chatgpt

Din fråga i rubriken är ju inte besvarad: "Vad består Kants storhet i?"
Bra grejer kanske, men hur kan sådana enkla och självklara teser finna berömmelse?
Det står nog att finna i tidsandan och att det var inte så vanligt att ifrågasätta och vara kritisk på den tiden det begav sig. okey det var upplysningstid och många ifrågasättanden, men hans sätt var väl lite originellt och genomgripande å sitter det från början hänger det med - Pythagora är ju världskändis även idag för sin gamla sats.
Chatgpt är bra men det var kul att få tänka till.

Som ateist kan jag heller inte kan se någon mening eller högre syfte med livet. Var och en måste finna sin egen mening. Och varför inte trolla om det funkar för dig mannen.

Hmm bra där. Fick ut lite mer av chatgpt, då jag frågade just hur hans tankar står sig mot modern vetenskap:

Great question! Kant’s idea that the human mind actively structures experience has had a lasting impact on science, particularly in physics, neuroscience, and cognitive psychology. While some aspects have been challenged or refined, the core insight remains influential. Let’s break it down:

1. Einstein and Modern Physics: Kant’s Influence and Challenges
Kant’s View (1781, Critique of Pure Reason)
Space and time are not objective, independent realities but forms of human perception.
We cannot access the “thing-in-itself” (noumenon), only appearances (phenomena) structured by the mind.
Einstein’s Theory of Relativity (1905, 1915)
Space and time are not fixed structures imposed by the mind; they are relative and dependent on motion and gravity.
Challenged Kant’s idea that space and time are universal categories of perception.
However, Einstein agreed with Kant’s idea that knowledge is shaped by the observer (e.g., time dilation means time flows differently for different observers).
🔹 Implication: Kant was partially right—our perception of space and time is not absolute, but it is still structured by the observer’s position. Einstein's relativity replaces Kant's "a priori space and time" with a physical, but observer-dependent, model.

2. Neuroscience and Cognitive Science: Does the Mind Structure Reality?
Kant’s View: The Mind Structures Experience with Categories
The mind imposes structures like causality, space, time, and substance on raw sensory input.
Modern Neuroscience: The Brain is a Predictive Machine
The brain does not passively record reality but actively constructs it.
Predictive coding models (Friston, 2010s): The brain constantly predicts sensory input and adjusts based on errors.
Gestalt psychology (early 20th century) shows the brain organizes raw data into meaningful patterns (e.g., we "fill in" missing visual information).
Studies in perception and hallucinations show how the brain imposes structure even when data is absent.
🔹 Implication: Neuroscience has strongly validated Kant’s claim that the mind is an active constructor of experience rather than a passive receiver.

3. Quantum Mechanics: Can We Know the "Thing-in-Itself"?
Kant’s View: We Cannot Access Reality Directly (Noumenon)
We can only know phenomena (appearances shaped by human cognition).
Quantum Mechanics (20th Century)
Heisenberg’s Uncertainty Principle (1927): The observer affects the observed system—we can’t measure both position and momentum with perfect accuracy.
Copenhagen Interpretation (Bohr, 1920s): The quantum world does not have definite properties until it is measured.
Some interpretations suggest reality does not exist independently of observation.
🔹 Implication: This echoes Kant’s phenomena/noumena distinction—quantum mechanics suggests we may never access an observer-independent reality.

Final Verdict: Is Kant Still Relevant?
✅ What Science Confirms

The brain actively structures experience (validated by cognitive science & neuroscience).
Knowledge is observer-dependent (Einstein’s relativity & quantum mechanics support this).
❌ What Science Challenges

Space and time are not fixed structures imposed by the mind (relativity refutes Kant’s view of space & time as purely mental).
We may access reality in new ways through science (Kant thought noumena were unknowable, but quantum mechanics suggests we might probe deeper).
Conclusion: Kant Was Ahead of His Time
His epistemology (theory of knowledge) is largely confirmed, but his specific categories (e.g., space/time as mental constructs) have been refined.
Science still wrestles with the limits of human knowledge, just as Kant did.
His ideas remain central in philosophy of science, especially in debates on perception, consciousness, and reality.