Skip to main content
5 events
when toggle format what by license comment
Dec 14, 2013 at 19:27 comment added John Your last paragraph implies that in order to do real philosophy you have to understand other philosophers first - which is of course nonsensical as there had to be a first one. - Personally I reject Kant for another reason (I didn't even know that he said what you argue about in your text.): His duty-ethics. I'm pretty sure that this bit was way more instrumental for the disasters of the German idealist tradition than musings on the objectivity of reality.
Sep 13, 2013 at 5:59 comment added RationalGeek You spend a lot of time debating between Aristotle and Kant, and then end by saying Rand is not internally consistent, without offering an example. Where is the internal inconsistency?
S Sep 12, 2013 at 1:35 review Late answers
Sep 12, 2013 at 9:42
S Sep 12, 2013 at 1:35 review First posts
Sep 12, 2013 at 2:34
Sep 12, 2013 at 1:19 history answered Gustav Decimus CC BY-SA 3.0