We start our Back Roads to Philosophy series with the first episode on Kant's Kritik der Reinen Vernunft. At this point we provide general introduction to the intention around which this exemplar of modern metaphysics has been formed. We stick to selected passages from the "Preface" and "Preface to Second Edition" as well as the "Introduction to First Edition", and we lay out why Kant's motivation is fundamentally to make an attempt at the new beginning in metaphysics; we explain the significance of some of the metaphors he is prone to use and give definitions of some of the basic terms. Finally, we talk about the structure of the Kritik and why and how, for Kant, it reflects the intrinsic structure of the very human faculty it is intended to analyze - pure mind itself.
Hereby we present new series of videos/webinars in history of philosophy. As we explain at length in introductory video, this will be as much as possible impartial exposition of passages from important philosophers, with minimum criticism, starting from modern age and then moving towards the past - hence "back road"; in the upcoming episodes we'll deal with Immanuel Kant's Kritik der Reinen Vernunft, a premier work of modern metaphysics. In introduction we give preliminary explanation why our way backwards in philosophy starts with him.
In the third and final episode in our series on Nicholas of Cusa's De Visione Dei we address prevalent modern misconception of mystical state as "individual experience" and how God can be known only from His act of knowing us; the act that always points us in the direction of our inner being but at the same time brings to light the fact that we cannot escape participating in it together with our fellow men.
The second segment in the series on Cusanus' De Visione Dei, where we delve deeper in his exercise in mystical theology.
In KT series of videos on traditional metaphysics we turn to Nicolas of Cusa and his little theological masterpiece, "De Visione Dei". In this introductory episode we explain how Nicholas sets up the exposition of mystical theology in the form of spiritual exercise which is at its initial stages accessible to everyone.
The notion of "critical thinking" or "using one's own head" is unanimously praised even by those who secretly hate it the most - the adherents of radical critique, that is. Yet, as it is understood today, it barely applies as thinking at all, when juxtaposed against the traditional method of guiding the mind towards the truth.
The main difference lies between the knowledge presupposing positive content and the one that attempts to dissolve any such content. Traditional metaphysics is rooted firmly in the former whereas the later, embodied in the modern metaphysical question of "why is there something and not nothing instead", is entangled in the later.
Finally, we conclude with discussing attempts at creating the "spiritual science" by modern thinkers who believed they can transcend inherent human limitations on the grounds of evolutionary idea, two examples being Hegel and Rudolf Steiner, and futility of such attempts.
Immortality is not such a tall order as it may seem at the first glance. The situation in which man can claim the right to become a woman and at the same time cannot affirm his right to exist for eternity is in fact quite the recent occurrence, as we shall see in the new KT Miscellanea.
Good deal of people used to wave off homosexual "marriage" as annoying but essentially harmless absurdity of our age, not so different from other excesses of indifferent freedom at the root of contemporary societies. However, is it really so? In this video we examine what the origin of political community (politeia) really is and point out that it is in fact directly, and quite obviously, subverted by the idea of "identiarian" or "homosexual marriage"; moreover, once understood, equating of normal and homosexual sexuality appears to be a direct and unequivocal strike at the root of communal life to such an extent that one has to wonder why so many ink has to be spilled arguing about something so strikingly obvious.
As is customary on KT, we employ the help of classical thinkers: we base our analysis on Thomas Aquinas' commentary on Aristotle's definition of origin of the society from the first book of his Politics.