Immanuel Kant, as most other prussian bois that history remembers, was a chad. After the metaphysical revolution of enlightenment and the establishment of reason as the most highest of values, Kant quietly went home, went on a coffee craze and wrote a critique which made people think twice and consider. How do you obtain pure reason? Wtf even is true knowledge?

At the time, there were 2 school of thought:

• Empiricists - That knowledge can only be ascertained by experiencing it. (Eg: Stuff is true cuz i feel it, duh)
• Rationalists - Knowledge through reason. (Eg: Stuff be true cuz 2+2=4, git gud at math, lol)

Kant did not dismiss reason as the highest value but he wanted to point out that the source of information is what really impacts knowledge. We depend on our senses and instruments - which are corruptible - but at the same time there are phenomena that regardless of anyone’s senses are obviously real. To make a clear distinction between truths, he devised:

• subjective truths - which have independent origins and are subjected to the limitations of their origin’s senses (Eg: It’s true most of the time)
• absolute truths - concepts like Time, Space and Math (Eg: Its true at all times)

Although we can now prove him wrong (at least for Time-Space), this pragmatism of taking two seemingly conflicting ideas, and considering them both for a more truthful assessment of the Universe, is what ended up getting him acclaim. Both truths are true. And true knowledge is understanding just that. …And a pinch to recognize our own incapabilities to experience reality in its full range due to faulty equipment. This is a pattern that was not only useful for Kant’s other works but when we put it like that it just might seem obvious to anyone. I couldn’t help but to think that his ideas were just a moderate approach to the ones before. In my head, saying Yes to both sides of a discussion was from then on “pulling off a Kant”.

And isn’t just saying “Yes” to both sides of any esoteric discussion the chaddest thing to do?

• philoshophy